UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby RICH-ENGLAND » Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:36 pm

although not totally in the "alien" sense of the term ufo, i always loved Nick Cook's book "The Hunt For Zero Point" about ufo's, the aerospace industry, anti gravity and nazi technology.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hunt-Zero-Point ... 0099414988

i also enjoyed the two accompanying documentaries that he made while researching and writing the book:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 136405829#

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... =en&emb=1#

enjoy.

thanks

rich
ATS HAS TURNED INTO A "BALLOONATIC" ASYLUM
User avatar
RICH-ENGLAND
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:06 am


Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby James Carlson » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:30 am

I'd be interested in knowing whether or not anyone has read Colin Wilson's "Alien Dawn - A Classic Investigation Into the Contact Experience", and if so, what did you think about it? I'm reading it now, but I'm reserving judgment for reasons having more to do with Wilson's previous work than anything substantive regarding this one, but I do want to know what others think about it. It was originally published in 1998, but a new edition was published this year.

Thanks,
James
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby James Carlson » Tue Feb 01, 2011 11:46 pm

Well, I'm afraid I have to dump Alien Dawn as being unworthy of anyone's attention. I was impressed by Colin Wilson's insistence that Dr. Craig (Condon investigator) was a thoroughly honest man, so I decided to give it a shot. I wish I hadn't. His take on crop circles alone is remarkably stupid, and he insists that there are crop circles in both England and America that man is simply unable to create. He says he's confident that ETs created them because the mathematical structures noted within the designs of the crop circles themselves were quite beyond any of thye individuals who could have possibly "created" such crop circles in the first place. He fails to noitice that most crop circles are geographical designs that are constructed on that basis, and all geographic designs have an underlying mathematical basis. You don't need to understand the math involved; all you need to do is create a design that is aesthetically pleasing. Such a creation would still contain the constructs of the mathematical basis behind them, but the creator him/herself would not necessarily have to understand the math to create the design. It's a very simple concept that he doesn't even mention. The complex mathematics inherent to many of the crop circles apparently raises them to ET status, but the baiss for that determination is faulty from the get-go, since an understanding of the underlying mathematical character isn't necessary to create them. If that's the basis of his belief in the genuine ET character of some crop circles, then we would have to believe at the same time that artists lkike M. C. Escher were fully cognizant of the mathematical properties inherent to their own work -- and I know for a fact that most of them don't. Creating designs doesn't require such knowledge -- it only requires a creative spark. At the same time, it would be foolish to believe on the basis of that limitation of mathematical knowledge that the mathematical constructs are not present in the work of such artists. Any idiot with a 9th grade education can see that the mathematics are indeed part of the artwork; the artist, however, doesn't require that mathematical knowledge to conceive of and then create the work itself. All he needs is a good sense of design.

That's just one of the many flaws to Wilson's book, and I was sorry to see it, because I have a great deal of respect for the man as a criminologist, author, and generally all around theoretical idea-guy. He deserves to be heard on very many subject, and has conceived and discussed numerous important aspects relevant to modern life regarding crime, philosophy, psychology, poetry, literature , historical interpretation -- he's just an amazingly complex thinker whom I personally believe deserves to be heard on every subject he has taken the time to understand and discuss. I just can't believe he wrote this book seriously as one to be reckoned with; it's full of easily noted holes and errors, and I can only place it as one of the worst things he's ever written. It's obvious that he put little effort into it. For instance, he accepts every witness report of UFOs as truthful, and seems to invest most USAF-sourced information with doubt, and that's just nauseating. Even those reports that are absolutely the most incredible stories of pure stupidity deserving of nothing but ridicule, he insists are probably true on the grounds that nobody would make up a story so stupid and brainless as those examined, so they have to be true. Nobody is so stupid as to think they could get away with making up such a case -- the expected ridicule alone would prevent them from doing so! Welcome to UFOlogy, Mr. Wilson.

Unfortunately, I can't recommend Alien Dawn. It's pap.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby Zep Tepi » Wed Feb 02, 2011 12:22 am

I know the person who is responsible for most of those really good crop circles. They have written a book about it, they have a website about it, yet some people still insist on ignoring the evidence for man-made crop circles and instead claim ET did it.

The stupidity of some people never ceases to amaze me.
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby James Carlson » Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:39 am

Zep Tepi wrote:I know the person who is responsible for most of those really good crop circles. They have written a book about it, they have a website about it, yet some people still insist on ignoring the evidence for man-made crop circles and instead claim ET did it.

The stupidity of some people never ceases to amaze me.

Apparently Colin Wilson spoke to Gerald Hawkins, author of Stonehenge Decoded. Hawkins told him that "there are mathematical ratios within many crop circles that make it highly unlikely that they were created by hoxers." Ratios? I don't get that at all -- you can find all number of geographical ratios in everything, natural and man-made, and the only importance that can attributed to such matters is what you inject into it. It proves nothing, let alone the intelligence of whomever created it. Hell, that's the same error creationists make all the time: there's too much order in the world to believe it evolved. There are too many notable mathematical ratios in the crop circles to have been created by hoaxers. All of it is crap -- and so easily proved as crap.

In his discussion about Hawkins' revelations, he says, "Tuning a harp he had bought for his wife, he learned about the mathematical ratios of the notes of the musical scale, and realized that many crop circles created since 1986 contain musical ratios. The possibility of this coming about by chance were thousands to one." He adds that this clearly demonstrates that unless the creators of the crop circles "had a sophisticated understanding of musical theory", they could not have created them. Well, from what I remember about music, you've got musical scale systems that are based on 8, 10, 0r 12 tones used all over the world. This means that any ratios based mathematically on base 2, 3, 4, or 5 can be assumed as mathematical ratios sufficient to understand them as musical ratios as well as mathematical ratios. How many aesthetically pleasing designs can you think of that also contain geographical designs based on 3, 4, or 5 sides? Thousands! He's basically hiding the mediocrity of the event by making it as overly complicated as he can, and the fact that he would feel it necessary to do so is absolutely maddening. After all of the respect I have had for that man for over 20 years now, it was sickening for me to read that book. I hate it for that very reason. He even claims that it was these arguments of Hawkins that convinced him that "many crop circles were created by alien life forms." It's dumbfounding.

The evidence that he regards as "perhaps the most convincing so far" are the Chilbolton "glyphs" which appeared on the night of August 13, 2001 in a cornfield at Chilbolton, Hampshire, UK. He insists that these are a response from extraterrestrials to a binary coded message sent as a radio transmission into space from Arecibo, Puerto Rico in 1974. Their complexity, apparently, indicates an unearthly origin. Just look up "Chilbolton crop circles" and you'll find pleanty of photographs. They aren't tremendously large, and I don't see any reason to believe they're something special, but make up your own mind. There are plenty of websites based on them, and they just give me a headache, reaching conclusions on the basis of dreams and such. One of the better websites I've found is this one: http://partyflock.nl/topic/1036199:Een_ ... et_ET.html

While it's true that whomever came up with this design would have to be a pretty intelligent guy, it certainly isn't something that humans couldn't easily do. The design is pretty specific and there are some interesting binary details in the 2nd one, but I don't see anything that couldn't be reproduced by an exceptionally sharp-witted human. And the fact that it was created right next to the Chilbolton Observatory, a facility for atmospheric and radio research, suggests that someone who worked there was the creator. Such a person would be very much aware of the Arecibo message, and would know how to make changes to it such as the addition of "silicon" to the table of atomic numbers, and another "DNA strand" to the original, as highlighted in the second of the two designs. That seems a lot more reasonable than all of the suggestions that ET was merely responding to a radio signal we sent out in 1974 from Puerto Rico, but decided to respond via a cornfield crop circle next to a radio telescope in Hampshire, England 27 years later. Right ... they have the ability to intercept a signal in the middle of a nothing-filled region of space, translate it into terms they can understand, create a response that can in turn be decoded and translated by us, and deliver that response by flattening out the corn stalks in a field next door to another radio telescope, but lack the capability to respond in the same way we sent out the original message? How in God's green world is that a reasonable response? This is very obviously a joke. I would think any astronomer or technician who worked at Chilbolton, which is run by the STFC Radio Communications Research Unit of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory and forms part of the Science and Technology Facilities Council, would probably consider it a witty, fun hoax to play on all of the rubes who insist it's from outer space. Replacing the radio transmitter in the original that we sent out in 1974 with a picture of a crop circle in the new one was outrageously funny, at least to me. I found the wit delightful! The humor is almost Shakespearean in its overblown sense of satirical, yet dramatic and unapologetic absurdity! But that's me, and I have no evidence, just a certainty that those designs in a corn field don't qualify as "proof" of an extraterrestrial email. Unlike Colin Wilson, apparently. I think they're delightfully engaging, but that's it. I wish I had done them! If I had, I would never come clean on it -- the humor runs out like water colors in the rain when that happens, and this one is just too, too funny to let it fade like that.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: UFO books, best of, required reading, etc?

Postby Luck » Sat Feb 12, 2011 5:00 am

I am about 3/4's of the way through Mirage Men, but I have to admit that right now, I am much more interested in some the related topics that have been brought up in this forum.

I had already read "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes and I plan to read it again in the near future, as well as, "Influence: The Art of Persuasion" by Robert Cialdini. When I had read both I hadn't developed any real interest (yet) in the topic of UFOs and I want to see if either could provide insights that might prove helpful in understanding some of the undercurrents of the UFO and paranormal topics that always seem to present themselves.

On my to read list (should I ever be able to find the time):
A couple of books on a social psychology given to me by a very nice Dr. of Psychology.
"Memoirs of My Nervous Illness" by Daniel Paul Schrieber (which was referenced by Jaynes in his book).
Joseph Campbell
Carl Jung
"From Psyop to Mindwar" by Paul Valley and Michael Aquino
And a couple of books on confabulation and false memory.

Then I may start to delve more into the UFO books.
I think the surest sign that there is intelligent life out there in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." (Calvin and Hobbes/Bill Waterson)
User avatar
Luck
Reality Is In Sight
Reality Is In Sight
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 2:19 am
Location: Midwest

Previous

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron