Dr. Steven Greer, Anonymous Blog Comments, UFOs, Free-Energy, and various and sundry things...

I have a few topics to ramble on about this evening and I hope that I can keep my thoughts straight enough to touch on each of them. This post is primarily motivated by a comment I received on my blog today.

While I am quite thrilled that something I wrote was actually read by someone, I am simply ecstatic that it engaged this person to such a degree that they bothered to write a comment in response. However, and this is the point, why the hell would someone leave a comment anonymously? When you leave a comment that is just the starting point for a dialogue, but when you leave it anonymously you close the discussion at that point. Personally I don't believe people follow blog comments as some sort of coherent thread of discussion; especially if the comment is in response to a post I may have made over a year ago.

The comment I received today was in response to a post I made entitled "My apologies to Dr. Steven Greer". For those of you who don't know, Dr. Steven Greer is a UFO 'contactee' who has written some books and championed a 'disclosure' movement over the UFO phenomenon. As an introduction you can read more about Steven Greer at his Wikipedia entry. He is now pursuing 'free-energy' ideas with his 'Orion Project'.

Now, there is a reason I made previous posts about Steven Greer and I like to think I explained myself sufficiently before. I grant that I did use an excessive amount of sarcasm, so maybe I wasn't clear enough on the topic. Let me outline my position on Steven Greer quite clearly.

• It is my opinion that Dr. Steven Greer is a gentle, benevolent, and well meaning individual.
  
• It is my opinion that Dr. Steven Greer is sincere and generally believes the things he is saying.
• It is my opinion that some of the work Steven Greer has done in terms of his 'disclosure' efforts has been positive.
• It is my suspicion that there is some sort of an objectively 'real' set of UFO phenomena and I believe that, like myself, Dr. Steven Greer is interested in learning whatever objective truth there might be behind the mystery.
• It is my opinion that Dr. Steven Greer has jumped prematurely to conclusions about the nature, intent, purpose, motivations, character, goals, and meaning behind his alleged UFO encounters.
• It is my opinion that Dr. Steven Greer has failed to acknowledge the simple *fact* that whatever consciousness which controls the UFO phenomena is ultimately responsible for the 'cover-up'.
  
• It is my opinion that there is absolutely no evidence to support the notion that UFO encounters with humanity have been positive, beneficial, friendly, or in any other way something we should approach with anything less than the ultimate caution; much less openly invite!
  
• It is my opinion that when Dr. Steven Greer goes out into a forest, shines a flash light, and meditates to 'vector in' UFOs that he is performing a humiliating act in the name of the human race.
• It is my opinion that if Dr. Steven Greer could really 'vector in' UFOs with his CE5 techniques he should be able to provide compelling video evidence. That he should be able to provide tangible proof of his contact. That he should be granted interviews and tours of these alleged alien craft. Instead, all he has are lights off in the distance and cameras that fail to operate. He entire body of personal evidence of UFO encounters boils down to nothing more than lights the sky and visions in his own mind. He begs the US government to end their alleged 'cover-up' but forgives the UFOnauts for the same crime. The consciousness in control of the UFOs he so loves can end the cover-up, definitively, unequivocally, and irrevocably, at any time, moment, instant. Yet, they refuse to. Why this bothers me and not Dr. Steven Greer is probably the root of our disagreement on this topic.
  
• In all of human history the interaction between the human species and this 'phenomenon' has never been to the benefit of our species. These encounters have manipulated human belief systems, religions, caused people to join cults, adopt irrational belief systems, and led many to madness and the devastation of their personal and professional lives. The 'phenomenon' has been in control at all times and has always acted with a subversive, covert, hidden, and false agenda. (See: Jacques Vallee, Carl Jung, and others who have analyzed the power of this mythology on our culture.)
• It is my opinion that Dr. Steven Greer was sincere when he wrote in his book that he, personally, has experienced miracles that were not even claimed by Jesus Christ himself.
• I believe that Dr. Steven Greer, in his effort to understand this mystery and what he has experienced personally, has lost all sense of perspective, rational judgment, and the ability to filter evidence in a coherent fashion. He takes all testimony at face value, whether it is from the most reputable witness to the most delusional loon.

I hope that clears things up for people on this topic. So, just what was the comment I received that set me off on such a rant? The comment was as follows:

I apologize to you for what I am about to say. My whole life I have encountered people like you who can't be open for even a minute.

You think everything is black and white.

Is life really that scary to you?

All I can say is you should open up because you are in for a big surprise that took me thirty years of serious research and experimentation to see what is about to happen (not just with UFO's).

I pray for your sake you're a quick learner.

So, what in this statement gets me riled up? It is that the anonymous commentee claims that I am not 'open-minded'. Hmm...I suppose I'm not open-minded. That is why I have read over a hundred books on the subject, that is why I openly engaged in online conversations with Steven Greer and his followers years ago, that is why I have spoken to numerous contactees and UFO witnesses over the years. I did all of that because I am not open-minded?

What we need to clear up here is the difference between being 'open-minded' and being irrational. I have said it before, and I will say it again. I am a multi-model agnostic. That means I try very hard not to 'believe' any one thing as being 'true' or 'false' but I try to consider all theoretical models for reality as 'possible'; even to the extent that I might consider multiple models correct simultaneously (without letting my mind explode in the process). Now, just because I am a multi-model agnostic doesn't mean that I consider all models to be of the same probability.

Sure, I suppose there is a chance that Steven Greer is right. Perhaps these UFOs are ETs and they are all nice and friendly and are only looking out for our best interests. But...you see...the thing is...I have seen very little evidence to that effect. I'm also not saying the UFOs guys are evil either. They seem to be generally doing there own thing from what I can tell; and not bothering us a whole lot one way or the other. That is unless you believe the stories of alien abductees and that opens up a whole other ball of wax.

When you weigh all of the 'evidence' what you end up with is that people seem to have experiences that convince them they have had alien encounters. There is generally little to no objective physical evidence to back these experiences up. Very little indeed, especially in light of the quantity of experiences claimed. What we do know is that certain altered states of consciousness, such as the experience of DMT intoxication, can produce highly similar subjective events. We also know, that all that we experience as an objective reality 'out there' is actually a construct in our own minds. What is, or is not 'real' in an objective and consensual manner is very difficult to say with any certainty until you apply the same rules of evidence to measure it relative to the rest of human experience.

I am somewhat comfortable stating that Dr. Steven Greer has had personal experiences that convince him of the ET UFO hypothesis. However, what his experiences have to do with me, you, or anyone else is hard to say.

To have an 'open mind' does *NOT* mean you believe any new idea, concept, model, or theory someone might throw out there. It does not mean that at all! What it means is that you use the same set of criteria when you make a judgment about a 'new idea' as you do an old and established one.

It is reasonable to object when someone refuses to look at the evidence for new ideas and concepts and dismisses it out of hand. However, it is unreasonable to expect someone not to apply the same rules of evidence, the same set of criteria for logic and rational thought, the same scientific method, to a new idea as one which is considered part of the established paradigm.

Sure, I have an open-mind, but I'm not going to leave it so open that I let my brains fall out. That goes for UFOs, free-energy, 9-11 conspiracy theories, the 12th Planet, December 12, 2012, Edgar Cacye, Atlantis, esoterica, or anything else.