Update from Dr. Jonathan Reed
Tommy Grand
There have been many developments in the Reed case since the original
alien encounter in 1996. Here's an update provided by the Dr. last
fall: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP-0WnczDKI
TG
More than 700 Congress attendees were present at Reed's talk. Interest
in the former child psychologist's case is due in large part to his
appearance on several Art Bell programs over the last 18 months.
Reed, accompanied by writer and supporter Robert Raith, gave a tearful
and emotional account of meeting a part-Reptilian, part-Gray alien
while on a walk with his dog. He expressed particularly intense sorrow
when he talked about watching his dog die. As the story goes, the dog
veered away from their intended path, and when Reed caught up to his
pet, a vibrating alien was shaking the attacking dog, to the point
where its head ripped in half, and disintegrated into a pile of white
ash.
After the dog was killed, Reed struck the alien with a baseball bat,
and captured on film the creature and its accompanying obelisk --
which is possibly a spaceship, or possibly a doorway to another
dimension. In his video, which he played before the IUFOC audience,
Reed can be heard panting heavily, to the point of hyperventilating.
However, critics say the video didn't shake enough, and his panic was
too audible, to be authentic.
Reed took the alien home, where he made a video of investigating the
four-and-a-half-foot being. He told the audience that his attempts to
cut the alien's clothes were thwarted, as its black, spandex-like
outfit automatically sewed itself up. When asked whether the being
were male or female, Reed said he didn't know, adding offhandedly that
he hadn't "made love to her." Ultimately, the being disappeared from
Reed's freezer, presumably because it was stolen by burglars who
reportedly had governmental license plates.
Reed has been on the run ever since. Wiping his eye, he admitted that
he's been beaten up by agents three times, and two of his close
friends have been killed. He goes as far as saying his life has been
ruined, that he has lost nearly all of the things he enjoyed before
his encounter, such as a steady job, home, and girlfriend. Recently,
he was shot in the shoulder, after trying to wrest a gun from stranger
approaching him in a parking lot.
With an equally emotional Raith, the controversial contactee recently
co-authored a book called The Link, which contends that mysterious
agents are chasing Reed for a technology that the alien wore on his
wrist. Something like a transmitter-receiver, this hieroglyphic "link"
bracelet turned from silver to black when Reed clasped it on the
alien's arm. It is believed that the wristband served as a tracking
device that maintained a connection with the alien's nine-foot-long,
granite-like craft.
Some Congress attendees are unshakable proponents of Reed and his
story. Shawn Atlanti, of San Diego, is convinced that government
agents are bent upon torturing Reed to death, by physical and psychic
means. Dan Iaria, of Indianapolis, having spent hours with Reed this
week, contends that the purportedly hunted Reed demonstrates
credibility and character as he tells his story. Dr. Heim, a remote
viewing specialist from Colorado, told the audience that his colleague
was able to remotely view the alien's craft with little prompting.
Reed, Raith, and their book's publisher were given a standing ovation
at the close of their presentation.
Regardless, the skeptical argue that Reed's video comes across as
having a little too much polish. They also take issue with his
seemingly overdone emotionality, as demonstrated by his tendency to
weep in mid-sentence. Further, critics wonder why Reed didn't make a
greater effort to relate his story to the police, from the very
beginning.
It's clear that the Reed story will continue to inspire debate for the
near future. Most likely, the case will decisively divide the ufology
community, as experts grapple with how much credence should be given
to an encounter experienced by one person, alone in the woods.
Tashi
Truly it has been said that there is nothing new under the sun, for
knowledge is revealed and is submerged again, even as a nation rises
and falls. Here is a system, tested throughout the ages, but lost
again and again by ignorance or prejudice, in the same way that great
nations have risen and fallen and been lost to history beneath the
desert sands and in the ocean depths. -- Paracelsus
Tommy thanks for posting this! Very interesting this compression of
time. The Tibetan Lamas speak of this as well. One can in this
lifetime experience the equivalent of 1000's of lifetimes of the past.
This is a time of great opportunity as well as great destruction. In
the past, if one wanted to to travel from India, to America, it would
take a lifetime, now it takes about 18 hours. All experiences are
accelerated and will continue to do so.
2012 seems to be a very important date for many cultures, they seem
to point to that time. The Vedas mention the beginning of a "Golden
Age", roughly 5000 years from the begining of the Kali Yuga. We are
now 5114 years into the Kali Yuga.
" Thus it is generally accepted that the age of the Kali Yuga began
on Febuary 20, 3102 BC.
In the Vedic writtings they describe aircraft with Mercury fueled
engines, and flight manuals, and instructions on how to fly them. One
account mentions that airplanes of the future will be "loud and noisy,
and not go very fast"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9jaAoSHkeM&NR=1&feature=fvwp
The dimension of time is something most people can't comprehend,
just as a fish can't conceive of a sky, and clouds.
John Nguyen
I'm not trying to put more fuel into the fire, but the theory in
following article seems plausible to my untrained eye. I clearly don't
have the knowledge to prove or disprove this, but I'll keep an opened
opinion for many debates to come.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20090813/sc_space/lifesevolutionmaydependongalaxy
Tashi
Very interesting article. The Buddha said 2500 years ago there were
"Countless world systems".
dsi1
> I'm not trying to put more fuel into the fire, but the theory in
> following article seems plausible to my untrained eye. I clearly don't
> have the knowledge to prove or disprove this, but I'll keep an opened
> opinion for many debates to come.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20090813/sc_space/lifesevolutionmaydependongalaxy
Interesting stuff. I've never heard that intelligent life was a rare
commodity. Maybe around here it is. Ha ha, just kidding, just kidding! :-)
Logically, any civilization we'll meet (if we meet) in the future should
be more technologically advanced than ours. The reason is simply
because, as far as civilizations go, ours has been around for hardly any
time at all and any folks that we meet would logically have been in
development far longer.
We think that we're an ancient species because of our short lifetimes
and memories. The reality is that man is incapable of the knowledge of
the scale of time as it actually exists.
For now, my assumption is that the universe is teeming with intelligent
life and that the distances involved is an impassable barrier to us
intermingling. That's a good thing too - if we do meet an advanced
civilization, my guess is that they're gonna want our water and mine our
planet as a food and fertilizer source!
Tashi
> John Nguyen wrote:
> > I'm not trying to put more fuel into the fire, but the theory in
> > following article seems plausible to my untrained eye. I clearly don't
> > have the knowledge to prove or disprove this, but I'll keep an opened
> > opinion for many debates to come.
>
>
> Interesting stuff. I've never heard that intelligent life was a rare
> commodity. Maybe around here it is. Ha ha, just kidding, just kidding! :-)
>
> Logically, any civilization we'll meet (if we meet) in the future should
> be more technologically advanced than ours. The reason is simply
> because, as far as civilizations go, ours has been around for hardly any
> time at all and any folks that we meet would logically have been in
> development far longer.
What do you base that assumption on?
> We think that we're an ancient species because of our short lifetimes
> and memories.
That makes a lot of sense I guess. Isn't that statement an oxymoron?
>
> For now, my assumption is that the universe is teeming with intelligent
> life and that the distances involved is an impassable barrier to us
> intermingling. That's a good thing too - if we do meet an advanced
> civilization, my guess is that they're gonna want our water and mine our
> planet as a food and fertilizer source!
A lot of assumptions and guess work in that last paragraph. You
sound kinda like a fish, telling another fish, there is no such thing
as air.
Tommy Grand
> Tommy thanks for posting this! Very interesting this compression of
> time. The Tibetan Lamas speak of this as well. One can in this
> lifetime experience the equivalent of 1000's of lifetimes of the past.
> This is a time of great opportunity as well as great destruction. In
> the past, if one wanted to to travel from India, to America, it would
> take a lifetime, now it takes about 18 hours. All experiences are
> accelerated and will continue to do so.
You have a good point, that's an interesting connection. Also, your
comment reminded me of this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Quickening-Todays-Trends-Tomorrows-World/dp/1879706709
BTW MT I was intrigued by an older post you made regarding Vedic
maths. I confess I had never heard of it, and the stuff on the Wiki
page was pretty cool! I asked a colleague of mine about it, he's from
Mumbai and a Brahmin to boot. He didn't know much about it, which
surprised me until he explained that he was taught in a Westernized
school. I met another Indian guy who had never learned about the
Thuggees. Makes me wonder if they are trying to erase the past over
there. Hmm.
dsi1
> On Aug 14, 2:07 pm, dsi1 <d...@humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote:
>> John Nguyen wrote:
>>> I'm not trying to put more fuel into the fire, but the theory in
>>> following article seems plausible to my untrained eye. I clearly don't
>>> have the knowledge to prove or disprove this, but I'll keep an opened
>>> opinion for many debates to come.
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20090813/sc_space/lifesevolutionmaydepe...
>> Interesting stuff. I've never heard that intelligent life was a rare
>> commodity. Maybe around here it is. Ha ha, just kidding, just kidding! :-)
>>
>> Logically, any civilization we'll meet (if we meet) in the future should
>> be more technologically advanced than ours. The reason is simply
>> because, as far as civilizations go, ours has been around for hardly any
>> time at all and any folks that we meet would logically have been in
>> development far longer.
>
> What do you base that assumption on?
The most successful life on this planet was around for about 165 million
years. Heck, some of them are still around today. How long have we been
around? About 200 thousand years. How long have we been a technological
species? 4-5 thousand years. Modern technology has only existed for
about 200 years, some people might think less.
What are the chances that we'll meet another civilization at the exact
same point of development or even within a hundred thousand years of
development as us? I will leave you to answer that one for yourself.
>
>> We think that we're an ancient species because of our short lifetimes
>> and memories.
>
> That makes a lot of sense I guess. Isn't that statement an oxymoron?
>> For now, my assumption is that the universe is teeming with intelligent
>> life and that the distances involved is an impassable barrier to us
>> intermingling. That's a good thing too - if we do meet an advanced
>> civilization, my guess is that they're gonna want our water and mine our
>> planet as a food and fertilizer source!
>
> A lot of assumptions and guess work in that last paragraph. You
> sound kinda like a fish, telling another fish, there is no such thing
> as air.
Can you, off the top of your head, list any instances in our history
where a less technologically advanced civilization was enriched by
meeting one more advanced? If you cannot, then you better ask yourself
who's making the assumptions and guessing - Mr Smartypants!
>
Tashi
> Tashi wrote:
> > On Aug 14, 2:07 pm, dsi1 <d...@humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote:
> >> John Nguyen wrote:
> >>> I'm not trying to put more fuel into the fire, but the theory in
> >>> following article seems plausible to my untrained eye. I clearly don't
> >>> have the knowledge to prove or disprove this, but I'll keep an opened
> >>> opinion for many debates to come.
> >>>http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20090813/sc_space/lifesevolutionmaydepe...
> >> Interesting stuff. I've never heard that intelligent life was a rare
> >> commodity. Maybe around here it is. Ha ha, just kidding, just kidding! :-)
>
> >> Logically, any civilization we'll meet (if we meet) in the future should
> >> be more technologically advanced than ours. The reason is simply
> >> because, as far as civilizations go, ours has been around for hardly any
> >> time at all and any folks that we meet would logically have been in
> >> development far longer.
>
> > What do you base that assumption on?
>
> The most successful life on this planet was around for about 165 million
> years. Heck, some of them are still around today. How long have we been
> around? About 200 thousand years. How long have we been a technological
> species? 4-5 thousand years. Modern technology has only existed for
> about 200 years, some people might think less.
Don't believe everything you are taught in school. You must
investigate for yourself. There is far more suppression of
information than you would think. Although it's no use helping you out
here, because you have such a conservative veil of reality, nothing
will help you.
> What are the chances that we'll meet another civilization at the exact
> same point of development or even within a hundred thousand years of
> development as us? I will leave you to answer that one for yourself.
David, they have already met us! It's really no longer a
question.
> >> We think that we're an ancient species because of our short lifetimes
> >> and memories.
> > That makes a lot of sense I guess. Isn't that statement an oxymoron?
> >> For now, my assumption is that the universe is teeming with intelligent
> >> life and that the distances involved is an impassable barrier to us
> >> intermingling. That's a good thing too - if we do meet an advanced
> >> civilization, my guess is that they're gonna want our water and mine our
> >> planet as a food and fertilizer source!
>
> > A lot of assumptions and guess work in that last paragraph. You
> > sound kinda like a fish, telling another fish, there is no such thing
> > as air.
>
> Can you, off the top of your head, list any instances in our history
> where a less technologically advanced civilization was enriched by
> meeting one more advanced? If you cannot, then you better ask yourself
> who's making the assumptions and guessing - Mr Smartypants!
There existed before the end of the last ice age many advanced
civilizations. After the flood there were a few survivors to bear
witness to the cataclysm. They were thrown back into the stone ages.
Much like what would happen to us today if tomorrow electricity ceased
to work.
dsi1
>> Can you, off the top of your head, list any instances in our history
>> where a less technologically advanced civilization was enriched by
>> meeting one more advanced? If you cannot, then you better ask yourself
>> who's making the assumptions and guessing - Mr Smartypants!
>
> There existed before the end of the last ice age many advanced
> civilizations. After the flood there were a few survivors to bear
> witness to the cataclysm. They were thrown back into the stone ages.
> Much like what would happen to us today if tomorrow electricity ceased
> to work.
>
>
Thanks for the straightforward answer to my question - not! I will
accept that as a dodge. Heck, I guess the Tibetans have been helped out
by the generous help of the Chinese and their tank and gun technology.
Life is gonna be so beautiful when the aliens come to help us. Yaaay!
Tashi
You suggest I think the aliens will save us, as if I think it is a
religion or something. This of course is your passive/aggressive way
to suggest anyone who is open minded to the possibility UFO's exist,
is a lunatic, and you are the sane guy, in firm control.
I truly don't know what to think. I imagine some are benevolent and
others more aggressive, quite like most earthlings. I do know one
thing, their are far too many credible people who have seen these
things, calling for the Government to come clean on this.
If you are interested in this, there is a wealth of information out
there, If you are not interested in this, you will tow the
conservative line and google the greatest UFO bloopers. We all have
24 four hours in a day!
John Nguyen
> For now, my assumption is that the universe is teeming with intelligent
> life and that the distances involved is an impassable barrier to us
> intermingling. That's a good thing too - if we do meet an advanced
> civilization, my guess is that they're gonna want our water and mine our
> planet as a food and fertilizer source!
That's certainly a possibility. On the other hand, they may be so far
advanced that they know how resolve all human/humanoid conflicts by
turning on/off some of the genes or remotely upgrade the "firmware" in
our heads. Wouldn't that be great? Then they would turn us into meals
and snacks to enhance their neutritional system :-)
Or maybe we are an experiment from alien so they can learn about their
past just like what paleonthologists are doing with the dinosaur's
soup bones? If you notice, the dinosaur bone hunters are very careful
with the bones they found and treat them like treasures. So I'm hoping
that "they" will treat us just as carefully. Hope is good!
Our universe started about 10 billions years ago plus/minus 23 hours
42 minutes and 8 seconds, give or take. What if there are other
universes that's more than 10 billions light-years away, which means
we cannot see them but they probably know our existence just by virtue
of being there earlier?
What if they have been trying to communicate with us but we failed to
recognize it? They could be a different metrics with much larger or
smaller scales that make it impossible for the two to sync up, or more
specifically, for us to read the right signals? Maybe they are
listening to John Cage's ORGAN2/ASLSP and enjoy tremendously. They
probably rewind it a few times already and we are still at the second
note??
OK, I'm up to my third beer for this fine Friday evening. I'll
continue to share my thought after I can get rid of the hang-over. Oh,
I didn't have a hangover, yet!
Cheers, partner!
John
dsi1
I'll have what you're having. :-)
dsi1
>
> You suggest I think the aliens will save us, as if I think it is a
> religion or something. This of course is your passive/aggressive way
> to suggest anyone who is open minded to the possibility UFO's exist,
> is a lunatic, and you are the sane guy, in firm control.
>
If you would care to refute my simple logic concerning the matters at
hand, feel free. I'll listen. Hell, you can even dodge the points - it's
your favorite strategy. No problem. However, please don't bring up UFOs
into this discussion. That's your thing, not mine.
And I'm sorry that my passive/aggressive way does not suit you. Out of
the tiniest remaining speck of respect that I have left for you, I'll
try to change, you self-righteous, cosmik debris spewing, egotistical
son of a bitch. Wow, I feel a lot better! Looks like that psychobabble
talk of yours ain't totally useless. Thanks! :-)
Now go screw yourself!
Tashi
John, I make the best Margaritas in the State! They go down like Kool-
aid.
John Nguyen
Now ya takin'. I can't wait!
Cheers,
John
John Nguyen
I have a very potent concoction of Coors Lights and Simi Cabernet
Sauvignon 2005. Be careful what you wish for, partner =)-
dsi1
>> I'll have what you're having. :-)-
>
> I have a very potent concoction of Coors Lights and Simi Cabernet
> Sauvignon 2005. Be careful what you wish for, partner =)-
Oh, an aristocrat, eh? :-)
Truth is, I don't drink alcohol, or rather I can't drink alcohol. I got
that Asian flush thing bad and additionally will have a hard time
breathing. Too bad, when I think about it, I'm a bit of a failure as a
fully made guy. I'll never know that simple pleasure of knocking off a
cool one with the boys. Well, I suppose I could knock back a Shirley
Temple. Ha ha. That's life, I guess. Think of me when you're enjoying
that Coors & Cabernet and maybe shed just the tiniest bit of a tear. :-)
Tashi
You have a full blown case of E-Temper rage! Dude! Seriously,
like...... get that checked out. First, it's a problem with
Decieriuos, and now UFO's.
Next time instead of telling me not to bring up UFO's in a thread
about UFO's, why don't you stay the hell off the thread which you
claim is not your thing. I really don't understand what forces you to
engage in a topic you have no interest in, if not to insult, belittle,
intimidate, those whom you hold in contempt. It's just a simple mouse
click away.......... to click, or not to click, this is your problem,
and your choice.
I'd hate to think I have everything wrapped up in a nice neat little
package for the rest of eternity, that scares the crap out of me!
Please, this post requires no response from you.
ktaylor
I used to believe in UFO's until I saw one.
Something to chill by:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Meqisu-fAPQ
Kevin T.
Tashi
The word "believe" duly noted. They either exist, or they don't
exist, there is no room for faith or "belief". I may "believe" the
sun will not rise in the east tomorrow.
Your video made me more uptight. Just for the record Kevin, I have an
aversion to four or more guitars of the same size. Only in the realm
of classical guitar is this acceptable.
However, I really enjoyed the Carrulli with two guitars........ well
done!
Dicerous
David often mentions *psycho-babble*...
David
dsi1
I wouldn't call it often. You can count on me using "psycho-babble"
whenever the I hear the trigger word "passive/aggressive." Hopefully,
Mr. T will appreciate my efforts to be less passive. Gosh, there's
nothing I wouldn't do for him. :-)
Of course you know that I have no small amount of disrespect for
psycho-the-rapists. Believe me, I know I have a problem with this, I'm
almost irrational - almost. Would it be worth my while to change this
attitude? Am I a bad person?
>
> David
Dicerous
I think the Hawaiian sun has baked your brain into a zombified
homonucleus.
David
Dicerous
for alain: A homunculus (Latin for "little human", plural is
"homunculi"; the diminutive of homo, "human") is, most generally, any
representation of a human being. It is often used to illustrate the
functioning of a system. In the scientific sense of an unknowable
prime actor, it can be viewed as an entity or agent.
Tashi
When I was there, I got a bad case of island fever.
dsi1
Hey wait a minute pal! I ain't no homo! :-)
To tell you the truth, I don't care for the sun and try to avoid
exposure to it's thermonuclear radiation. OTOH, I dislike too cold
places so this works out well for me.
Are you a psycho-the-rapist? You sorta fit the profile. Do other people
consider you a little odd? Do they think you're rather cold and
standoffish? Are you really bad at telling jokes? Do your consider
yourself a master of your emotions and others to be slaves? Are you a
wine not beer person? Do you favor the classical guitar? Do you like to
ask the questions, not answer them? Do you have unresolved sexual
problems? Do you wear turtlenecks with a jacket? Do you like to use
unusual words and phrases such as zombified homonucleus? Are you trying
to find wife number three - or whatever?
Well, you could be a psycho-the-rapist. :-)
>
>
> David
ktaylor
I'm curious about your aversion - not to the video or the music per se
but to the idea and expression of 4 (or more) guitars playing
together. Perhaps you'd take the time to articulate that for me.
Thanks,
Kevin
Tashi
Notice I very carefully used the words "same size". I don't like four
pianos, four violins, four cellos, four flutes, four oboes, four
clarinets, four bass guitars, four electric guitars, etc.
I do like four bowed instruments as long as they are a cello, viola,
and two violins. In the renaissance many lutes were made in sets of
four, a bass lute, tenor, and altos. Notice they were not all the
same size, for good reason.
I agree with Chopin, "there is nothing more beautiful than a guitar
save perhaps two". Two is a great number as the audience can observe
a wonderful dynamic between two players, this dynamic gets lost the
more guitars you add to the mix.
It might have it's place in teaching, I wouldn't know about that.
However, as one who appreciates the expressiveness of the guitar, I
find the solo performance very hard to beat.
Matt Faunce
I agree. I have the same aversion to more than two guitars. I never
thought about more than two of some other instrument. Same size, good
observation. I never put too much thought into it. I like my coffee
black, my whiskey straight, and my guitars solo.
Matt
Tashi
And my women loose!
ktaylor
Thanks for that. I have heard similar preferences before. I tend to
think of a guitar group as expanding the limitations inherent in the
fretboard: chord voicings that are not possible, textures that defy
solistic (or duet) ability - those kind of things. The range
limitations are not too bothersome to me as long as the music has
interesting content. It is a challenge to exploit the medium to
overcome what you are saying, I admit. Certainly voicing can be
separated better with multiple instruments than on one or two, if for
no other reason than the spatial difference.
Guitar ensemble (I think of "ensemble" as more than one guitar per
part) is a very different animal than even a guitar quartet, with even
more challenges for the listener. Having been exposed to that like few
others, I think it has some real artistic possibilities. I don't think
it has been exploited well enough yet. There is still work to do.
If it works it will strike the listener - even those who thought they
would not like it.
Kevin