UFO UpDates Mailing List
From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@cyberport.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 18:17:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 05:07:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Code of ethics
----------
> From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> Date: Friday, December 20, 1996 7:55 AM
>
> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 07:42:39 -0500
> From: "Steven J. Powell" <sjpowell@access.digex.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> References: <2.2.32.19961216195235.00afe0ec@globalserve.net>
>
> > From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@cyberport.com>
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> >
> > > We have self-claimed experiencers from virtually all
faiths
> > > and religions so I'm think that a spiritual approach might
be
> > Question: How did my statement refer necessarily to any of
> > RELIGIOUS persuasion John?
> > Question: Why and how does the term SPIRITUAL equate to the
> > condition of RELIGION?
>
> You didn't necessarily refer to any specific religion but each
religion
> has its own spirituality (which it necessarily thinks is
singularly
> right, with every other spirituality being specifically
wrong).
I feel that this is a difference in terminology John. <grin>
In my view, Religions, denominations, sects etc. each have their
own particular DOGMA which to all too many equate to a
particular flavor of spirituality. Yet, I seriously question if
these constitute spirituality at all necessarily. You see to me,
true spirituality has NOTHING to do with religion. Down through
the ages John there have been many atrocities committed in the
name of this or that religion. Where I ask you is the
spirituality in committing inhumane acts John?
Spirituality in my view is an evolving condition within each of
us that is exemplified partially by our individual Humaneness. A
constant striving for a higher level of personal conduct that in
part displays an individual's growing personal concern as to his
own actions being in the best interest for all concerned.
However, this is but one small aspect. Hopefully you get my
point.
> I don't know why spirituality and religion are linked. I'm
not a
> religious or spiritual person. They seem to be linked to me.
They aren't linked necessarily John, this is just one of the
illusions that individual religions perpetuate in order to
survive and/or grow. This may seem somewhat cynical to many, but
I feel that aside from the many good things that individual
religions accomplish, these are offset to a great degree by the
control that they exercise. Thus, Religions are control
mechanisms John.
I ask you, where lies the spirituality within the control of
others under the guise of guidance. How many Christian
denominations for example, espouse the notion of one's going to
Hell if their particular path isn't followed? Spirituality?
Bah! Humbug! <chuckle>
> > In my view, spirituality and faith have really very little
to do
> > with religion and dogma John.
> > It has been my experience that religion has served to retard
> > spirituality and hinder faith in many rather than to
perpetuate
> > it.
>
> Well, you and _I_ can agree with that but the other 80% of the
world's
> population that actively believes in one or another religios
dogma
> apparently doesn't agree with that <grin>.
To be sure.
> > > But if you could _only_ pick one to start with????
> > Ahhhh well, responsibly I would work toward getting the
player
> > off of the bench.
>
> Me too.
That is humane and thus, spiritual to a degree.
> > to convince me that my experience was a beneficial one
conducted
> > by benevolent beings.
>
> That was extremely unfortunate and hopefully you've managed to
undo most
> of that silliness. As we now know that individual wasn't an
acceptable
> MHP to begin with.
Hahaha! I was branded anathema from the gitgo John. <grin>
I didn't for a second buy that hogwash and did my best in the
attempt to point out why I felt that it was pure baloney. I can
honestly relate that following a number of the get-togethers, I
was taken aside by a few and thanked for speaking out. I once
again challenge others who have experienced similar
circumstances to my own, to seriously question what are to me
the illusionary trappings provided by those who perpetrated the
circumstances in the first place.
> > This really only served to compound the
> > problem. When I began to attempt to take a look at my
experience
> > from a metaphysical/spiritual viewpoint after some research,
I
> > was able after a time to begin to accept what had happened
to
> > me. I must however qualify that I only accept that something
> > exceedingly strange happened. I recall the events as having
a
> > third dimensional reality, but question a great portion of
that
> > as being fact.
>
> Most experiencers I've talked to would say something similar.
The high
> strangeness of the experience, and various specific events,
seem to
> stand almost as a contradiction to it being a 3D-real event.
Really. That hasn't yet been my experience.
> > > Standard therapy isn't about whether your experience is
real
> > > or not, its just about the issues related to you and your
reactions.
> > Well, I suppose that this is true. I know that I have come
to an
> > understanding of my reactions concerning the event.
>
> That's largely the name of the game. Therapy can't, shouldn't
and
> generally won't prove something right or wrong - just get you
back in
> the game. In you case it was mostly self-therapy and you
aren't the
> only person who mostly helped themselves. A non-trivial part
of
> traditional psychology is helping you to become your own best
therapist.
Yup! Kinda like hypnosis. <grin>
> > > Some experiencers go through a period when its extremely
> > > important for them to tell others about what happenned to
them for
> > > the purpose of self-testing their own telling of the
experiences and
> > Sure. I found myself in the position of seriously
questioning my
> > own sanity. Equally important from my standpoint, was that I
was
>
> There's nothing at all wrong with the self-testing-by-telling
phase that
> people go through. It very clearly shows the internal turmoil
and
> questioning that's going on within a person. I think that
tends to
> demonstrate that something extremely strange did happen to the
> individual.
Unquestionably.
> > I don't know John. You need to appreciate that I was
questioning
> > my sanity. I feel that this has been the case of many others
as
> > well.
>
> I understand that. And if you told your story to a person
who's sanity
> you didn't question and that person was even moderately swayed
that
> probably something _did_ happen to you, then you would have
(maybe just
> a little tiny bit) demonstrated to yourself that you weren't
crazy.
Okay, I see your point, you're correct.
> > It is a difficult thing to accept that others may think
> > that you are not playing with a full deck. I had to come to
a
> > place where I had accepted what had happened to and to
accept
> > that unless also experienced by another, there was simply no
way
> > they could understand where I was coming from and to be O.K.
>
> I think there's a _huge_ difference between a person with
ongoing
> experiences and one with apparently post-experience thinking
only.
I believe that the abduction scenarios can be brought to a halt.
This does not necessarily mean that the encounters stop however,
it just means that their nature changes.
> Perhaps you've had the experience of talking to someone about
your
> experiences and (somehow, some way) they became _totally_
convinced that
> they were _positively_ real. Did their 110% acceptance,
genuine as it
> may be to them, seem hollow or shallow to you?
Reserved. <grin>
But my friend, I fail to see how it could be any other way.
> > > There is a catch-22 here. If we establish elaborate
> > > electronic monitoring and that equipment shows _NO_
physical
> > > activity and _NO_ signs of tampering with the gear, yet
the abductee
> > > reports that they were in fact abducted, we would have no
choice
> > > except to assume that whatever happenned was non-physical.
> > That does not make the events any less real nor dangerous.
> > Man is after all, a multi-dimensional creature. The vast
> > majority of us have barely scratched the surface of our
> > realization of this. We have much to learn.
>
> And that's the problem. Traditional science would say that
there's
> nothing wrong with the hardware, it performed exactly as it
should, and
> it recorded no 3D events at all. Traditional psychology might
then say
> that there's nothing wrong with the person either, but they
_are_
> suffering some trauma from what can _currently_ only be
described as a
> nightmare. Maybe, in our example, we'd get lucky and there'd
be
> something else, a physical marking or something, to complicate
things.
Having said the above John and in consideration of the entire
exchange, perhaps you are getting a bit of a feel for what I was
referring to by the term 'awareness'. Some are consciously aware
of things within their surroundings within which others have no
cognizance. Therefore, these things are real to them on an
subtle experiential interactive way while to the others, there
is not an equal amount of perception.
> > > > You got me, buddy. Still, you have to admit that based
upon
> > > > the numbers alone, there is something decidedly strange
going
> > > > on.
> > > I've been convincved that something was going on for
> > decades...
> > As have I. Furthermore, I have come to suspect that
persisting
> > in attempting to gain any understanding utilizing a
traditional
> > approach is/will be futile.
>
> I can convince myself using non-traditional approaches but I
couldn't
> convince anyone else without them.
Agreed. Yet, your experience is not any less valid is it?
Most especially when you encounter others who independently
report nearly the exact same experience(s) under similar
circumstances.
> > > Who asked 'em? I'm not a member of any system of religion
so
> > > I guess I get the short end of the stick? I'd be better
served if
> > > the aliens replaced my cable TV company...
> > I feel that systems of religion have little to nothing
> > whatsoever to do with this equation John.
>
> Its a transitional problem. About 80% of the world's
population
> _actively_ believes in/practices one or another religion.
(That means
> they pray more than once a week, they attend some ceremony
once a week,
> etc.) _Most_ religions offer a direct link to God. In most
religions
> there's nothing between the person and God. Making the
universe bigger
> by there being one or more inteligent alien species sort of
puts stuff
> between humans and their God.
What I have found valuable in a following of religious in
general is the fellowship.
There is something that is supremely comfortable and
strengthening within the arms of fellowship. This does not
necessitate the practice of a religion in a dogmatic sense
though.
Actually, I haven't attended a fellowship situation for around
two years. That circumstance wasn't with a religion as most
would define it, but I did attend somewhat religiously, for
thirteen years.
I AM contemplating at present attending on a regular basis, a
particular denomination. This will not be due to it's particular
dogma, but due to the fellowship with some of the people within
the congregation including the minister whom I like as a person.
> We can expect that if we ever meet aliens, that is if they
come here,
> that they're probably older and more technically advanced than
us.
This may or may not be true, but does not necessarily pertain to
more important issues.
> They've probably either successfully dealt with or made lots
of progress
> dealing with their social and religious problems. It would be
> interesting to see how they did that but it would also be
threatening to
> some folks here.
Perhaps they have never had these issues to deal with.
Perhaps they have never been exposed to emotional content due to
never having had that aspect within themselves. Perhaps they are
just now beginning to experience this and are experiencing a
beginning of it's development within themselves. I suggest that
were this not the case, they could ill afford perpetrating the
inhumane acts to which they reportedly have.
> I personally don't have a problem with any of that but I
suspect that
> many folks would. I also think it'll get worked out over
time.
I just pointed out one of mine. I do not for a second buy that
these beings where ever and however they do get here, are far in
advance of us in aspects that really matter.
Another thing. I feel that despite the possibility that they may
possess superior weaponry for example, they have insufficient
numbers to take advantage of the slight increase in superiority.
Their only alternative it is clear, lies within manipulation to
gain their ends.
> > They then go their way doing the same things over and over
> > expecting different results, but receiving the same ...
still
> > searching for the causation.
>
> I think its hard to be very responsible in life when we're not
much in
> control of it or what happens around us.
Responsibility is a matter of acceptance.
We collectively create our own greater reality John.
> > A bunch I'd wager. And I needn't remind you John, Fear
usually
> > breeds violence.
>
> Sure does.
All too many strive to rationalize their fear and to justify the
actions that are a result thereby refusing to take
responsibility. They therefore attempt to abide within an
illusion.
> > > Those changes happen across generations. As one
generation
> > > moves out or prominence another one moves in. It takes
time.
> > What if time is not a commodity that we can any longer enjoy
in
> > these regards?
>
> Well, then we're screwed. Probably the single most common
thread that
> runs through human society, politics, economics, and even
religion is
> reaction instead of action (or pro-action). We wait for
something to
> happen then we react to it instead of determining that
something is
> going to happen and act on it.
I prefer to have faith and trust in spirit John. I know that
when the chips are down that many are going to shed their rose
colored glasses and witness reality for what it is ... of our
own collective creation. Some will choose to realign it with
values and features more in keeping with those of humaneness
while others will still be addicted to the self same illusions
with which they have been running for eons. They will grow and
evolve, but this as in the past will be a slow process.
Thus, I AM suggesting that there will indeed be a split in what
is experiential reality. Some will arise to experience a new
dimensional reality while others will remain within the hell of
their own making until they discover that they can rise above
it.
> I don't think anything is going to change that in the near
term.
I do, but as inferred, many will be oblivious to the change.
> > > It occurred to me when I was writing that that in those
areas
> > > where we are _already_ using electronic monitoring of
pre-release
> > > convicts the costs would be essentially zero. The
equipment is
> > > already in place as are the people to do the monitoring.
> > Then it should be utilized.
>
> Yes, it should. It all starts with a police report.
Let me assure you that in this community, that would bring
nothing but contempt and ridicule.
> > > How do we objectively prove that things are vibrating at a
> > > higher frequency, how do we prove that this affects human
thinking?
>
> > That is two questions. As to the first, I suspect that our
> > physical instrumentation may be at or near their limitations
of
> > possibility. However, we can catalog the effects upon
measurable
> > phenomena of forces of higher frequency. Kirlian photography
and
> > newer, related technologies are an example of this. Of
course,
> > there have been other suggested explanations tendered for
the
> > phenomena observed in Kirlian photography, but no conclusive
> > proof that I know of.
> > Secondly, it affects awareness more than the thinking
process.
> > It serves to distort.
>
> You could very well be right about our instrumentation's
ability to
> observe. That's always been a problem in science.
The solution is self evident John. Unfortunately, there seems to
be a lot of ego invested in the attainment of degrees. Thus, the
system or rather the adherents thereof, serve to be
self-stifling.
I AM not anti-science, but of the ego that often accompanies the
academic accomplishments.
> > In any event, the concepts I AM attempting to convey are
> > difficult to find useful words for.
>
> Whether is hard science or spirituality we're talking about
things at or
> beyond the known edge, there's no textbook to check for the
right
> words...
Too true.
> > > I don't know why most abductionists ignore the paranormal
> > > aspects of the event. Until recently the paranormal
aspects were
> > > _actively_ censored out of abduction accounts, even by
MUFON.
>
> > I will state that I feel with every fibre of my being that
this
> > is the aspect that is the key.
> > That this aspect of nearly every case is all but ignored by
> > nearly every researcher that I know of, is doing themselves
and
> > more importantly the rest of us, a great disservice. If it
is
> > there, then it is of significance.
>
> I think the paranormal aspect is more important than the other
details.
As do I and I feel the urgency that it needs to be addressed.
> > I think that many have already made up their mind that this
> > phenomena comes to us from across the galaxy, John.
>
> I think they've done that too.
I feel that this is just so much propaganda.
> > I think that
> > they fear that if the incidence of paranormal phenomena is
> > recognized, then abduction incidents in general will be
declared
> > non-physical. Frankly even if they were, I fail to
understand
> > the significance of that. The phenomena is still occurring
and
> > leaving circumstantial physical evidence. Put another way,
the
> > phenomena is occurring and may be partially of a
non-physical
> > nature or para-physical nature leaving physical effects in
some
> > cases. In any case, something is happening and it may well
be
> > very dangerous.
>
> People don't like to admit they took a wrong turn especially
if they'd
> been on that wrong turn road a long time. There clearly is a
> consensus-likde decision among most that this is a 3D, aliens
in
> spaceships, deal and they exclude the paranormal (or sometimes
explain
> it away with science fiction).
Then they play into the perpetrators hands In My Opinion.
Once one breaks out of this mold and is what is termed by some
an experiencer John, one notes a decided change in the content
of the experiences that occur after.
> We should also bear in mind that the abductionists are new to
the scene
> and invented their own 'ology.' Paranormalists were here
before them.
> If the abductionists accepted the paranormal aspects then
they'd have to
> compete directly with the paranormalists (who, by the way,
began
> using electronic monitoring _years__ ago)...
I can't argue with you.
> > > I don't know if that's _actually_ true but its what the
> > > abductionists are saying.
> > In many cases yes. There also seems to be some suspicion
that it
> > happens to a greater percentage of military people and/or
their
> > dependents.
>
> I recently heard this mentioned. Do you know what this
suspicion is
> based on?
No. My being of a military family has nothing to do with it. In
fact, I would suspect the opposite.
With me it is just a generality due to having read the accounts
of so many who are/were of a military family upbringing.
However, I have been remiss in having not thought of the attempt
to compile any statistical evidence in support (or converse) the
notion.
Kindest Regards,
Clark
UFO UpDates - Toronto -
updates@globalserve.net
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
Phenomena.
To subscribe please send your first and last name to
updates@globalserve.net
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
|
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page. |
Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is not
responsible for content.
Financial support for this web server is provided by the
Research Center Catalog.
Software by Glenn Campbell.
Technical contact:
webmaster@ufomind.com