November 17, 2023 • 25 mins
Welcome to "Musing While Cruising", where Chris pontificates on various things on his travels!
(WE WILL WORK ON IMPROVING THE AUDIO ON THESE EPISODES)
Has it ever crossed your mind that we might not be the only intelligent life forms in the universe? Ever thought about the real possibility of UFOs and the existence of extraterrestrial entities? Join Chris in this episode as he ventures into the uncharted territories of UFO skepticism and the possibility of non-human intelligence.
Strap in as we confront the power of words used by government officials in their denial of extraterrestrial craft, and question the implications of such dismissals. We'll venture into a speculative realm, contemplating the existence of an intelligence beyond our own and the potential life-altering consequences of their perceived superiority.
What could it mean for humanity if such an entity wielded the power of life and death? Prepare for a mind-bending discussion set to challenge your perception, potentially shifting your historical perspective and opening up new avenues of understanding about our place in the cosmos.
Sure, it's all conjecture and speculation, but it's still fun!
Contact Us:
Twitter: @NotSoDeepShit
Facebook.com/NSDSChrisandSteve
Instagram.com/nsdschrisandsteve
Email: nsdschrisandsteve@gmail.com
Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE, LIKE and LEAVE A REVIEW for the show!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to Musing While Cruising.
I've been wanting to producemore content and I'm in the car
a lot, driving to various places.
Today I'm on the way back fromgetting a haircut Susanie,
freshly, freshly cut and shavedat the wonderful Salon 22 on
Essex Street in Lawrence,massachusetts.
(00:22):
Shout out to Edinson and Salon22.
But anyway, musing WhileCruising, I do my best thinking
in the car, and yeah, so whydon't I just use while I cruise
and we'll talk about stuff?
What I've been thinking aboutlately is trying to figure out
(00:42):
the skeptical mind when it comesto the topic of UFOs, because
what I find frustrating in mostof my conversations is that
there's a certain degree ofknowledge which is out there.
It is out there, it is able tobe obtained, but a lot of people
(01:05):
, some that I engage this topicwith, they haven't done any of
that initial investigation.
So in order to speakknowledgeably on the topic,
while they're lacking, they'relacking a lot of the data.
Furthermore, they want me toconvince them of its reality.
(01:27):
Sum it up in a few moments.
You know, don't make it toolong, but you know, convince me
why I should believe this thing,which is hard to do.
It's hard to sum up anyknowledge base in a short time
frame.
Take any expert on any topic.
(01:49):
It can be a consequential topicor it can be a completely
irrelevant topic, but whateverthat thing is, say okay, you've
taken some amount of time toacquire your knowledge.
Now, in part, all of thatknowledge ought to be instantly.
I don't want to do any of thework.
I don't want to do any of theresearch or reading or listening
(02:11):
or thinking or pondering.
I just want it fed to medirectly, give me it all.
And when somebody can't do thatsuccinctly, we get upset and we
either blame the person or weblame the knowledge base.
That it's not legitimate.
There's information out there.
There have been hearings,briefings and hearings that have
(02:31):
taken place in Congress.
The most recent was just pastJuly 2023, during which some
extraordinary claims were made.
Now one could ask you know, hey, extraordinary claims require
(02:51):
extraordinary evidence.
That's what you always hear,right, okay, but maybe
extraordinary claims alsorequire extraordinary research
to uncover secrets of theseclaims or uncover whether these
claims are true.
I think we've passed the pointwhere we can afford to keep
(03:13):
having this discussion aboutwhether something is happening.
Something is happening.
Whatever that thing is, it'shappening.
Whatever it is, it'sinteresting.
If we have to keep it up, we'llhave to keep it up.
Keep having this conversationof bringing everyone up to speed
with where we are now November2023, before we even get into
(03:38):
2024.
We need to bring everybody upto date, something I do in my
UFO talks.
By the way, I travel around todifferent senior centers and
libraries and 55 and oldercommunities A little outfit
called Senior U.
We talk about things, I talkabout UFOs, I talk about
(04:02):
artificial intelligence, we haveplanned talks on a variety of
something, so there's a lotthere.
As I drive to these gigs, I'llprobably muse some more.
I'm certainly going to becruising, so I will muse.
Musing while cruising.
I love that title.
I think I really just wanted anexcuse to use that title of
musing while cruising.
(04:23):
The other thing I've beenthinking about a lot is my own
journey with this topic, which Ibecame interested in let's say
for the sake of argument, reallyseriously in the early 90's.
I probably was interested in itbefore that, but that's what I
got really interested in theidea of UFOs, the idea that
(04:44):
something could be coming herefrom somewhere else.
But in those early days I likeda very technological
perspective on the whole thing,with the notion.
I was very comfortable with thenotion that crafts were flying
(05:07):
from some place in space andsomehow making it here.
I wasn't really crazy aboutanything that left those very
comfortable confines, becausethat I could understand.
The other elements of UFOs whichunfortunately come along with
the territory is, it starts toget a little what you'd call the
(05:28):
woo when you get into psychicsand ghosts and even when you get
up abductions and cattlemutilations and crop circles, it
all gets really weird.
Initially I was not comfortablewith any event.
Unfortunately the two arelinked.
You really can't have aconversation about one without
(05:50):
at least touching on the other,because at times many UFO
encounters UAP encounters asthey're called now many of these
encounters stray into the weir.
They leave the comfortableconfines of what could be
explained by an interaction withan advanced technology and they
(06:14):
almost get, dare I say,religious, and that's something
that just is.
So I notice many.
I notice there are researchersout there who don't feel as
comfortable and anytime itborders into the weird stuff,
(06:34):
they leave it out of theiranalysis.
I get it, I get the, I get the.
I understand the resistance tothose ideas Because many of them
are really outside of reallyoutside of what we've been
forced to contemplate before.
(06:55):
We haven't got a real reason tothink beyond a certain paradigm
.
It just hasn't come up.
Up till now there really hasn'tbeen a benefit in going down
those roads, those moretheoretical roads, but they're
(07:21):
important.
They're important roads to godown.
I think one of the main reasonsthat I discounted the idea of
alien abduction initially, oneof my main objections to it was
that the thought that somethingfrom somewhere else could come
(07:46):
in and take someone and dosomething with them, put them
back and in some cases,manipulate their perception of
the thing that was done to them.
That's scary man.
That is frightening.
(08:06):
That is a frighteningpossibility.
So I understand the reluctance.
I totally get why someone wouldwant to pretend that that
wasn't a possibility, but thatwasn't a thing that could happen
(08:28):
.
And I'm not saying it doeshappen.
I don't know that it does.
I'm just saying that if youlook into the topic of abduction
cases, even taking into accountthat some percentage might be
falsified, might be incorrectinterpretations of what was
(08:52):
going on, might be just purehucksters trying to defraud the
law and someone with a crazystory even if you take that into
account, the sheer amount ofaccounts makes it difficult to
(09:12):
take them all off the table forone reason or another, it's the
volume of evidence.
There's not in my mind oneparticular UFO case, uap case
that is so solid that it provesthat 100%.
(09:33):
I mean, I guess the closest youcould come to that is the Tic
Tac event from 2004, onlybecause of the eyewitness
testimony from four individualsin the Navy and two separate
planes.
I mean that's a pretty strongcase.
(09:55):
But let's put that aside andsay there is no one case that is
such a strong case that it isthe game changer.
It is what anyone will convinceanyone that it's all true.
But I'll tell you there's a lotof little cases that start to
build a very compelling argument.
(10:15):
But you've got to look at theevidence.
You can't just refuse to lookat it and then say, because I
haven't seen it, it doesn'texist.
And I think that's a bigproblem with a lot of our
dialogue, particularly on thesubject of UAP.
There's a lot of people whowant to make very strong
proclamations that there'snothing to it, not having looked
(10:38):
at the evidence at all.
Now, in some cases there aresome who do look at the evidence
and they have problems withsome of the evidence, which is
perfectly valid.
There's a lot of problems youcould have with various parts of
the evidence, especially ifyou're trying to keep it in a
(10:58):
very materialistic, verymachines from another planet
flying here kind of paradigm,which is the most comfortable
paradigm for people.
But if you take it outside ofthat paradigm, take it outside
of the fact, maybe it's notphysical machines, maybe it's
(11:22):
something else, maybe it's anon-human intelligence that is
interacting with us in a waythat in hopes we can understand
it, and part of that interactionis us perceiving encounters
(11:43):
with technological gadgets thatseem to be more advanced than
what we have.
I'm just speculating here.
This is musing while cruising.
I'm not saying this is it?
I'm not saying I have theanswer, I'm just musing.
So what we're seeing is not somuch a race of beings from
(12:12):
another physical planet that onecould fly to if they went
enough in one direction, in thatparticular direction in space.
Maybe it's not, maybe it's morenuanced than that.
Maybe, like I said, it's anintelligence that's interacting
with us, trying to get us torecognize that it exists, so we
(12:36):
can then figure out how to havea real conversation with it.
That's the tripping part, right?
That's the real craziness of it.
What if it's just trying to getus to notice it?
And it's manifesting, and someare many are not.
The reasons for that aremultiple.
(12:59):
I mean, we're not looking up inthe sky as a people as much
anymore.
It's just less relevant in ourworld, I mean, unless you're
taking a flight, but we don'treally look up in the sky.
More often than not our facesare on the road, as they should
be when one is cruising, even ifyou're amusing.
They also might be on ourdevices when we're hopefully
(13:23):
stationary.
We're not looking up in the skyas much.
So how many sightings of UAPare just missed because nobody's
looking?
Some are also, you know, toofast to really be um for enough
(13:44):
people to get recognized.
It's happening.
It doesn't seem to want toreveal itself in full, which I
guess is also the funny, funnypart about this right, the UAP.
From the perspective of thetechnology that UAP seemed to
(14:07):
represent, they could be very,very overtly noticed.
You know, like they could hoverover a major city for hours and
make it so apparent that theyare there that there is no um.
(14:27):
There's no denying.
Presumably, if they're also sofar advanced of us, they would
probably have the ability to becompletely undetected, right, I
mean, they seem to be able to beless detectable at times, but
(14:54):
it seems arbitrary, or is it?
Maybe it's by design.
Maybe the design is thatsometimes it's detectable on
instruments, sometimes it'sdetectable, um, by the human
senses, sometimes both,sometimes neither, but maybe
that's the point of it.
Maybe it's trying to get us, asa culture, to recognize it and
(15:20):
then do what I hope is happeningnow, which is sick our best
scientific minds on it, uh,bring them up to speed that
something is happening,something's going on.
Whatever that thing is, I'lltell you, though, um, if you're
listening to what your electedofficials say I don't know
(15:43):
whether you listen to what yourelected officials say, but, um,
they're not comfortable with theidea that these things could be
from here in another nation,because the abilities they seem
to possess, um, well, quitefrankly, blow us out of the
(16:04):
water.
So if it is a another humannation, um, that's the more
worrying of the possiblescenarios.
I mean, if it's, you know, ifit's Russia or China, well, it's
going to make a lot of peopleuncomfortable.
So, what if it's not Russia orChina?
(16:27):
What if it's something else?
What if it truly is a non-humanintelligence.
By the way, that term non-humanintelligence, it's a nice way
of sidestepping theextraterrestrial um stick bone
and it's used a lot the reverseway by Arrow, the all domain
(16:47):
anomaly resolution office,because a lot of times when they
make uh denials about UAPrelated things, they will go out
of their way to say we've seenno evidence of extraterrestrial
craft in our airspace.
Let's say Okay.
(17:09):
So what would be required tohave evidence of
extraterrestrial craft?
Number one you would need toknow exactly where its origin is
to be able to recognize thefact that that is an
extraterrestrial point andtherefore they are
extraterrestrials.
If you cannot say that andthere are other options on the
(17:31):
table than just outer space youmay not be aware of them, but
they are there.
If it is something else, if itis something outside of that,
then they can say quite rightlythat they have no evidence of
(17:53):
extraterrestrial craft in ourairspace because they don't.
It's a true statement.
Um, words matter.
Words really matter togovernments and bureaucrats,
words in government bureaucratsthe most.
Words do matter, the specificword, the specific meaning of
(18:14):
that word and how it's usedcontextually.
That makes a difference.
So when they deny, when Aro,when Dr Sean Kirkpatrick of Aro
denies extraterrestrials, it'squite right to do so.
We have no evidence, but that'swhat they are.
(18:38):
We do know something's happeningand whatever that answer is,
it's interesting, right, it's aninteresting story.
So let's find out what it is,let's determine what the truth
is.
There's no harm in that.
It's no, it's okay.
And if we have to wrestle withthe fact that something is here,
(19:05):
a non-human intelligence isvisiting us here and interacting
with us in some way If that istrue maybe it is, maybe it isn't
we're gonna have to figure outhow to reckon with it.
Because if it is true, if it'strue, it's true, even if it's
(19:30):
not a thing that we would liketo be if it is in fact what is
happening, then it really isbest that we recognize it,
process it, deal with it andfigure out a plan going forward,
how we're going to coexist withit.
Because, again, we do need toconsider speculation.
(19:59):
I'm just musing here here.
If there is something, it tosome degree has the power to
decide whether we live or die.
Would it utilize that power?
I don't know, but it certainlyhas it to some degree, to some
(20:22):
degree.
Do I think they can push abutton and obliterate our entire
species?
I mean, let's hope not right.
But if you thought about it fora few minutes, you probably
could figure out a couple waysto do that very easily, as long
as you're not affected by thosesame things.
But there's definitely a couplethings you could do.
(20:45):
So if something?
So if a non-human intelligenceis interacting with us and it
has some degree of power overwhether we live or die, on
whatever scale it does you knowlarger, small and we can't do
(21:08):
anything about it, we can't stopit, we can't prevent it, we
can't seek retribution for it,wow, it really puts us in a
different place historicallythan where we have been.
Right, there's a cost to that,there's a weight of that.
(21:33):
But even if you don't want toadmit it or recognize it, the
knowledge itself, the potentialthat that knowledge is true,
really does something to thehuman perspective.
(21:55):
So it's something to thinkabout, right?
I mean again, I'm not sayingthat is the case, I'm just
saying I'm saying it'ssomething's going on, that's all
.
I want to get us on the samepage of Um.
I don't want to have to keepfighting the battle of whether
(22:15):
something is happening.
That's a wasted conversation,right?
I mean, if we're still havingthat conversation, if we're
still, if we're still talkingabout whether something is
happening, it's time we're notspending talking about what we
should do about it, what we cando about it, I mean, what we're
(22:35):
even capable of doing about it,right, um, maybe nothing, you
know.
Maybe, maybe, maybe we'repowerless, cruising through
(22:58):
Salisbury Might have to dosomething about the shakiness of
this cat, of this, of thismount.
It's very shaky.
It's gotta be a way tostabilize it, pulling into home
base.
So that concludes today'sepisode of Musing While Cruising
.
Hopefully it'll be something Ikeep doing and, uh, thanks for
(23:19):
listening.
Hope you enjoy the new haircutand, uh, until next time.
See ya, I'll be there by yourside.
(23:56):
Hey, hey, hey.
Welcome to Musing While Cruising.
I've been wanting to producemore content and I'm in the car
a lot, driving to various places.
Today I'm on the way back fromgetting a haircut Susanie,
freshly, freshly cut and shavedat the wonderful Salon 22 on
Essex Street in Lawrence,massachusetts.
(00:22):
Shout out to Edinson and Salon22.
But anyway, musing WhileCruising, I do my best thinking
in the car, and yeah, so whydon't I just use while I cruise
and we'll talk about stuff?
What I've been thinking aboutlately is trying to figure out
(00:42):
the skeptical mind when it comesto the topic of UFOs, because
what I find frustrating in mostof my conversations is that
there's a certain degree ofknowledge which is out there.
It is out there, it is able tobe obtained, but a lot of people
(01:05):
, some that I engage this topicwith, they haven't done any of
that initial investigation.
So in order to speakknowledgeably on the topic,
while they're lacking, they'relacking a lot of the data.
Furthermore, they want me toconvince them of its reality.
(01:27):
Sum it up in a few moments.
You know, don't make it toolong, but you know, convince me
why I should believe this thing,which is hard to do.
It's hard to sum up anyknowledge base in a short time
frame.
Take any expert on any topic.
(01:49):
It can be a consequential topicor it can be a completely
irrelevant topic, but whateverthat thing is, say okay, you've
taken some amount of time toacquire your knowledge.
Now, in part, all of thatknowledge ought to be instantly.
I don't want to do any of thework.
I don't want to do any of theresearch or reading or listening
(02:11):
or thinking or pondering.
I just want it fed to medirectly, give me it all.
And when somebody can't do thatsuccinctly, we get upset and we
either blame the person or weblame the knowledge base.
That it's not legitimate.
There's information out there.
There have been hearings,briefings and hearings that have
(02:31):
taken place in Congress.
The most recent was just pastJuly 2023, during which some
extraordinary claims were made.
Now one could ask you know, hey, extraordinary claims require
(02:51):
extraordinary evidence.
That's what you always hear,right, okay, but maybe
extraordinary claims alsorequire extraordinary research
to uncover secrets of theseclaims or uncover whether these
claims are true.
I think we've passed the pointwhere we can afford to keep
(03:13):
having this discussion aboutwhether something is happening.
Something is happening.
Whatever that thing is, it'shappening.
Whatever it is, it'sinteresting.
If we have to keep it up, we'llhave to keep it up.
Keep having this conversationof bringing everyone up to speed
with where we are now November2023, before we even get into
(03:38):
2024.
We need to bring everybody upto date, something I do in my
UFO talks.
By the way, I travel around todifferent senior centers and
libraries and 55 and oldercommunities A little outfit
called Senior U.
We talk about things, I talkabout UFOs, I talk about
(04:02):
artificial intelligence, we haveplanned talks on a variety of
something, so there's a lotthere.
As I drive to these gigs, I'llprobably muse some more.
I'm certainly going to becruising, so I will muse.
Musing while cruising.
I love that title.
I think I really just wanted anexcuse to use that title of
musing while cruising.
(04:23):
The other thing I've beenthinking about a lot is my own
journey with this topic, which Ibecame interested in let's say
for the sake of argument, reallyseriously in the early 90's.
I probably was interested in itbefore that, but that's what I
got really interested in theidea of UFOs, the idea that
(04:44):
something could be coming herefrom somewhere else.
But in those early days I likeda very technological
perspective on the whole thing,with the notion.
I was very comfortable with thenotion that crafts were flying
(05:07):
from some place in space andsomehow making it here.
I wasn't really crazy aboutanything that left those very
comfortable confines, becausethat I could understand.
The other elements of UFOs whichunfortunately come along with
the territory is, it starts toget a little what you'd call the
(05:28):
woo when you get into psychicsand ghosts and even when you get
up abductions and cattlemutilations and crop circles, it
all gets really weird.
Initially I was not comfortablewith any event.
Unfortunately the two arelinked.
You really can't have aconversation about one without
(05:50):
at least touching on the other,because at times many UFO
encounters UAP encounters asthey're called now many of these
encounters stray into the weir.
They leave the comfortableconfines of what could be
explained by an interaction withan advanced technology and they
(06:14):
almost get, dare I say,religious, and that's something
that just is.
So I notice many.
I notice there are researchersout there who don't feel as
comfortable and anytime itborders into the weird stuff,
(06:34):
they leave it out of theiranalysis.
I get it, I get the, I get the.
I understand the resistance tothose ideas Because many of them
are really outside of reallyoutside of what we've been
forced to contemplate before.
(06:55):
We haven't got a real reason tothink beyond a certain paradigm
.
It just hasn't come up.
Up till now there really hasn'tbeen a benefit in going down
those roads, those moretheoretical roads, but they're
(07:21):
important.
They're important roads to godown.
I think one of the main reasonsthat I discounted the idea of
alien abduction initially, oneof my main objections to it was
that the thought that somethingfrom somewhere else could come
(07:46):
in and take someone and dosomething with them, put them
back and in some cases,manipulate their perception of
the thing that was done to them.
That's scary man.
That is frightening.
(08:06):
That is a frighteningpossibility.
So I understand the reluctance.
I totally get why someone wouldwant to pretend that that
wasn't a possibility, but thatwasn't a thing that could happen
(08:28):
.
And I'm not saying it doeshappen.
I don't know that it does.
I'm just saying that if youlook into the topic of abduction
cases, even taking into accountthat some percentage might be
falsified, might be incorrectinterpretations of what was
(08:52):
going on, might be just purehucksters trying to defraud the
law and someone with a crazystory even if you take that into
account, the sheer amount ofaccounts makes it difficult to
(09:12):
take them all off the table forone reason or another, it's the
volume of evidence.
There's not in my mind oneparticular UFO case, uap case
that is so solid that it provesthat 100%.
(09:33):
I mean, I guess the closest youcould come to that is the Tic
Tac event from 2004, onlybecause of the eyewitness
testimony from four individualsin the Navy and two separate
planes.
I mean that's a pretty strongcase.
(09:55):
But let's put that aside andsay there is no one case that is
such a strong case that it isthe game changer.
It is what anyone will convinceanyone that it's all true.
But I'll tell you there's a lotof little cases that start to
build a very compelling argument.
(10:15):
But you've got to look at theevidence.
You can't just refuse to lookat it and then say, because I
haven't seen it, it doesn'texist.
And I think that's a bigproblem with a lot of our
dialogue, particularly on thesubject of UAP.
There's a lot of people whowant to make very strong
proclamations that there'snothing to it, not having looked
(10:38):
at the evidence at all.
Now, in some cases there aresome who do look at the evidence
and they have problems withsome of the evidence, which is
perfectly valid.
There's a lot of problems youcould have with various parts of
the evidence, especially ifyou're trying to keep it in a
(10:58):
very materialistic, verymachines from another planet
flying here kind of paradigm,which is the most comfortable
paradigm for people.
But if you take it outside ofthat paradigm, take it outside
of the fact, maybe it's notphysical machines, maybe it's
(11:22):
something else, maybe it's anon-human intelligence that is
interacting with us in a waythat in hopes we can understand
it, and part of that interactionis us perceiving encounters
(11:43):
with technological gadgets thatseem to be more advanced than
what we have.
I'm just speculating here.
This is musing while cruising.
I'm not saying this is it?
I'm not saying I have theanswer, I'm just musing.
So what we're seeing is not somuch a race of beings from
(12:12):
another physical planet that onecould fly to if they went
enough in one direction, in thatparticular direction in space.
Maybe it's not, maybe it's morenuanced than that.
Maybe, like I said, it's anintelligence that's interacting
with us, trying to get us torecognize that it exists, so we
(12:36):
can then figure out how to havea real conversation with it.
That's the tripping part, right?
That's the real craziness of it.
What if it's just trying to getus to notice it?
And it's manifesting, and someare many are not.
The reasons for that aremultiple.
(12:59):
I mean, we're not looking up inthe sky as a people as much
anymore.
It's just less relevant in ourworld, I mean, unless you're
taking a flight, but we don'treally look up in the sky.
More often than not our facesare on the road, as they should
be when one is cruising, even ifyou're amusing.
They also might be on ourdevices when we're hopefully
(13:23):
stationary.
We're not looking up in the skyas much.
So how many sightings of UAPare just missed because nobody's
looking?
Some are also, you know, toofast to really be um for enough
(13:44):
people to get recognized.
It's happening.
It doesn't seem to want toreveal itself in full, which I
guess is also the funny, funnypart about this right, the UAP.
From the perspective of thetechnology that UAP seemed to
(14:07):
represent, they could be very,very overtly noticed.
You know, like they could hoverover a major city for hours and
make it so apparent that theyare there that there is no um.
(14:27):
There's no denying.
Presumably, if they're also sofar advanced of us, they would
probably have the ability to becompletely undetected, right, I
mean, they seem to be able to beless detectable at times, but
(14:54):
it seems arbitrary, or is it?
Maybe it's by design.
Maybe the design is thatsometimes it's detectable on
instruments, sometimes it'sdetectable, um, by the human
senses, sometimes both,sometimes neither, but maybe
that's the point of it.
Maybe it's trying to get us, asa culture, to recognize it and
(15:20):
then do what I hope is happeningnow, which is sick our best
scientific minds on it, uh,bring them up to speed that
something is happening,something's going on.
Whatever that thing is, I'lltell you, though, um, if you're
listening to what your electedofficials say I don't know
(15:43):
whether you listen to what yourelected officials say, but, um,
they're not comfortable with theidea that these things could be
from here in another nation,because the abilities they seem
to possess, um, well, quitefrankly, blow us out of the
(16:04):
water.
So if it is a another humannation, um, that's the more
worrying of the possiblescenarios.
I mean, if it's, you know, ifit's Russia or China, well, it's
going to make a lot of peopleuncomfortable.
So, what if it's not Russia orChina?
(16:27):
What if it's something else?
What if it truly is a non-humanintelligence.
By the way, that term non-humanintelligence, it's a nice way
of sidestepping theextraterrestrial um stick bone
and it's used a lot the reverseway by Arrow, the all domain
(16:47):
anomaly resolution office,because a lot of times when they
make uh denials about UAPrelated things, they will go out
of their way to say we've seenno evidence of extraterrestrial
craft in our airspace.
Let's say Okay.
(17:09):
So what would be required tohave evidence of
extraterrestrial craft?
Number one you would need toknow exactly where its origin is
to be able to recognize thefact that that is an
extraterrestrial point andtherefore they are
extraterrestrials.
If you cannot say that andthere are other options on the
(17:31):
table than just outer space youmay not be aware of them, but
they are there.
If it is something else, if itis something outside of that,
then they can say quite rightlythat they have no evidence of
(17:53):
extraterrestrial craft in ourairspace because they don't.
It's a true statement.
Um, words matter.
Words really matter togovernments and bureaucrats,
words in government bureaucratsthe most.
Words do matter, the specificword, the specific meaning of
(18:14):
that word and how it's usedcontextually.
That makes a difference.
So when they deny, when Aro,when Dr Sean Kirkpatrick of Aro
denies extraterrestrials, it'squite right to do so.
We have no evidence, but that'swhat they are.
(18:38):
We do know something's happeningand whatever that answer is,
it's interesting, right, it's aninteresting story.
So let's find out what it is,let's determine what the truth
is.
There's no harm in that.
It's no, it's okay.
And if we have to wrestle withthe fact that something is here,
(19:05):
a non-human intelligence isvisiting us here and interacting
with us in some way If that istrue maybe it is, maybe it isn't
we're gonna have to figure outhow to reckon with it.
Because if it is true, if it'strue, it's true, even if it's
(19:30):
not a thing that we would liketo be if it is in fact what is
happening, then it really isbest that we recognize it,
process it, deal with it andfigure out a plan going forward,
how we're going to coexist withit.
Because, again, we do need toconsider speculation.
(19:59):
I'm just musing here here.
If there is something, it tosome degree has the power to
decide whether we live or die.
Would it utilize that power?
I don't know, but it certainlyhas it to some degree, to some
(20:22):
degree.
Do I think they can push abutton and obliterate our entire
species?
I mean, let's hope not right.
But if you thought about it fora few minutes, you probably
could figure out a couple waysto do that very easily, as long
as you're not affected by thosesame things.
But there's definitely a couplethings you could do.
(20:45):
So if something?
So if a non-human intelligenceis interacting with us and it
has some degree of power overwhether we live or die, on
whatever scale it does you knowlarger, small and we can't do
(21:08):
anything about it, we can't stopit, we can't prevent it, we
can't seek retribution for it,wow, it really puts us in a
different place historicallythan where we have been.
Right, there's a cost to that,there's a weight of that.
(21:33):
But even if you don't want toadmit it or recognize it, the
knowledge itself, the potentialthat that knowledge is true,
really does something to thehuman perspective.
(21:55):
So it's something to thinkabout, right?
I mean again, I'm not sayingthat is the case, I'm just
saying I'm saying it'ssomething's going on, that's all
.
I want to get us on the samepage of Um.
I don't want to have to keepfighting the battle of whether
(22:15):
something is happening.
That's a wasted conversation,right?
I mean, if we're still havingthat conversation, if we're
still, if we're still talkingabout whether something is
happening, it's time we're notspending talking about what we
should do about it, what we cando about it, I mean, what we're
(22:35):
even capable of doing about it,right, um, maybe nothing, you
know.
Maybe, maybe, maybe we'repowerless, cruising through
(22:58):
Salisbury Might have to dosomething about the shakiness of
this cat, of this, of thismount.
It's very shaky.
It's gotta be a way tostabilize it, pulling into home
base.
So that concludes today'sepisode of Musing While Cruising
.
Hopefully it'll be something Ikeep doing and, uh, thanks for
(23:19):
listening.
Hope you enjoy the new haircutand, uh, until next time.
See ya, I'll be there by yourside.
(23:56):
Hey, hey, hey.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.