Is Disclosure happening right before our eyes?

[AstralCB]

I have a little difficult to believe Greer when he states that multi
national corporations already since 1950es - 60ies know how to
produce unlimited power by Zero Point Field energy. I wonder if
Greer is over-interpreting some things.

I believe the unlimited power/energy he is talking about is what is becoming more commonly known as 'Free Energy'. There are many generators that produce zero point energy fields that create this free energy. So far the governments have suppressed this technology time and again.

A basic understanding of how this works is the generator pulls energy in from the atmosphere and as it produces energy it uses about 30% to keep itself energized and the other 70% is used for you appliances, heat, etc. (That's a very basic concept of course).

[PauliEffect]

Also his statement that ETs are not interested in our DNA development is contradictory to the fact that we might have been seeded by ET races in the first place. (If I remember correctly he mentions this shortly once).

If they already has seeded us, the ETs have all DNA they ever want.
If they need to take any more samples, they just have to pick
whatever finds they can get in sewers or dustbins or clothes
from second hand shops. Abducting people seems like going
over the river to get the water.

So most likely, the ETs are not that interested in more DNA, that's
just more of the same.

[CFTraveler]

I don't know, if I were experimenting on an animal, such as using retroviruses to modify their DNA, periodic checking to make sure the experiment is going well would be necessary.
Regardless of what I just said though, I don't think it's about DNA or even biology. I think the answer is more complex and possibly mysterious.

[Sinera]

Yes, I also believe it is not (just) about DNA in the first place. In D. Cannon's book, there are two other main reasons mentioned, one might still be related to DNA though.

First, it is medical or/and biological. It is however also done by checking the "other" bodies, (etheric, astral) that are sometimes only 'abducted' instead of the physical one (this supports the theory put forward by some OBErs, such as e.g. Buhlman or R. Peterson.). Sometimes however the physical is taken also and it's molecular frequency changed to be transported / teleported (Star Trek is maybe more real than we think).

Second, it is also for implants, mostly checking or replacing ones that already are in the persons, many of them since birth (!).

The implants themselves are said either to be for reason 1 (medical!) or reason 2: observation and/or communication. E.g. one was to improve the person's blood cell quality somehow to keep up her health levels sufficiently. The second might be a rather shocking revelation for all abductees who naturally and most understandably feel to be frightened and victimized all the time: However, so the transcripts of some hypnotically regressed persons say, these persons (or rather their higher self) supposedly agreed to the procedure prior to incarnation. They are "in it" from the beginning. (Shift, Earth changes and starseed theories and all that...)

I just am reporting about what I read about. As said above, I don't know or am not sure what my opinion on this is anymore. Seems I have none any longer.

[CFTraveler]

I just am reporting about what I read about. As said above, I don't know or am not sure what my opinion on this is anymore. Seems I have none any longer.

You and me both. I don't even know what my intuition is telling me most of the time regarding UFOs.

[Beekeeper]

Earlier this year I spoke to an Australian UFO investigator. He said he'd found extremely little to support the existence of extraterrestrials/inter-dimensionals though he'd had one good case in Queensland he'd found pretty compelling where the girls were floated out of an upstairs bedroom and found downstairs by their parents. He suggested an alternative theory to the abduction scenarios, which he assured me was quite widely known, though I'd never heard it. This was that pharmaceutical companies are somehow be behind alleged abductions and implants. That didn't resonate with me a whole lot but, then again, he didn't go into it much.

I've read or viewed that even children in remote regions of Africa have reported greys, though I can't remember where.

What did resonate with me was Project Camelot's interview with Gary McKinnon, the English guy who hacked the Pentagon some years ago. He claimed that the documents he found mentioned off-world forces. Professor John E Mack, who died in 2004, is another person worth investigating. He worked with alleged abductees and, I believe, exercised great integrity and courage in his explorations. Historian, Richard Dolan is another person working in the field that I feel can be trusted. I'd watch rather than read him. (I have one of his books and it's sat quite a while waiting for me to finish it - a bit dry).

Linda Moulton Howe did the work on animal mutilations, which continue to the present. You can read some of her material for free on her Earthfiles site. This is one of the most disturbing aspects of the whole field of Ufology, suggesting that it isn't just human biology that the others have an interest in. Right out on the extreme wings you'll find reports of those who allege having witnessed genetic splicing experiments that included human and animal genetical material.

The argument that Hollywood is priming us to be afraid doesn't really take into account the history of Science fiction. Generally there's a long tradition of aliens representing "the other" as manifest on earth itself. Sci-Fi often works like analogy and all works are products of their context. Frightful aliens can, psychologically speaking, represent any number of threats that their respective creators experience within their cultural/historical contexts or even, more simply, the shadow self. When you do investigate with an open mind you find a lot of horror stories of malevolent beings as well as those that don't seem to intend harm or damage and Hollywood likewise presents different types.

[Sinera]

The argument that Hollywood is priming us to be afraid doesn't really take into account the history of Science fiction. Generally there's a long tradition of aliens representing "the other" as manifest on earth itself. Sci-Fi often works like analogy and all works are products of their context. Frightful aliens can, psychologically speaking, represent any number of threats that their respective creators experience within their cultural/historical contexts or even, more simply, the shadow self. When you do investigate with an open mind you find a lot of horror stories of malevolent beings as well as those that don't seem to intend harm or damage and Hollywood likewise presents different types.

An interesting example of this good-bad spectrum diversity is the movies of Steven Spielberg. On the one hand we have the benign type with e.g. "ET The Extraterrestial" and "Close Encounters Of The 3rd Kind". On the other hand we have the bad and highly superior Earth invaders with "War Of The Worlds", "Transformers" or his newest TV show "Falling Skies".

What strikes me: The 'good' ETs were from the 70ies/80ies. The bad ones are of a newer date (Concededly with WOTW being a remake, but still...).

So the conspiracy freak is tempted to ask: Is there a trend?

(Besides: Same trend applies to war or military movies in genera, with or without any monster aliens (such as the infamous "Battle L.A." or similar ones). In general, there are so many movies that seem to almost exalt the military way. There are no real anti-war movies made anymore, imho. There is nothing critical of the military or of war business. War seems to be the 'natural way' to solve conflicts and every marine is automatically a hero. Even the pop music business seems to be 'in it' now. It is rumoured that the Pentagon has a say in many of these scripts, also since they send their consultants or even lend some of the weaponry to the filmmakers, not without their own 'hidden' motives, as it seems.).

[CFTraveler]

I have noticed it as a trend on TV movies and series in general. Usually the civilian activist is a greedy "politician" and the military man is the "hero", who knows it's better to attack first, because, his intuition is right. I've been noticing this for at least five years now.

[Beekeeper]

An interesting example of this good-bad spectrum diversity is the movies of Steven Spielberg. On the one hand we have the benign type with e.g. "ET The Extraterrestial" and "Close Encounters Of The 3rd Kind". On the other hand we have the bad and highly superior Earth invaders with "War Of The Worlds", "Transformers" or his newest TV show "Falling Skies".

What strikes me: The 'good' ETs were from the 70ies/80ies. The bad ones are of a newer date (Concededly with WOTW being a remake, but still...).

So the conspiracy freak is tempted to ask: Is there a trend?

My point is trend does not necessarily equal conspiracy. Trends are usual. Movies and other texts reflect fears and fantasies within their contexts and there's nothing new about elites who own the means of production promoting elite agendas. Perhaps too, a tendency towards violent scenarios has developed in response to audience taste. It's not unheard of for film makers to get on a bandwagon in order to make megabucks.

I've also noticed a continuation in parodic alien movies like Paulie and even District 9- which is clearly about Apartheid and also, perhaps, the tendency of nations to resist those seeking asylum and again exemplifies my point about movies reflecting context. This is not to say movies have not been used for propaganda purposes; they clearly have. I highly recommend the documentary that can be found on You Tube called Reel Bad Arabs if you want to explore more deeply the influence of elites and context in shaping and pandering to audience prejudices.

I have noticed it as a trend on TV movies and series in general. Usually the civilian activist is a greedy "politician" and the military man is the "hero", who knows it's better to attack first, because, his intuition is right. I've been noticing this for at least five years now.

Sounds like Rambo the movie, not the novel. I've noticed the trend (well, not recently because I barely watch it) in TV shows that depict older males as the fountain of all knowledge and rightness (CSI - any series) and younger guys as headstrong, moronic d*ckwads who are somehow still irresistible to intelligent (and stupid), hot young women.

[LPCF]

I see the discussion continues apace since I last posted on this thread! All I would add is that Dr. Grier makes one important point. If the ETs are advanced enough to visit us from far away, they are clearly more technologically advanced than us. Yet to have reached this advanced state without having destroyed themselves suggests that they are also much more spiritually advanced. He suggests that they are non-aggressive, and that it is we who are aggressive and at risk of blowing ourselves up. I find that argument quite convincing. Mankind needs spirituality!

BTW, he says that his group makes contact via telepathy following meditation and going into trance states, and that some ETs have fine bodies (like astral bodies) - so quite a bit like this forum!