(Thread IKs:
sharknado slashfic)
|
im happy for u tho or sorry that happened sending gratitude 
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
    
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15oi2qc/mh370_airliner_videos_part_iii_the_rabbit_hole/ oh no... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
lowtax...did mh370?????
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
mangosteens are soft disclosure
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
lowtax had information that would lead to the disclosure of NHI presence on earth
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:lowtax had information that would lead to the disclosure of NHI presence on earth IT WAS ON THE FRONT PAGE ALL ALONG! Which is why nobody saw it before it was deleted welp
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
SO DONT loving FLY IT, DONT loving SHIP IT, DONT loving REACT IT WITH MY BATTERIES.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:52
|
|
|
nice!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:54
|
|
|
Goddamn I wish I could draw like you, these are brilliant
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
Reminds me of 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
Petey posted:I want the aliens to do to me what human scientists did to this literal bird https://www.instagram.com/p/CvoshhrIXQp/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Aliens please draw some bomb rear end irresistible titties on my chest k thnx Wheeee posted:lowtax had information that would lead to the disclosure of NHI presence on earth Lowtax figured out that traveling between realities requires buckshot
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:Reminds me of ooo yeah I’ll have to check that out!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
The Demilich posted:Lowtax figured out that traveling between realities requires buckshot Daaaaaark lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
New Jeffrey Mishlove interview with Bob Bigelow: https://youtu.be/yEVtyBGViaY
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:Daaaaaark lol What do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
Honky Mao posted:What do you mean? man’s killed heself
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
Okay let's talk about remote viewing! AKA controlled remote viewing, coordinate remote viewing, etc etc etc What the heck even is remote viewing and what makes it different from clairvoyance? Remote viewing is a protocol driven system of information retrieval at a distance and without access to information about the target. I personally don't care for the term "remote viewing" because it creates in people's minds an expectation that they will have a very good mental "image" of visual information, that they'll be viewing something, remotely, and that's really not the case. There are other terms that describe it ("anomalous cognition" is a good one) but they haven't really caught on and they aren't used by any teams I know of. Remote viewing was developed for the purposes of gathering intelligence, though, for gathering information about places that the viewer does not have direct access to. Initially, it was just a lark, a throwaway study to see if it worked. The early systems worked either with an "outbounder," that is, a person who goes to the remote location, and a prompt to the viewer of "describe the location where [person] is." The prompt is really important, and we'll talk more about that in a bit. Outbounder RV worked pretty well, except for one big problem and one little problem. The big problem is, depending on the outbounder, there were severe limitations on the options. There were places where a person could reasonably go, and that ruled things out. This was especially true when the outbounder left from the office, say, two hours ago - the viewer would know the outbounder couldn't possibly be more then two hours away. Without a lot of expense and effort in maintaining blinding and so on, this was a really hard problem to solve. The little problem is that they also couldn't rule out that there was telepathic overlay, or telepathic communication between viewer and outbounder, based on their rapport, for example, which meant there wasn't viewing going on, rather just bog standard telepathy. "Who cares!" you might think, "it's still psychic!" And that's true, but the purpose of these systems is not to demonstrate psychic ability is real - the fact that we're working with it assumes that already. The purpose is to gather intelligence. We already know from the NSA stuff that telepathy works better when you have a rapport with an individual, so that kind of interference is a problem if you're trying to get the thing to work with someone you don't have a rapport with... and if you're trying to do spy poo poo, you're not likely to have a rapport with the target, because, well, if you did, just get them in a SCIF and ask questions. The thing that makes RV unique, and why it has a little pocket industry around it, is that it is extremely regimented and controlled. If you read McMoneagle's stuff, he thinks that's the absolute most important thing, and he's not wrong about that. The use of a regimented protocol and a lot of controls is how we make sure that psychic stuff is actually happening and we're not just imagining or fooling ourselves. He strongly advocates for relatively skeptical viewers, people who are not prone to flight of fancy and who are very grounded. All of these things have pluses and minuses. But basically, the difference between remote viewing and other forms of divination is that remote viewing adheres to very strict protocols that maintain scientific rigor while also guaranteeing certain quality of information. Hit or miss, if you follow the process, you didn't fail (and, it's assumed, you'll succeed more often than not). Anyhow, outbounder RV fell out of vogue because of limitations in how it could be studied. The next attempt for targeting was simply to use geographic coordinates. While this yielded good results (the infamous Pat Price "crane" session was done this way) the concern here is that a savvy viewer could recognize that, for example, a target is in Russia or China or Africa or so on. Skeptics would point to this and say something psychic wasn't happening, and that the viewer was just guessing...but that wasn't the real problem. After all, if guessing provides actionable intelligence, who cares what the skeptics say? But the real problem is that knowing anything about the target fucks up remote viewers, badly. This is where it differs from clairvoyance. Clairvoyance is psychically seeing at a difference, but you tend to know what you're trying to see based on context. It's really a top-down process, you know you're trying to view a castle, and you're letting your mind fill in big details while you pull out the tiny details psychically, or immersively project into the vision and so on. It works, there are good clairvoyants out there who aren't frauds, but it doesn't easily lend itself to a controlled system of intelligence gathering. Basically, it is much more difficult to validate, and even more difficult to train. Remote viewing works the other way: you know nothing about the target, at all, and you try to assemble the information based on the impressions that come to you when you interface with the target. Whenever you get a clear picture, you pause for a bit and walk away because that is almost always going to be your brain filling in the details, a thing that RV terms "analytical overlay." The problem of AOL is that AOL turns into AOL Drive - rather than actually getting information psychically, you start describing the analytical overlay. So how does modern RV work, if not by coordinates? Remote viewers still use coordinates, but they are now totally arbitrary and assigned to the target by the tasker. The hypotheses behind this were largely developed by Ingo Swann, and it goes something like this (I'm basically going to deliver how I describe it which is informed by Swann but if there's details that differ that's my poo poo just roll with it): All information exists in some state or another, and all information can be indexed in some way. Swann called this the "Matrix" or the "matrix of all knowable information." When we remote view, we "tune in" to this informational matrix, and then start filtering the information based on the coordinate. The coordinate is associated to the target by the tasker, and this then becomes information about the target, which means it can serve as an index. A prompt would be something like "Your target is 2031-4042: describe the target." You can get more specific than that, but that's an example. Describe a session. Okay, first just to back up things, I have been remote viewing since 2001, when I FOIA'd up all the documents that were available back then. I typically work as a viewer, though I'm familiar with the other parts of the process by necessity. I do so professionally though occasionally. I mostly self-taught, though I did formal training through Morehouse later in my career with it both to study how it's being taught (this is what my research work was in) as well as to get some formal education because, unfortunately in my opinion, the former Stargate viewers have really locked down the industry with credentialization that stifles and keeps people out of it. Anyhow, that's the background. I'll be describing this from the perspective of the viewer, as that's what I'm most familiar with, but I'll fill in the other details. What's a session look like? A tasker comes up with a task. I should not know who the tasker is and I should not know what the task is. If I know either of those things, we're done, don't even bother. The tasker assigns it to the monitor, who is going to provide it to me. So far, we have three people. The tasker is the person who is assigning the task, obviously. The monitor is the person who is going to monitor and observe me, the viewer. The monitor should know me pretty well. They usually know certain things about me better than I do. They are there to control the session, by providing the tasking and by observing me and keeping me on objective. For example, if I start wandering down a rabbit hole or getting weirdly distracted or fixated on target information, they might prompt me to change things. If they start noticing something in the data as I'm writing it down, they might prompt me to look at that information. In a real session, they should not know what the target is either (risk of telepathic overlay), but in a training session they might know - this is both to train me by helping guide me on target if I land "nearby" but not "on," as well as to help them learn about me. They are looking for tics, behaviors, facial expressions, habits, etc. I don't know most of those about myself, if I did, it would poison their ability to read me because I could pretend, right? But most viewers have tics and habits that they demonstrate when they have a really good connection to the target, and the monitor can usually tell when information is good or if the viewer is firing off wild rear end guesses, and they can either terminate the session or prompt more information or so on. Basically, the monitor is really important in remote viewing, and their role is probably the most under-appreciated but mission critical. The viewers get all the glory, but the monitor is who facilitates them doing their absolute best. Lori Williams wrote a good book on the subject called Monitoring: A Guide for Remote Viewing & Professional Intuitive Teams that I recommend. Okay, so I sit down with my monitor. I personally prefer to use pen and paper and to have a table or desk next to a couch or bed because I like to lay down for a second and focus on the target coordinates, reciting them in my head while I "drift off." Different people have different methods. So I have my notebook, and I start by writing the date and any inclemencies - things that are likely to gently caress me up. If I feel lovely, I didn't get a lot of sleep, I have distractions or stressors, whatever, all that poo poo goes there under the inclemencies. This both helps me isolate and purge them, and it helps put a big asterisk next to the session. The monitor is doing similar stuff - there's weird evidence (I'm not sure I believe it all that much) that solar weather effects RV performance, and one of my teams was really into that so the monitor would track that stuff. The monitor would also usually track my food and drink intake prior to session (caffeine could effect my performance but I do not know whether it made it better or worse). After I write that poo poo down, I take a couple deep breaths and drop into a low grade trance state. The monitor then reads me the coordinate and gives me a prompt. I write it down. Rarely, I get an instant connection and I start getting information. More commonly, I write it down, tap it a few times, with my pen, then I lay down, pull a hoodie hood or something over my eyes to block light, and recite the coordinates in a cadence that makes sense, rhythmically, while I follow the steps mentioned in the previous Monroe post of letting myself drift. I do this until I start getting information. As soon as that happens, I sit up and write down an I/A/B, which is the ideogram, A B information. The ideogram is a single penstroke drawing that gives an impression of the overall gestalt of the target. It's... well, ideographic, so what they mean varies from viewer to viewer. The A component is the feeling or motion. These days it has become my "vibe" but this is kind of unorthodox. How I think about it now is "it's giving. . . " because I think that's hilarious. But normally it would be something like "flowing, moving" or "solid, static" or etc. The B component is the the analytical response in one or a few words. This is usually something like "tower" or "structure" or "mountain" or "river" or whatever. This whole process with the I/A/B is Stage I, and during it any strong visual information is noted on the margin of the paper and immediately discarded. Stage II documents initial sensory contact. Here, the viewer is writing sensory information down. Nothing should be drawn at this point and nouns are to be avoided. Nouns would indicate AOL. So an S-II of, idk, goatse would be like "soft, wide, red, open, metal, fleshy, white, long, exposed, wet, moist, leaning" or something. Usually during S-II is where I get my first problems of AOL because my brain in particular really likes to go "... that's a penis!" and as soon as that happens, I go over to the right margin and write AOL: a penis and the monitor tells me the time so I can note that as well. I then return to describing the target, but if all the stuff I describe is a penis, I'll usually go back over and write "AOL Break: Penis" and then I take 5-10 minutes to chill. When I'm done with the break, I tap the number, recite the chant-mantra in my head a few times to reestablish contact, and resume. The break should not end until I have broken connection to the signal line because the whole point is to reboot it, I hosed it up by describing a penis (or whatever) too much. In Stage III, we "widen the aperture" and make our first attempt to describe visuals and draw and sketch things. Here some artistic skill is helpful but you don't really want too much, we're not looking for detailed sketches. Different viewers are good for different things. I tend to excel at locations, maps, and so on. One of my early training sessions was a kayaker on a bay in I think Vancouver?? I don't remember it was 20+ years ago, but anyhow I drew like this big map of the area and when I ended the session they were like "okay so that was a miss but uh you were on target." The target was the kayaker, the map was technically not the target, so a miss, but I was on the target. This is an aside: rigorous protocol means sometimes even if you're on the target, it's a technical miss. This is okay! In real operational stuff you are not trying to get these things. I was doing a training session with a new monitor a few years ago and we were trying an ERV ("extended remote viewing," basically means not using the orthodox approach) session where I would say things outloud while in the trance state instead of writing them, and I ended the session, sat up, and went "oh poo poo wait was that the international space station?" And it was but I hadn't said that during the session. But I had described a lot of things about it that were on target, so it wasn't really a miss, but sucks that I didn't say that as an AOL in session because it was hot poo poo lmao okay anyways Stage III sketches and drawings get labeled as different components, and in Stage IV the monitor assists the viewer with prompts to interrogate information about the specific components, essentially repeating stages II and III but for each component. These things are then arranged on a kind of obnoxious grid where you write the information under different columns for dimensionals, aesthetic impacts, emotional impacts, tangibles, and intangibles. There are also columns for AOL and AOL/S which is "AOL from Site" where the AOL is a close match to the features of the site identified in Stage 3. Stage V, the viewer further interrogates each component from Stage IV. These last two stages are sometimes broken into different sessions in order to prevent the viewer from getting overworked, but personally I work best in the same session. I tend to get really bad "bi-lo" problems, or bilocation, where I get very trancey and spacey for an hour or so after session because my mind likes to glom onto the target like a pitbull and not let go of it. So doing it all at once time works better for me. All this off an arbitrary coordinate!! How you might RV aitee So you want to RV Sandia Underground or where LockMart moved the nonhuman biologics? Not a problem. We can assign an arbitrary coordinate to these just fine, right? What would we need to put that team together? And what if us and so everyone knows that's the target? There are workarounds. The first thing is getting a team dynamic put together and running practice runs to learn the skills and learn to work together. The tasker in a purpose-driven team like this is also often your analyst, who is gonna map the data to the known conventional intelligence information to present a final product to the client. In a bigger team that is non-specific, the analyst and the tasker are usually different people or they work together. In this kind of team, tasker and analyst can be one in the same. We're talking about a method for intelligence gathering here, and that's super important to keep in mind because it means the data is basically going to be compared to intelligence information from other data sources and validated and confirmed and then used to fill in more information than could be gathered by like, GIA, or in civilian world, by the private detective and the NGIS survey and other OSI methods. The viewer-monitor team should then set up regular sessions. They should be viewing let's say twice a week. They should never, ever know if the target they are being given by the tasker is a live target or if it's a practice target. They shouldn't be told that until say the end of that month. Knowing if the target was real or not will change the way they perform, and if you tell them after session for example then they will start getting weird and going like "oh well it was practice the last three times so this time..." In this case, because the team is working on RVing aitee, guessing that it's a live target is going to cause weird frontloading AOL problems, so going into it blind and knowing they won't be unblinded for at least a few days takes that away. Depending on the skill level of the viewer, practice targets can be "real-ish" where you go with actual locations and so on, or they can be totally lame practice poo poo for a new viewer. I personally prefer to always train people to RV actual things. I have never been a fan of like "8259-1911 is a red dodecahedron" and having people view that poo poo for training, abstracts are significantly harder than concretes in my experience. But you don't want the viewer to be able to guess if it was training or real and you definitely don't want them to guess that based on the primary gestalt in Stage 1, so if the working goal is to remote view a UAP in a skunkworks hangar, tasking buildings, aircraft, etc. are fair game and mix that in with like industrial parks, the eiffel tower, or whatever other targets. You should have enough data to confirm accuracy on those targets because it'll let your analyst know what viewers should be getting hot targets when, as a lot of times viewers get streaky and you want to use that to your advantage. This is also where the monitors and tasker should be working together closely (the viewer should not be included in these conversations, the viewer should be focusing on following the process at all times and so shouldn't know if they've got a hot hand at any given time). This process is also building up information for your analysts. Viewers will key to certain types of data really well and other types they'll miss routinely and building up that information is super handy for the analyst because it lets them discard info that a viewer routinely misses while including information they hit more accurately. This is also where you want to have more than one viewer on a task usually, so you can cross reference their poo poo in the analysis process, which brings me back to what Morehouse once said (I think he took down the article where he wrote it but I'll look again a bit) which is that it is blatantly obvious that the Stargate "cell" that was burned when Dames was going to go public was not the only group working on this stuff, because the purposes of intelligence gathering are best served by having multiple disparate cells all working on the same tasking (with different target numbers assigned etc) so that you can get multiple perspectives on the same target. Okay TLDR I forget what I was originally going to write about the RV stuff but I decided to write more experientially because like you can find old manuals and poo poo all over the online - although I will say I actually prefer the 1985 draft protocol over the uh 1995 Firedocs RV Manual that was really popular. I think the Firedocs website is down but that manual is all over the place now. It's good but I think the 1985 protocol is better driven. And then of course there are a zillion programs and books and poo poo. Remote Viewing Secrets by McMoneagle is one of the best, I mentioned Lori Williams' monitoring book up there, there are a ton of these books because every one of the Stargate viewers has written one. I think Paul Smith's book is supposed to be good and David Morehouse's materials are decent. I would be happy to start throwing some targets out here and I'd very much like to do some training runs with the aphantasia guys but I kinda want to do that right and like, publish on it lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:I would be happy to start throwing some targets out here and I'd very much like to do some training runs with the aphantasia guys but I kinda want to do that right and like, publish on it lmao Excellent post. Sign me up for this, I am so down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
There have been a lot of dumb and false stories that are getting lots of attention in the UFO community lately. I'm not sure if it's because people are desperate for some kind of news or if there is some kind of distraction campaign going on? Las Vegas Backyard Alien Combative Jungle Aliens in Peru Aliens Abducting Flight MH370 Grush Medical Records Leak
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
The Grey posted:There have been a lot of dumb and false stories that are getting lots of attention in the UFO community lately. I'm not sure if it's because people are desperate for some kind of news or if there is some kind of distraction campaign going on? My guess would be a combination of deliberate disinfo and grifters/pranksters smelling that blood in the water.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 22:53
|
|
|
The Grey posted:There have been a lot of dumb and false stories that are getting lots of attention in the UFO community lately. I'm not sure if it's because people are desperate for some kind of news or if there is some kind of distraction campaign going on? nice bait
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:10
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Okay let's talk about remote viewing! AKA controlled remote viewing, coordinate remote viewing, etc etc etc Probably dumb question, but what are the temporal/dimensional limits of this? What I mean is could you use RV to provide information about something in the distant past, distant future, or at a different physical scale? Or does that all fall into the realm of clairvoyance? For instance, could remote viewing be used to visualize a chemical process at the atomic scale over extremely small time increments? Or does it have to work pretty much at the human scale?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:12
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:everyone involved is dumb as hell and I’m here for it
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
48 Hour Boner posted:Probably dumb question, but what are the temporal/dimensional limits of this? What I mean is could you use RV to provide information about something in the distant past, distant future, or at a different physical scale? Or does that all fall into the realm of clairvoyance? Theoretically, there are no temporal and dimensional limits. Cleverly written tasking can let you see things over different times. Different viewers will get different results here. For example, I tend to view things "in the present moment" and it needs clever nudging from my monitor to fix that. An example was a training run where I viewed some historical fort and the prompt was to view it as it was at the time of some battle but I described it as present day (a miss, obviously). So I wouldn't be the best choice for that. You could probably use clever prompts and a good viewer to view something like that. One of the big historical sessions I think mentioned before was Ingo Swann viewing Jupiter and describing rings, and it was marked as a miss and then revisited several years later when Voyager confirmed it has rings. So there are no theoretical temporal/dimensional limits, but there are practical ones based on the skillset of the viewer and the way it's tasked. There are also other ways to use RV to get information sideways, there's a technique called associative remote viewing where the tasker assigns the coordinates to one of two (or more) options, and sets conditions for which it is. So for example if you wanted to know if a stock was going to go up or down at a certain point (or hit a target value, or whatever) you would assign target idk 1919-1919 to "if STOCK hits 500 on [date], the eruption of Mt St Helens, if STOCK does not hit 500 on [date]. a blue hole off the coast of Belize". These two are pretty different, so the viewer doesn't even need to hit the target dead on, you can go off most of the major gestalt and get it. Or you could use a manmade target vs a natural target or whatever. And this lets you view things like yes/no questions or so on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:26
|
|
|
The Grey posted:There have been a lot of dumb and false stories that are getting lots of attention in the UFO community lately. I'm not sure if it's because people are desperate for some kind of news or if there is some kind of distraction campaign going on? were all addicted to 24/7 content we can ENGAGE with
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:42
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:oh poo poo its my sixth* favourite american boomer dude! he's interviewing robert bigalow :o pertinent to the thread paranormal hitchikers is one of the topics. he also did robert anton wilson, dean radin, oliver sacks, john brandenburg for ancient martian nuclear war fun, and this guy that I find strangely very compelling and moving: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHceJEQSYzI
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:44
|
|
|
RV Target: What would you actually find at the end of the rainbow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:44
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:oh poo poo its my sixth* favourite american boomer dude! he's interviewing robert bigalow :o pertinent to the thread paranormal hitchikers is one of the topics. this seems like a pretty cool jeffrey
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
A huge part of my graduate work was with thanks to Mishlove, he holds the only PhD in parapsychology from UC Berkeley after doing his dissertation on psi and psi development in different cultures. It was later published as a book, "Psi Development Systems." It's good as heck. He had to fight Berkeley and the APA to get his PhD and it owns that he did. I'd love to meet him, I owe him a beer imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2023 23:58
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:I'd love to meet him, I owe him a beer imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:A huge part of my graduate work was with thanks to Mishlove, he holds the only PhD in parapsychology from UC Berkeley after doing his dissertation on psi and psi development in different cultures. It was later published as a book, "Psi Development Systems." It's good as heck. He had to fight Berkeley and the APA to get his PhD and it owns that he did. I'd love to meet him, I owe him a beer imo. do you remember this old psi forum in Web 1.0 days? I believe it was this https://www.psipog.net/ but it doesn’t seem to exist anymore anyway when I was like 12 I got obsessed with this stuff, specifically astral projecting and the telekinesis stuff. However pretty quickly I became an extremely embarrassed teenager and hadn’t really thought about it since until your post about remote viewing. I kind of think I might have gotten into it by someone doing a front page post making fun of it lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 00:25
|
|
|
The Grey posted:There have been a lot of dumb and false stories that are getting lots of attention in the UFO community lately. I'm not sure if it's because people are desperate for some kind of news or if there is some kind of distraction campaign going on? dumb? false? or 100% factually accurate? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
Alright based on some great posts earlier in the thread, I ordered the sci-fi novel "REJOICE: A Knife to the Heart" by my man Steven Erikson, got it in the mail yesterday, and have been devouring it. It feels like it was written for me, and this thread. I just reached a point in the book that made it impossible for me to not post about it. To bring people up to date on the discussion of this book from earlier, the idea is that aliens project a technologic field over the earth that prevents violent acts by humans, but that is only one of the things they do. However before I go into more of the glee I get out of this book I should talk about its author. Erikson is a sometimes-local to me. He used to live on the small gulf island I am from, then lived in the city I currently live in, Victoria BC. Being a huge fan of his fantasy series, The Malazan Book of the Fallen, I met him a few times around town, then when he was reading from his newest books at local bookstores he would often invite everyone out to dinner at the pub down the road. So myself and a friend of mine took the opportunity to chat him and his wife up about their backgrounds (he was an anthropologist) and his novels. The man is a purestrain nerd, influenced by classic Star Trek as much as Michael Moorcock's Elric novels. One of his novels, Willful Child, is a pastiche and loving ode to Shatner era Trek. Parts of the Malazan series were written with the help of roleplaying with his friends and collaborators. His mastery and love of the genre (and other sci-fi authors) really shines through in this novel. How do the aliens communicate with us? Well, they don't. They set up an AI to control the forcefields on Earth. They project fields around pods of whales, great tracts of land and sea, and even create wildlife corridors. Humans and their things are shoved along by the slowly growing fields. Unconscious and drugged humans are described being rolled slowly along. Rather than doing first contact with the president of America, as the Americans were egotistically expecting, the AI instead 'beams up' a Canadian sci-fi author whose writing they are fans of. They have calculated that once they convince her, she will be their mouthpiece to explain what is going to be happening to planet Earth. The author herself asks why me, why not Stephen King or George RR Martin? But it comes down to the aliens enjoying her sci-fi more. Super cheeky, reminding me a bit of Vonnegut's Kilgore Trout being the authorial stand in for ET contact. -What about other forms of violence? Well it is child's play for such a godlike AI to step onto the internet and become the ultimate moderator, preventing the dissemination of violent media. The AI continues to allow the enforcement of some laws through the police, but that is only at the first stages of its Protocol. -Why have the aliens done this now? They have obviously been watching for a long time. They value consciousness and made a judgement that the human race was about to drive Earth's biosphere into near extinction and that due to how we have exploited the planet's surface resources, sentience is unlikely to return and thrive after we annihilate ourselves. So they finally intervene before it is too late. They are from systems closer to the galactic core but still consider our system to be part of their "community" and feel like they have a parental role. -They can prevent people from hurting each other, even from going from a hug into a more violent embrace. At a checkpoint in the Gaza strip, people are rioting and throwing themselves at the invisible barriers while just down the road from them a Palestinian youth walks up to bum a smoke off some baffled Israeli soldiers. What is the  description of how they are doing this? They have wrapped a "web" around Earth's magnetosphere using an AI supercomputer that exists largely in a state of quantum uncertainty. Through manipulation of earth's magnetosphere they can project walls of force between people who are about to come to blows. The speed of quantum calculations allows them to track human thought and throw up the barrier based on the violent motives of a person. They easily block bullets and prevent ICBMs from firing.-What about our other alien experiences? For example, the stereotypical Greys? The greys have been hanging around Earth because they derive sustenance from intense psychic emanations. They mind-rape abductees to satisfy themselves. They have been working on digging a moon base, but they GTFO when the pacifist aliens come into our system. The pacifist ETs consider the Greys to be parasites. -What is the universe like? Is it endless galactic struggle for resources? For this one, I will just post screens of the pages I read that drove me to put the book down and post here. You see, Iain M Banks was right all along. Adam is the name they chose for the AI, Samantha is the author:  
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
Brain Curry posted:SO DONT loving FLY IT, DONT loving SHIP IT, DONT loving REACT IT WITH MY BATTERIES. This got a hearty lol outta me
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
Finally watching Skinwalker Ranch, and Travis Taylor just mentioned that he was on the UAP Task Force. I can only lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 01:38
|
|
|
Turpitude posted:Alright based on some great posts earlier in the thread, I ordered the sci-fi novel "REJOICE: A Knife to the Heart" by my man Steven Erikson, got it in the mail yesterday, and have been devouring it. It feels like it was written for me, and this thread. I just reached a point in the book that made it impossible for me to not post about it. To bring people up to date on the discussion of this book from earlier, the idea is that aliens project a technologic field over the earth that prevents violent acts by humans, but that is only one of the things they do. However before I go into more of the glee I get out of this book I should talk about its author. I was the poster who originally brought this book up but it was actually in the GBS thread. Glad you are enjoying though, it's a fun book and I would definitely recommend it to anybody in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:
I'm listening to True Hallucinations right now, and just got past the part where Terence says he saw a UFO fly over him. He takes a moment to point out that he was extremely on drugs, but that he's done any drug you can name, and none of them made him see UFOs
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Finally watching Skinwalker Ranch, and Travis Taylor just mentioned that he was on the UAP Task Force. I can only lol Oh we have such sights to show you. I hope you like model rockets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
D-Pad posted:I was the poster who originally brought this book up but it was actually in the GBS thread. Glad you are enjoying though, it's a fun book and I would definitely recommend it to anybody in this thread. Thanks D-Pad, I second that recommendation! High-minded modern sci-fi like this is really rare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 02:00
|
|