Friday, June 14, 2019

An Evidence-Free yet Indisputable Case for Intelligent Life Beyond Earth

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness

With the way people reject the suggestion that intelligent life may exist in locations beyond Earth, one might be led to wonder whether or not there is intelligent life on Earth itself…

Denial Is Unreasonable

To conclude that intelligent ET life is nonexistent, one mustn’t have put adequate thought into their analysis.

If one is as I used to be, a parroter of whatever I believed my peers and “authority” would grant approval for, then there isn’t much of any thought at all.

Of those who do think further, these often the more scientific types, the tendency is toward being so dependent on “authority” and “approved means” to tell them “what we know” while perceiving this information to be “fact” and “truth” that they’ve no mind left for what lies outside of conventional research and assumption.

The purpose of this writing is to look at a variety of concepts that, although they certainly aren’t evidence—and much less proof—of intelligent ET life, make a very strong case as to why such life could most certainly exist and we wouldn’t have a clue.

These ideas shatter any imagined validity in denial because denial assumes that all, or at least a satisfactory number of, avenues have been examined, but this is not the case.

Be aware that this is not a conspiracy-informed discussion. It could be described as an exposition on open-minded thinking and inquiry, and the shortsightedness that arises without them.

Similarly Dissimilar

Even if we unwisely assume that what “authority” tells us is all true and they really know no more than they tell us, so what?

How many millions of years has sentient life been on this planet and yet we, the most intelligent of creatures, have hardly been to the moon?

Is it really that implausible for even one or ten or one thousand other planets in this universe of unspeakable magnitude to have intelligent life of a similar or lesser status?

Life could even be the rule rather than the exception—we can’t see or travel to them, so why would we think that they should automatically be able to see and travel to us?

As for science saying that we’ve been sending signals out into deep space but haven’t received anything in return, again, so what?

Is anyone actually receiving them? Are any receivers of these signals not really receivers because, although intelligent, they don’t yet have the technology to receive and reply? Must the receivers of these signals necessarily respond?

Why does ET life have to behave exactly as we assume it should behave?

We Wouldn’t Know Unless We Knew, Right?

Of course, this less-than-or-equal-to status ignores the human- and Earth-centric arrogance of the required belief that no one is greater. (Even if it were true that no one is greater, we don’t know that no one is greater, and so the arrogance still stands.)

Since arrogance and ignorance go hand-in-hand, if we don’t want to be ignorant or arrogant, we must be open to the possibility that there is intelligent life elsewhere and that some is less advanced, some is equally advanced, and some is more advanced—potentially advanced enough that we couldn’t even see it if it were here.

Consider 3 categories of orientation of advanced, intelligent ET beings (excluding any mixing):
  1. Neutral
  2. Negative
  3. Positive
These beings have no agenda other than pure observation. As such, they would not interact with us or allow themselves to be seen.

If they were here, we wouldn’t know unless we knew, right?

There are two general ways of interaction with negative beings: they would try to control and/or destroy us either overtly or covertly.

Alhough negative ETs might initially observe us from a distance, the use of overt force, such as UFOs flying around blowing shit to smithereens and reptilians corralling humans in chains, isn’t at all apparent, so, potentially, since negative beings can never seem to keep themselves from meddling in others’ affairs, they could be here controlling us covertly.

We wouldn’t know unless we knew, right?

There are two general ways that interaction with positive beings could take place: overtly or covertly.

Looking at the world’s state of affairs, what peace-desiring beings would want to fly into Earthly airspace? Even if they had reached the ground without being obliterated by missiles in midair, they would probably be quickly abducted by government officials and/or swiftly killed (literally or figuratively) because that’s what happens to everyone who lives and speaks of higher truth on this planet. So, if any such positive ET beings had any inkling of the danger of being here, they would not likely wish to make themselves known overtly. Furthermore, suddenly showing up by the hundreds, thousands, or even millions would scare the hell out of people, and that’s not peace-extending at all.

This leaves us to covert behavior: positive and merely observing, or positive and actually helping us in some way.

We wouldn’t know unless we knew, right?

Otherwise, if a given race of ETs were technologically equal or even a good deal more advanced than us, what if, say, they lived halfway across the galaxy or in a different galaxy altogether. How long would it take them to get here, if it were possible for them, even at light speed? (The Milky Way is 100,000 light years across, by the way.) Or, of all the infinite places they could go, what’s to say they would necessarily come anywhere near here?

It’s so easy to say, “Science says…” or, “The New York Times reported that…” but who actually knows?

A person may well not even know that there are termites eating away at his or her own house until their foot unexpectedly falls through the floor, and yet somehow we know that there’s no one living on—or in—any far-flung celestial object? With such the lack of attention we give them, there could be people living deep inside the Earth's crust or the moon and we wouldn’t even be aware.

We wouldn’t know unless we knew, right?

Keeping It Simple

In writing this, I admit that I’m skipping over a lot.

I’ve personally seen multiple UFOs, two of them so close I could almost touch them. I’m ignoring my own intuition and the self-knowledge that has come to me through QHHT (Quantum Healing Hypnotherapy) and Akashic Reading sessions. I’m making no suggestion of things I've found through 15+ years of conspiracy research. I'm bypassing scriptural references to ET races and all the spiritual (and other) information available about them. I’m avoiding the fact that, of the many thousands of worldwide sightings, abductions, and video recordings of UFOs over the decades, surely, at least one must be legit. I’m paying no heed to the half-assed, limited hangout, partial disclosure that’s suddenly burst into the mainstream even as reports and studies continue to come out saying that we’re most likely alone. I’m setting aside all the obvious marks (structures, artifacts, etc.) of other civilizations that have been left all over our world (and the Moon and Mars) and for which we have “no” explanation that necessarily point to unknown civilizations with advanced technology, potentially or necessarily of ET origin.

But do you know where skipping all that stuff puts me? Right here. Offering a simple case for intelligent ET life that, by pointing out a lack of evidence, cannot be thrown away as nonsense.

How adamant have people been about there being no ET life? How negative have people been toward those who believe in intelligent life beyond Earth? How closed-minded have people been about something that they cannot come even remotely close to proving false?

People have been so focused on what they apparently “know” that they've steamrolled right over everything they don't.

To Be Intelligent, One Must First Admit Ignorance

Arrogance says, “I know,” but in doing so it can’t help but admit to its own ignorance—the very thing arrogance is used as a shield from.

Can other places in this universe of unspeakable magnitude potentially have intelligent life, whether less, equally, or more advanced than us?

Of course.

Because, from an openly ignorant viewpoint, an absence of data isn’t proof of anything other than an absence of data!

We wouldn’t know unless we knew, right?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated.
1.) Be kind.
2.) Be constructive.
3.) Be coherent.
4.) No self-promotion. (Use "Comment as: Name/URL" to include your personal link.)