HomeUncategorizedUFO Disclosure and the Occult

UFO Disclosure and the Occult

from a recent exchange about disclosure:

I don’t see it as just some isolated niche issue.  Having got more and more into this issue the past years, I say with confidence that the presence of other intelligent beings is foundational to our whole existence.  I don’t think one can even understand ancient or recent history without going deep into the topic.  So much in the last century has been about technological secrecy, and the implications of that technology have in the past half century become so far from our consensus reality that full disclosure would be impossible anytime soon, since we are incapable of understanding much of the cosmic picture.

I think the recent slew of whistleblowers like Goode and Tompkins are being allowed to let some of this stuff out in ways that are easily dismissed by most people but are an answer to a need that some of us were burning with.  After meeting an area 51 director at a retirement community, I started digging deeper into the subject, and found it so vast and perplexing that I could only make sense of it with the most far out speculation.  Then suddenly Corey Goode appeared on the scene with a detailed picture that makes all of our science fiction look quaint, and merely crystallized what I was already envisioning.  I really think those of us that were ready to know called it forth.  If there were more proof, it would be devastating to the rest of our culture.  This was for those who needed to know, or at least needed a story that brought it all together.  In the occult, it is a common theme that the truth is always given in ways that people can handle.  The black magic tradition works with different rules, caring less about violating others’ free will, but they have their own reasons for secrecy.  Interventions and manipulations open up doors to either side’s opponent.

In Corey’s defense, he has always been especially clear that all these stories are points of view with an agenda, and that there are always more layers and no one has the whole picture.  So I think of this era of disclosure as part and parcel with the revelations of Theosophy a century or so ago that were also supposedly called forth by the demands of the culture at that time.  We touched briefly on that subject a while back I know, and I know you are more skeptical than me, but if you do at some point get a chance to think through some of this stuff with an open mind, I would be interested in getting your opinion.  This website is particularly helpful in evaluating Theosophy and the radical challenge it makes to current science and cosmology.  The author David Pratt is very rigorous, in my opinion, and at the very least, very interesting.  I have been studying his papers in depth the past year, and he has some of the best research and arguments for controversial issues like climate and earth science:

probably my favorite paper is this one, since India has long been a fascination for me:


I am working along similar lines to contextualize recent esotericism and especially the physics that helps one understand it.  I am really excited right now seeing how much Deleuze figured out in general terms, which the alternative science community is coming to through a completely different path.So I would be interested in your explanation for what this whole occult culture is doing.  I understand if it is just too “alien” to your perspective and interests.  That is understandable.  I just have a problem when the assumption is made that that lack of meaning and context is universal so anyone interested must be a naive believer. I don’t find most skeptic explanations convincing.  They are usually dismissive not illuminating.  Richard Dolan for instance is just a historian who branched out from researching the rise of the CIA so he dismisses people like Corey Goode or even Tompkins (who has more evidence at least of his position in the power structure).  Dolan’s explanation is that they are probably either lying or are part of a genuine disinfo campaign just to make the real stuff look silly, to discredit the field and obfuscate the truth.  Frankly as an external observer, I find it distasteful when they call each other disinfo whenever they don’t agree.  Dolan, to his credit, had remained polite, until MUFON pressured him to be on stage with some of these people and he felt forced to publically distance himself from them.

But if they are actually a disinfo campaign, that would be a fascinating story in itself.  And while some out of the dozens of supposed whistleblowers now may be lying for attention, it is difficult to square with the details of some of their biographies.  It is hard to believe some of these people would do all this just to cruise the lecture circuit and sell a few books while lying through their teeth.

At the very least I think we are seeing with these people the beginnings of the future of religion.  Much as Theosophy seeded the New Age, UFOlogy is seeding the culture’s future cosmology.  While religion is easy to make fun of, it is basically metaphysics for the masses, and it doesn’t mean that it isn’t based in truth.  Dismissing it as revelation hides the value that is every creative meaningful act.  True Religion isn’t just someone making up  a story.  People definitely believe stupid things sometimes, but they do so generally when there is an absence of good shamans to update the stories of the culture.  Theosophy was an attempt at that.  I really don’t see any clear line between metaphysical philosophy and Theosophy.  Analytic philosophers probably don’t either, but I would be surprised if you sided with them here.

We indeed need to grow out of belief and into critical metaphysics, but not into positivism and scientism.  Steiner and Deleuze both claim to be doing the important task of creating concepts.  Steiner obviously goes way further with that, creating much more elaborate content, but I don’t see a formal difference.  One can certainly critique the value and coherence of any formulation, but that is different than negation.  My long term project is to flesh out the formal aspects of this perspective.  I do this not to justify but to critique, to put this stuff in a meaningful context.  So much academic work goes into so much of little consequence, meanwhile the spiritual culture of our age is completely ignored and ridiculed.  Much of it deservingly, but we are in the middle of such an explosion of mysteries which deserve to be understood.

As for why people like Bezos are building rockets instead of UFO craft…..To start with, this isn’t just some fancy propulsion technology.  You can’t separate out the real field physics from the whole cosmology and economic implications that go along with it.  We can call it antigravity, but it is much more than that.  Some call it electrogravitics, but again, these terms are wed to the mainstream physics.  Electrogravitics comes from Thomas Townsend Brown who started figuring out some basics back in the 30’s.  But he was quickly brought into the military projects and his public work on the subject stopped.  Soon after, the subject disappeared out of the aviation journals rather suddenly even though it had been a hugely promising and popular topic.  Everyone involved just stopped.  Skeptics could write that off to a dead end, but researchers that have dug deeper find the trails.  That time period required a little more direct intervention but soon after the whole field of propulsion physics was off in another direction.  It only takes a little nudge to alter the course of science when you have the power.  Someone can get close, but they show up and tell you that they already have this shit figured out but it is classified.  You get some money or you get some access and after a while, few people of means even go in that direction anyway.  There just aren’t any roads that lead to the kind of physics you need.

Nowadays its mostly eccentric engineers in their garage trying to just tap into the field with overunity devices. McCandlish told a story when he was on Cosmic Disclosure about a close friend of his that started getting overunity in his private workshop and the next day got a visit from the suits.  It isn’t “free energy”, it taps right into the field and that immediately shows up on a screen somewhere apparently.  So basically there is no one that knows exactly how this stuff works that will talk.

A further question should be, what are they doing with these crafts? Where is all this technology going? It certainly has little to do with the geopolitical struggles here, at least the possible conflicts we are involved in.  When Catherine Austin Fitts was in charge of the books at HUD and she realized it was part of a vast financial scheme, she couldn’t fathom where all this money was going.  She didn’t care about UFOs but she came to realize the amount of money being channeled to something had to be huge.  She eventually realized that a big portion of our global economy is being manipulated to fund another civilization.  (Not the whole thing, there are outliers resisting, which does drive a lot of the global politics these days).

So taking even a fraction of this into account, does your question about why Bezos and Musk are investing in rockets rather than UFOs still make sense? In what scenario would that question even make sense?  Where these craft are going to be developed into commercial travel? Do you really think the new tech billionaires can buy their way into a club so exclusive that wars are fought to protect it from being hijacked?  Presidents killed….  JFK was killed for a lot of reasons, but the reasons come into focus when one understands his relationship with Forrestal, the then ongoing power struggle between the White house and the military industrial complex, and the larger conflict between factions Dark Journalist calls “X protect and X share”.  DJ tracks this conflict in fascinating detail.

So I don’t know what Bezos knows or doesn’t know.  But how about someone else in that category who admits he knows and wants to know more.  Here is a clip of Robert Bigelow on 60minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moH4qrHReCQ

Why is someone obsessed with UFOs and in the aerospace business not trying to build them?  Well we know now that he was trying to get info as part of the program Harry Reid set up.  According to the NYTimes Bigelow got some parts, some metal alloys from crashed crafts, but the whole project didn’t get very far.  They definitely hit the wall that politicians always hit ever since Eisenhower lost control and the aerospace giants consolidated their program and power and leverage over the military programs.  A wall built over the course of decades to protect “X”.

But before that wall was very solid, we can see a similar drama that played out with Howard Hughes.  I think he knew enough, like Bigelow and Musk, that he wanted to know more, and he was bold enough to pressure them into giving him some access.  But with little success, other than to help build the Integratron, which probably never really worked.

I think it serves many elite interests to continue the myth of the libertarian self made man, innovating our future.  Musk is interesting; he probably knows something given some of his AI comments, but I am not sure.  Most likely he just knows the boundaries he was given and may have even experienced some pushback when he stepped over them.  When it comes down to it, the wealth and power these entrepreneurs have acquired is nothing compared to what has been built and achieved by these highly organized networks of people working with nearly unlimited funds, unchecked power and complete autonomy.  Musk can’t even smoke weed without almost losing his support.

Perhaps your question implied something more like why are they all getting into the rocket business?  Perhaps that is part of the game they are playing if they do know something. Put some pressure on these people maybe?  Most likely it is just that entrepreneurial zest for the frontier.  We all grew up expecting a scifi reality by now.  But it turns out space isn’t the empty frontier we had hoped.  Turns out we have to figure things here out first before we get to play with the others.

So I don’t think there is any one club to buy into with this stuff, no matter how much money someone has.  It isn’t even a question of old vs. new money.  Certainly there are established cabals around old money that wield a lot of power.  But what a lot of research seems to suggest is that the rise to power of the u.s. intelligence communities really complicated the picture.  While some factions definitely have some allegiance to western financial elites, after the dust settled in the years immediately following ww2, a lot of the power ended up in the hands of former Nazis within various post war intelligence and research groups, that eventually were able to break free from the financial elites and gain dominance over some of the corporate and military groups.

I think it is pretty clear that people like the Rockefellers don’t even have any access.  It seems pretty obvious that they have had an interest in gaining more access and certainly know about the breakaway groups, and they do wield a lot of political power.  But political power has become increasingly subordinate.  Even with the backing of some deep state players, Trump had little success at challenging the entrenched power blocks.  There are a lot of claims about how this is all structured and Goode and Tompkins have given the most detailed account.  Michael Salla’s books are the best summary of their information and the support for it.  It is far out stuff but it is a very useful framework.

Basically,  at the highest level of geopolitics there are two main power blocks on Earth with loose alliances within the breakaway groups (living off planet and within the underground system).  The breakaway groups are mostly allied with the Western cabals but have some defectors within working with the reactionary faction of nationalists on Earth that are trying to resist the globalists.  There are a lot conservative and immature people in the conspiracy community (like David Wilcock) who overlay their melodramatic hero myth onto this, but Goode himself is actually pretty straightforward about the moral complexity involved.  I think anyone that thinks through what is out in the open, even without all the fairy tales, can see that the globalists have good reason to want to take over the world and get us past this stage of existence.  And the reactionaries have good reason to doubt that is the best option and that a prolonged fossil fuel economy might help make the inevitable postcapitalist world be more multipolar.  And they both probably do awful things.  The breakaway groups and their allied aliens tend to have a longer term focus than just global politics.  If they do indeed exist as Goode claims, and are looking at the multidimensional picture, it makes sense that they are more concerned with humanity’s evolution than just which sociopaths pretend to rule the planet.  But it is not unimportant either.  It is just not a simple good vs. evil as the conservative mind tends to frame things and unfortunately they do tend to dominate the conspiracy community.

I definitely agree Ancient Aliens is pretty silly from what I have seen.  “Ancient astronaut theorists” tend to completely misunderstand the phenomenon, committing the fallacy of misplaced concreteness as William Irwin Thompson said about Sitchin and company.  Of course he said the same thing about Steiner, but I think that, although there is definitely plenty of exaggerated literalism in Theosophy, the very meaning of concrete and abstract has to be reframed to properly understand esoteric phenomenon of all kinds.

Basically one has to go all the way into the upside down esoteric account of our world if any of this is to make sense.  Everyone that tries to go halfway ends up convincing few skeptics and distorting the esoteric account into projections of the foolish cosmology of current physics.  An example is when Joe Rogan had on Graham Hancock to debate skeptic Michael Shermer and Shermer pointed out how there is just as much archaeological evidence of Michael Cremo’s research and theories as Hancock’s, and Cremo’s argument is completely bonkers from the mainstream view.  Cremo, if you are not aware, advocates for the traditional esoteric account.(Cremo’s writing partner Richard Thompson wrote a cool book on UFOs and Indian myth called Alien Identities, a formative book for me in my youth).  In the traditional Indian scriptures (brought out more fully by Theosophy) humanity is millions of years old and a product of higher beings, not just as some genetic intervention in evolution, but fundamentally in a topological descent from the more to the less complex, with animals being an offshoot of us.  (The details are too complex to summarize here).  The account people like Hancock give is just a normal mainstream account with some aliens or more advanced humans thrown into our early history.  But Shermer is right, once you start considering all this anomalous evidence, where does it end?

Well it doesn’t end, but it leads to a very different view of the cosmos.  Check out David Pratt’s website I mentioned if you want the details of why it is very much an upside down version of mainstream concepts of evolution and cosmogenesis (which is why some called the early stages “involution”).  I think most of us that have come to this subject haven’t done so just out of rational calculation of the odds of aliens.  Anyone that has taken a large enough dose of the right substances have seen or talked to other beings and intelligences.  People like Hancock get fascinated by the shamanic world but don’t move beyond their drug dependent vision of a separate supernatural world.  Similarly, thinking of aliens as just some technologically advanced foreigners stopping by to lend a hand seems like a plausible compromise of esoteric cosmology with our current worldview, but it leads to all kinds of other questions and inconsistencies, as you have noted.  Anything but surface level curiosity necessitates seeing other beings and worlds not as alien or circumstantial encounters but central to our life and world.  The other is in us and part of us, so to speak.

As for how much help early man got, that is another complex issue.  Every era of technology has a kind of consciousness inextricably linked to it. Most of recorded history is just a blip in man’s history, where it is precisely that we have had the least contact and intervention, for various reasons.  And we have already progressed technologically far beyond our capability of handling it well.  It wasn’t as if aliens were coming down trying to advance humanity.  There have been from the beginning, various groups with various agendas that were intertwined in complex ways with each other and with groups of humans on the more or less primitive levels of culture.

Also you seem generally unaware of the history and organization of secret societies.  Granted a lot of conspiracy people make it seem silly, but this is also, like much of this stuff, probably partly by design.  There is only so far into that world one can get just throwing money around.  I think you would find Laurence Gardner interesting.  He writes from within elite culture and gives their perspective and values.  In his book on the history of Masonry, he critiques conspiracy theory which assumes just because people meet together in groups that those groups are controlling those people.  Once again, it isn’t about some monolithic group controlling the world.  Everything in that world is compartmentalized.  One cool story comes from Ingo Swan, the top remote viewer in the documented and declassified psychic spy programs.  Most of his work was at a pretty low level, but he was occasionally brought into an underground base by a mysterious military group that was using him to try to see what other groups were doing on the moon.  The modern picture of western intelligence is of many many groups, which cooperate and compete in a complex network of alliances and agendas.  Most of which are not part of or even aware of the full extent of a breakaway society.  And much of the breakaway society is supposedly a totalitarian military society coordinated with a series of corporate run slave colonies.  Nothing any sane person would want to be a part of anyway unless they were in charge.  Everyone else just slaves away in spaceships and bases without much else to do but play ping pong and follow orders.

One additional thing I want to say about Salla, since I recommended him.  He seems to have embraced the Qanon material without enough critical context.  If you are not aware, Q has become a major and politically relevant phenomenon, giving all of Trump’s dubious moves a series of elaborate justifications. I think Q is perhaps indeed orchestrated by the people in military intelligence behind Trump as claimed, but I see their motivation and agenda as being less pure and good than they market themselves as. Anyway, it is part of the game being played and I tend to ignore it mostly, but I thought I would mention it. It is just another example of the way the Left’s lack of theory of the elite, and their swallowing all the corporate science and globalist propaganda without scrutiny and awareness of the dark side of technology and progress, leads to anyone with an interest in the actual structure of elite agendas being pushed into Rightwing politics where they are easily corralled into paranoid and fascist narratives.

Your comments about rockets and rich people got me thinking about the semiotics of rocket technology.  I heard there is a TV show now about Jack Parsons, exploring his descent in Crowley’s occultism as his team was developing early rocket tech.  It reminded me of how different the whole sign regime of Newtonian physics contrasts with the field physics of UFOs and how different people are attracted to different secrets.  Rocket tech has had its share of masculine eccentrics like Von Braun, and Parsons who was into Thelemic magic, which is all about sex and self assertion.  Phallus to the moon.

In contrast, at the same time Thomas Townsend Brown quietly working with his dielectric disks but almost certainly getting pulled into the secret groups working on the saucer tech.  Though the lore is that it was Maria Orsic and her group of female mediums that first came up with the designs for the early models in Germany.  Though in Farrell’s research it is clear that there were many precedents in German physics that at least made them open to the Vril society’s findings, if that is anything more than lore.  Farrell focuses on the actual documents of German physics at the time.  The Germans have always had a fondness for the more collective, natural, systems and cyclical semiotics which is common of the landlocked nations as opposed to the mercantile libertarian individualism of the coastal societies and their angular manifest destiny.  The naturalist Victor Schauberger was probably an earlier source of German saucer design.  His vortex theory was popular with the Nazis who picked the swastika as a sign for a reason (see Farrell’s books).  All very feminine nature orientated stuff.  Even when it was rendered into military research, like the Nazi Bell and its swirling vortices of mercury pulsing immense DC energy, deep in the central European forest before all the scientists were shot.

The point being, while you might be right that enough money gets you some secrets, and almost certainly the capitalists and old royal elite have formed some long and deep alliances, and are most likely working together at various levels of knowledge of the other factions, the flamboyant libertarian pioneers aren’t trusted with the real secrets and it is easy to see why they end up in rocket tech.