Hi forum friends,

With that Mel Gibson movie on crop circles coming up soon, I thought you might be interested in learning more about this most intriguing phenomenon.

Check out http://www.cropcircleresearch.com/database/index.html and some of the links under Latest Crop Circles in the left frame. I think the one at this page impresses me most.

What do you think causes these?

Interesting, eh?

LOL. That caught my eye. Phil, did you used to write headlines for the National Enquirer?

What do I think causes crop circles? Aliens. Aliens with spaceships in need of a tune-up. You see, normally their spaceships travel noiselessly and cleanly through space and their hyperdrives spew no exhaust whatsoever. The hyperdrives don�t emit matter of any kind. They propel the spacecraft through space by bending spacetime and are actually repelled by the past and thus gain forward momentum. But when the spacecraft is coming in for a landing the hyperdrive kicks into �anti-grav� mode. When in anti-grav mode anti-gravity is used to gently bring the spacecraft to a landing. But after some of these long trips the hyperdrives get a little choked with interstellar dust. This excess dust interacts with the anti-gravity and becomes subject to quantum randomness and uncertainty. The different patterns that one sees on the ground are the result of a complex interaction of quarks and anti-quarks. Much like a snowflake, these patterns are never repeated and only exist because the dirty hyperdrive is spewing out an excess of protons that are greatly accelerated by the anti-matter field, are split into their component quarks, and produce this quark/anti-quark interaction. The top and bottom quark/anti-quark interactions produce the circles while the strange and charmed quark/anti-quark interactions produce the straight lines. The dirtier the hyperdrive engines the more complex and detailed the pattern that is imprinted on the ground. This whole phenomenon is not unlike the black ring that an old, oil-burning Oldsmobile leaves on the driveway.

I call your 11 Crop Circles and raise you 5 White Crows .

I haven't seriously researched Crop Circles and reserve comment other than to say that I rather resonate with Brad's explanation.

I have read, recently, As I Lay Dying by Richard John Neuhaus, whom I have admired in his role as Editor In Chief of the highly esteemed journal First Things . I have also read The Afterlife Experiments by Gary E. Schwartz, professor of psychology, medicine, neurology, psychiatry and surgery at the University of Arizona and director of its Human Energy Systems Laboratory. After receiving his doctorate from Harvard University, he served as a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Yale University, director of the Yale Psychophysiology Center, and co-director of the Yale Behavioral Medicine Clinic. He has published more than four hundred scientific papers, edited eleven academic books, and is the co-author, with Linda G. Russek, Ph.D., of The Living Energy Universe.

Contemporary research on anomalous information retrieval has been advanced through the cooperation of research-oriented mediums with exceptional talent and integrity and scientists, such as Schwartz, open to exploring their abilities.

Can mediums receive highly accurate and specific information under laboratory controlled blinded conditions?

I refer you to The White Crow Readings for a compelling account of Evidence of Information Retrieval Between Two Mediums as published in the
Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 2001.

Call? Check? Raise? or Fold?

pax tibi,
johnboy

Okay, JB. I didn't take the time to slog all the way through The White Crow Readings. What's your take on it? Oh, I see. I kind of thought you'd say that.

Before you place your bets, let me show you all the cards. There is no joker in the deck but both the believers and the skeptics appear to be holding some aces (reliable, credible and trustworthy authorites).

Whether researching Crop Circles or Mediums, The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal encourages the critical investigation of paranormal and fringe-science claims from a responsible, scientific point of view and disseminates factual information about the results of such inquiries to the scientific community and the public. Although the Debunkers of the Debunkers sometimes seriously call into question the professonalism of various CSICOP members and their often apparent animus, CSICOP has become an ally of the more serious researchers if only by way of suggesting improvements in experimental design. For instance, see

A Critique of Schwartz et al's After Death Communication Studies.

For examples of debunking of the debunkers, see Reply from Dr. Gary Schwartz to James Randi and Steve Grenard's rebuttal to a book review of The Afterlife Experiments posted at Amazon.com by Marc Berard.

Perhaps some of you saw the HBO documentary Life Afterlife which debuted in October 1999. The company which made this film is Lucky Duck Productions in New York City which is headed by journalist Linda Ellerbee, who was the film's Executive Producer. The documentary was produced and directed by Lisa F. Jackson. Lisa has been involved in docuemntary film production for over 25 years and her numerous awards include an Emmy, a Cable Ace and four CINE Golden Eagles. Most recently, she received an Emmy for "The Secret Life of Barbie" which she produced for ABC News.

What was this film about?

Life Afterlife was NOT about Near Death Experiences, UFO's, alien abduction, channeling, past life regression, reincarnation etc., etc. Rather, it was the first serious documentary ever made for a national television audience about the broad range of experiences and issues currently surrounding death, and especially life after death. You can read samples of the types of After Death Communications (ADC's) they uncovered here.

For an exhaustive listing of related links, one can visit Gary Schwartz's site and Linda Ellerbee's site.

To submit your own experiences, read others' experiences or to participate in online chat and message boards pertaining to ADC's, visit Bill and Judy Guggenheim's site where you will find many additional articles, resources and links.

To those who have read this far: I just finished Gary Schwartz's book and found it most credible. It seems that much of the hypothesizing that Gary Schwartz has done, such as in the chapter entitled "How Our Lives Might Change" (wherein he discusses the implications for what if life after death were really true), is not really new. Ever since the Resurrection Event two thousand years ago, millions have lived their lives as if Schwartz's hypothesis was true, some with more assurance and conviction, more faith and hope, than others, and many others merely wagering with Pascal. Of course millions have also lived their lives with a firm belief in reincarnation, too. I think many of us can report that, for the most part, we have journeyed through life very much attendant to our communion of saints. So, the question I pose is: "What difference does Schwartz's research make to us individually?"

Schwartz proposes this answer: "How can you make this science relevant in your personal life? The answer is that what you absorb in this book can be polished and developed, and your own skills in this area nurtured. You can become more open and aware of your interconnections with others, both in this life and after this life, both here and there."

A few months ago, I had quoted Vatican spokesman, Father Gino Concetti, one of the most competent theologians in the Vatican, who said in an interview: "According to the modern catechism, God allows our dear departed persons who live in an ultra-terrestrial dimension, to send messages to guide us in certain difficult moments of our lives. The Church has decided not to forbid any more the dialogue with the deceased with the condition that these contacts are carried out with a serious religious and scientific purpose." I only realized, recently, what prompted his interview, was his support for certain things said by American theologian Richard John Neuhaus, whose book __As I Lay Dying__ I mentioned in a prior post.

My impression is that the church would be supportive of research such as by Schwartz, and I'll quote Pope Pius XII out of context here: "The Pope reassured them: Dear Father Gemelli, you really need not worry about this. The existence of this voice is strictly a scientific fact and has nothing to do with spiritism. The recorder is totally objective. It receives and records only sound waves from wherever they come. This experiment may perhaps become the cornerstone for a building for scientific studies which will strengthen people's faith in a hereafter." [Italian Journal Astra, June 1990 quoted Kubis and Macy, 1995:102]

At the same time, while encouraging individual members of the faithful to pray with and seek the intercession of the communion of saints, which includes our deceased loved ones, of course, I have gathered that it does not sanction the "raising of spirits" or seances or mediumship. I think the reason for this is the widespread and rampant fraud that can be encountered and the possibilty of delusion, not to mention other perils such as deception by evil spirits, etc This may change as science advances.

Father Pistone, Superior of the Society of St Paul in England said in an interview, years ago, regarding electronic voice phenomena: "I do not see anything against the teaching of the Catholic Church in the Voices, they are something extra-ordinary but there is no reason to fear them, nor can I see any danger (Bander 1974: 132). The Church realizes that she cannot control the evolution of science. Here we are dealing with a scientific phenomenon; this is progress and the Church is progressive. I am happy to see that representatives of most Churches have adopted the same attitude as we have: we recognize that the subject of the Voice Phenomena stirs the imagination even of those who have always maintained that there could never be any proof or basis for discussion on the question of life after death. This book and the subsequent experiments raise serious doubts, even in the minds of atheists. This alone is a good reason for the Church supporting the experiments. A second reason may be found in the greater flexibility of the Church since Vatican II; we are willing to keep an open mind on all matters which do not contradict Christ's teaching (Bander 1974:103)."

Still, what concrete steps might I take as an individual? I will continue to read and study, using my interests in science and theology as guideposts. I think I'll be more in earnest with my intercesssory prayer, too, asking for and looking for prayerful assistance from departed loved ones and friends. Neither of these two steps represent a radical departure from what I have done for years. This is likely true for you, too?

The one thing that I may do which will be new, will be to point people who are grieving, and whom I think might be consoled by such studies, in the direction of this growing body of scientific literature, and even to point them in the direction of certain mediums who have pretty much proven their integrity and sincerity (whether based on the experience of reliable, credible and loving grief counselors that I know, or based on the research done at the University of Arizona by Gary Schwartz and colleagues). I think that, more and more often, perhaps, a responsible, compassionate response to deep grief and trauma just might should include such referrals. What do you think?

Finally, perhaps with discernment and with courage, those of us who have significant experiences with death bed visions, near death experiences or afterlife communications might give stronger consideration to sharing those things, however intensely personal they may sometimes be, discretely with others. This discretion may involve confiding things to a small circle of family and friends, on one hand, or publishing some occurences/things widely (even if anonymously) through respectable authors and websites. In this age of skepticism and secularism, I just don't think it is realistic to expect all believers to fallback on a faith unaided by signs and wonders, and never should we move forward uninformed by reason, although under all circumstances, in the final analysis, faith remains faith.

I hope you're enjoying this Crop Circle thread as much as I.

pax tibi,
jb

Brad, I think something like this crop circle might be evidence of a space ship landing.

But then there are things like this and this which suggest some kind of artistic expression--even an attempt to communicate something.

There's also this face (stand back a ways and look at it!)

What to think? I honestly don't know. These things appear overnight--no "works in progress" evidence. If they are hoaxes, they are cleverly done, as often there isn't a footstep observed. This one appeared on ice too thin to walk on.

From the web site I've cited above, we read: The Independent Research Centre for Unexplained Phenomena (IRCUP) was founded in 1993 by Paul Vigay, after a number of personal experiences and four years of extensive research into the continuing crop circles enigma. Paul was previously a UFO and paranormal investigator, but became interested in crop circles in 1989 when he discovered anomalous electrical effects in and around crop formations.

After four years it became increasingly apparent that there was a real and genuine mystery to the subject. Not only have strange aerial anomalies (UFOs) been linked with crop circles, but many people and objects have been affected by their influence - either positively or negatively. Another thing, which has become increasingly obvious during the last couple of years is the seemingly paranoid attempts by some sceptics and hoaxers to try to debunk the subject in the eyes of the general public.

All very interesting, I think

Phil

P.S. J.B., thanks for expanding the topic to include other paranormal issues. It'll take me awhile to read up on some of the references you gave, but I, too, and convinced that there ought to be nothing wrong from a religious standpoint with pursuing the meaning of these phenomena. Clearly, this isn't the same thing as "conjuring up spirits" and other dangerous practices. Not only because of my faith, but because of such psychical research, I'm convinced of the reality of an afterlife.

What to think? I honestly don't know.

Actually I saw a pretty good show once on crop circles on the Discovery Channel. It was sort of an �investigative reports� type of piece and not a Leonard Nimoy �In Search Of� type of show. It showed two sides of this story of the crop circles in England: those who believed thoroughly in it (and those who appeared to believe thoroughly in it and were making a bit of an industry out of it) and those who actually claimed to have made the crop circles (and demonstrated exactly how they did it). The demonstrations of the making of the crop circles were very convincing. Two guys quickly and easily made a quite complex pattern in a field in the dead of night with only a bit of moonlight to see by. They used a piece of string tied to a stick to make perfect circles, used boards to flatten the corn or wheat, and used simple sighting methods to draw long, straight lines. Perhaps other phenomenon could be responsible but that becomes a little problematic in my opinion. I view them as wonderful works of art.

I've heard of that, Brad. And so there are obviously hoaxes, which can help in many ways to understand the phenomenon. Hoaxers (artists) show how it can be done. Only . . . this still impresses me immensely. Hard to imagine anyone being able to keep track of all these circles and the overall pattern and pull it off in one night. If it's of human origin, then I guess I'm even all the more impressed as I couldn't do something like that with a compass, pen and paper and hours of practice.

Phil

Only . . . this still impresses me immensely.

That�s just an amazing fractal-type image. And the one of the alien face was extremely complex. I�d loved to have watched (whomever!) make that one.

Hard to imagine anyone being able to keep track of all these circles and the overall pattern and pull it off in one night. If it's of human origin, then I guess I'm even all the more impressed as I couldn't do something like that with a compass, pen and paper and hours of practice.

Whether of human, alien or angelic origin those are some great works of art. I almost don�t want to know how they are done. That would ruin it. But still I wonder, and I�m guessing they used a cherry picker or something to lean over the edge of the pond to sculpt that circle in the thin ice.

Shalomplace Participants All - you'll notice how artfully and craftily and deftly I derailed this Crop Circle thread and redirected it toward ADC's, NDE's, OBE's and other feminist agenda items --- so, what does anyone think about where Elvis is now?

unashamedly and unabashedly,
anonymous

I derailed this Crop Circle thread and redirected it toward ADC's, NDE's, OBE's and other feminist agenda items

I thought feminists had only one item on their agenda: to rule the world and make men their boy toys? That's assuming we aren't replaced by clones of George Clooney.

I should say I overheard this, telepathically, at the SuperWalmart: sometimes, i feel ... so ... used ... just an object ... and i wanna cry ... but i don't know why ... and i go to Walmart and ... just looking at those boxes of chocolates ... my thighs begin to swell ... i swear ... and George Clooney ... child, he'll do ... if Tom Kidman isn't available ... and then i perchance glance a kodachrome pic, on the cover of a tabloid, in the checkout line, an intricate and beautiful crop circle ... and everything's a little better for awhile

tom de la cruz

OK, wise guys. Get focused, will ya?

JB, I really do want to explore other instances of paranormal phenomena. How about another thread on one or two, maybe some of those you've referred us to above.

Agreed, Brad, the art form itself needs to be appreciated. Being a total klutz at some of this, I stand in awe at the designs in fields. And while I'm sure that there are some clever groups who go out into fields on moonlit nights with their sticks and strings and flattening boards, well . . . I'm not sure that's all there is to it.

Like that this circle, which appeared overnight in a field in Great Britain (why so many there?). The author of the web page explains what you'd have to do to make such a design . . . kind of tongue in cheek, but quite convincing, I believe. This page also shows how to make some of these circles. Note that some of them require stamping down the grass to make the pattern, then later raising it up again.

This web site is definitely of the "believer" category. Be sure to scroll down the page to see the Quicktime movie. It describes all sorts of anomalies associated with authentic circles, and states: For a few decennia now we have a new phenomenon: crop circles. Is it a hoax? Is it of an alien origin? From the civil point of view we do not know. Some guys named D. and D., who turned out to have contacts with the american and british Intelligence Agencies, undermined in 1991 public belief by stating that they at least made 300 of them since 1978 (against 9000 of them registered all over the world in 1999). On request though they were not able to reproduce any of them to a satisfying degree that could match with the real phenomenon. The guys today maintain a (professional) website instructing on how to make your own circles. Apparently this is an action of legally covering it up (see also a Crash Course on Crop Circles). That Crash Course link is instructive, as it has evidence to discredit the hoaxers who claimed to have made some and bragged about it on tv.

On the "natural explanation" side, there's http://www.circlemakers.org , which demonstrates how the art is accomplished. The "believers" claim this group is intentionally decieving everyone. There's also http://www.thenoiseroom.com/hoax1.htm , in which the art is actually demonstrated.

Ahh, well, maybe the most interesting thing is our response to the phenomenon.

Phil

Now that Brad and I have wrestled control of our keyboards back from those sarcastic aliens (whom I suppose are on their way back to J-Pax and B-Pax) ...

Phil wrote:

quote:

Ahh, well, maybe the most interesting thing is our response to the phenomenon.

Es verdad. This, alone, is worthy of a thread.

I've been brainstorming just this very thing: credulity, incredulity, skepticism, open-mindedness, gullibility, agnosticism, gnosticism, epistemological hubris/humility, ontological un/certainty ... why?

And so, with Pilate, everyone asks: What Is Truth? and not merely, what is the truth.

I'll go last.
pax tibi,
jb

And so, with Pilate, everyone asks: [i]What Is Truth? and not merely, what is the truth.[/i]

I think there are different ways of approaching that, JB (yes, a serious response). Certainly there's scientific truth, which can be verified through the scientific method. It would seem that a phenomenon so objectively manifest as a crop circle could be submitted to that kind of scrutiny. The little studying I've done of this during the past two days doesn't point to much of that sort of inquiry, however. Of course, a group just coming forth and saying they do the circles and then showing how is pretty convincing! But then you read other groups which critique that in convincing ways--like the virtual impossibility of pulling off some of those complicated patterns with such precision in just a few hours overnight.

Outside of the scientific method, what are we left with? If your wife says she loves you, how do you know it's true? Her behavior, of course, along with your affective and intuitive sense that she's sincere and really intends this. Such does not permit examination by the scientific method, but there is surely truth at work, there.

So when Pilate asks Jesus "What is truth?" and Jesus has spent three years revealing God's love through teaching, healing, and working miracles, it is Pilate who comes across a little dense. Notice that Jesus doesn't reply. What he might have said (very presumptuous, I know) is that "The Truth about God which I have revealed has been made plain for all to see and experience. One can have other beliefs about God if they wish, but please do not act so confused about the Truth that I have proclaimed."

I won't go into the philosophical dimension, as sifting what is true there is almost impossible since Hegel and, later, the post-modern critique.

Suffice it to say that, to me, truth is given form and substance according to one's beliefs, and so one must be aware of what one believes, and why. We view many things as true because of our beliefs, and that's not so bad, only that doesn't mean it can be proven . . . nor that it should be. It's when we adhere to what can be proven as untrue that things get a little screwy. . . even pathological.

Phil

And so, with Pilate, everyone asks: What Is Truth? and not merely, what is the truth.

Phil wrote:

quote:

I think there are different ways of approaching that

Ooh, ooh, ooh ... a nibble on my line ... maybe a little epistemological pluralism, even ..

and also wrote:

quote:

Certainly there's scientific truth, which can be verified through the scientific method.

Look at the bobber! The cork is twisiting and jumping!!!

then said:

quote:

I won't go into the philosophical dimension

Darn! He got away!!!

Let me change baits. Maybe he'll bite on this treble hook of constructive postmodernism, critical realism and epistemological pluralism if I spray it with some hierarchical chain of being auxiliary hypotheses to complement his core commitment to such a panentheistic ontology as would be consistent with a Maritain-inspired Thomistic Metaphysics, Jungian Depth Psychology, Rahnerian Transcendental Method of Anthropology and ... DARN! I dropped my rod and reel in the bleeping lake!!!

Next.

pax tibi,
jb

First off: JB you�re killing me. If laughter is the best medicine then I�m overdosing. Cease and desist. Does anyone remember the Monty Python sketch in which British counter-intelligence during WWII develops a joke so funny that it's deadly? They translate the joke into German so their troops can use it against the Germans on the front lines. For safety�s sake, during the translation, a translator can work on only one of the words in the joke. One time one of the translators accidentally read two words of the joke and went catatonic.

Phil said: JB, I really do want to explore other instances of paranormal phenomena.

I really don�t care how crackers any of you may think I am but sometimes I get small glimpses of the future. There�s just a certain feeling of knowing that occurs and usually I�m not even quite conscious of it until the event happens. Unfortunately (or fortunately) it is quite rare and usually concerns only trivial things. No lottery number requests will be given. This could also be related to something else that is strange. Sometimes I�m thinking in my mind of something I want to say and then the other person says the exact thing almost word for word. It happened tonight. My older sister and I used to do this all the time and we both thought it was kind of strange. Shut up, JB. I know what you were going to say.

I'm not sure that's all there is to it.

Nor am I. Frankly, if you�ve ever seen a truly talented artist at work drawing something, you�ll be struck by thoughts of the spiritual. Artists practice their skills but the origin of this talent is truly mysterious. I�d be less impressed by knowing that aliens painted those crop circles then I would by knowing where this talent comes from. And apparently amazing abilities are inside each of us. They could just be considered untapped. There was a good article in Scientific American about savants (such as the one Dustin Hoffman portrayed in �Rain Man� which was based on a real person). Almost all of these savants have some type of underdevelopment or damage to the left side of their brains. And there are many instances of �normal� people who had never before showed any artistic talent suddenly having such talent after having an injury to or degeneration of the left side of their brains. No, JB, I�m not banging on the left side of my head right now with the keyboard.

Ahh, well, maybe the most interesting thing is our response to the phenomenon.

Certainly we are all susceptible to falling prey to charlatans because of what we want to believe. But that we want to believe something tells us something about ourselves. There�s really no way to put into words most of the experiences we have. I�m not sure words (even mathematics) are adequate to describe the world. Nor am I sure that �feelings� are any more reliable. But we become so attuned to the �rational,� logical and predictable. We become so used to describing in words our thoughts and feelings and emotions. We humans become so good at using symbols to describe everything that we live our lives as if the symbols represent reality. They don�t. Our senses see but a part of the world and yet because we are all made out of �world stuff� we could certainly have many connections to things that we have no symbolic way to describe. Thus it would not surprise me that we get glimpses of things that are neither describable, provable or repeatable. Our convenient symbol for this is the paranormal. But it could, in fact, be quite normal.

re: Certainly we are all susceptible to falling prey to charlatans because of what we want to believe. But that we want to believe something tells us something about ourselves. from B-Pax

And Dr. Schwartz speaks in his book about what he calls skeptomania , an almost pathological obsession some folks have, usually otherwise extremely bright naturalists/materialists/atheists, with debunking anything whatsoever having to do with supernaturalistic hypotheses for paranormal and anomalous experiences and data. . Folks like Schwartz are saying nothing more than that their data are not inconsistent with a supernaturalistic explanation. The are not saying the data provide conclusive proof. The same is true for theologians like Jack Haught, who maintains that an hierarchical universe with a chain of being operating on emergent complexity, which has a realm transcendent to ours and suggesting telos , is not inconsistent with the data we have. He is not saying we can conclusively prove such a transcendent realm but only that our experiences are consonant with such an hypothesis. Such a transcendent realm would, in principle, grasp us but be difficult for us to grasp, that is our data (related to our core ontological commitments/hypotheses) would be indirect and our meta=physical hunches, more or less, confirmed through inference, intuition and testable auxiliary hypotheses, hypotheses which are logically consistent, internally coherent and externally congruent and which inspire new research and have explanatory efficacy while providing very meaningful contexts to support our worldviews. I ramble and can't see what I am typing without my glasses, while Mr. Sandman's dust is still in my eyes --- but the point is that many hardnosed skeptics have untestable, unprovable a priori ontological presuppositions from which they bootstrap their epistemologies, which indeed have no firmer a foundation than anyone else's ontological presuppositions. This type of rationalism, which is kin to logical positivism and radical empiricism, is no more convincing to me than the fideistic positions some believers take and is a form of fideism itself. Their main claim to fame is to point to the efficacy of the scientific method and they ask: What, in principle, can we not know ---other than the earliest moments after the Big Bang and the deepest structures of matter? To which I reply: We can not, in principle, solve the ontological riddle, Why is there something rather than nothing, and we must go with the notion that it is not how things are but THAT things are which is the mystical. Thus fides et ratio, faith and reason, can be married and it is not an unreasonable position to believe in the Resurrection Event for which we have much evidence, bolstered even in these latter days by signs and wonders.

Gotta run,
pax tibi
jb

For those of you who still have heart for this topic and want to see some cool geoglyphs (and a whole lot more mysterious stuff), check out this page. What do you think?

Phil Mulder
OS X-files

check out this page. What do you think?

THE DOGON TRIBE OF AFRICA

"Several specialists now claim they have found the long-sought "final evidence" of visits made to earth by ancient astronauts. The myths of the Dogon tribesmen of Mall, West Africa, contain astronomical knowledge which the native people could have neither learned by themselves nor guessed. Obviously, the researchers say, some more advanced civilization told them. These fascinating Dogon legends speak of Jupiter's four moons and Saturn's rings, which were not seen by human beings until the invention of the telescope. They speak of the star Sirius and of a pair of invisible companions. One of them circles Sirius every fifty years, the legends declare, and is made of a metal that is the heaviest thing in the universe. Astronomers have discovered that such an object (called "Sirius-B") does exist but only the most sophisticated and sensitive instruments -- unavailable, of course, to the Dogons -- can detect it."
from The Sirius Mystery, by James Oberg

-----

Now I know where the K-Pax script writers got some of their ideas.

Brad Scully
I fought the Jobs and the Jobs lost.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread after my trudging non-sequitur! I think I've depleted all of the neurotransmitters in my left brain in the past 72 hours by posting my apologetics for natural theology on several different listservs and then running back to answer questions and overcome objections based on each epistemology's competing claims for the most congruence, most consonance, most consistency and most coherency with ... with what?

Now, I'm going to go lie down, on my left side, and see if I can funnel some of my right-brained secretions through my corpus callosum into the left hemisphere while looking at a jpeg slide show of crop circles and listening to "Chelsea Morning".

pax,
jb

check out this page. What do you think?

I�m more interested in hearing what you think, Phil. That link is full of interesting images, sometimes holey images, which contain things that could pass for UFOs. Many of these paintings seem to suggest aliens may be the source of �divine� influence. So one possible scenario is that advanced aliens visited earth hundreds of thousands of years ago. Perhaps they were on some archeological expedition. They encountered a variety of primitive beings including apes. They looked at these apes and thought �we will inject a little bit of DNA and re-create them in our image.� One day they will return (judgment day, no doubt). Even the image of God from the Sistine Chapel shows God riding in what could be interpreted as some sort of vessel.

Perhaps we retain some type of memory of this visitation and it expresses itself through our most sacred art. It also seems to be assumed that people still catch glimpses of these aliens; that they are still here among us. There are paintings of aliens that look remarkably like what people describe today. Either way it is clear that it is quite natural to associate the sky or �above� as looking toward the creator, toward heaven.

We build tall churches with spires to reach up to our creators, to get their attention, much like the Nazca lines of Peru. Of course these advanced aliens don�t need our guideposts in order to find us. But we wish to find them. But they are already in us � their DNA. The Kingdom of God is within. Of course the symmetrical and streamlined shapes of the alien ships can mean only one thing; that they are here among us and that they live underneath and travel through the oceans. Why is water used for baptism? Why are we thrust under water as a prelude to being closer to God? Why the myth of the virgin birth? It is a memory of our creation by genetic engineering that required no father?

Okay, better stop before my head explodes.

Brad, I don't really know what to make of some of this.

Consider Genesis 6: 1-4:
"When men began to multiply on earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of heaven saw how beautiful the daughters of man were, and so they took for their wives many of them as they chose. Then the Lord said: 'My spirit shall not remain in man forever, since he is but flesh. His days shall compreise one hundred and twenty years.'
"At that time the Nephilim appeared on earth (as well as later), after the sons of heaven had intercourse with the daughters of man, who bore them sons. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."

Yep, that's in every Bible, not just special ones, and every commentary I've ever read sates that the Nephilim refer to some kind of mythical race, whose origins are unknown.

It's obvious that these are mythical memories, and they serve no apparent purpose in relating Jewish history, except that that's where God states there will be a limit on the life span of human life. Also, the next passage describes the preparations for the Flood, fwiw.

There's also mention of a fiery chariot (or whirlwind, translations vary) which carried Ezekiel away (see 2 Kings 9-12). Interesting, especially in that he is one who appears to Christ during Christ's transfiguration on Mt. Tabor.

It could well be that what the Bible calls angels are extra-terrestrials, and it could be that there are good and bad ones.

Having one of the busier web Christian spiritual sites on the net (which isn't saying much, believe me), I get all kinds of links and guestbook entries. Some are pretty "normal," but then there is this one, which I really did enjoy visiting. Some of the UFO clips are intriguing; if not fakes, they're darned good.

So where does that leave us? Well, my faith wouldn't be shaken if extra-terrestrials were involved in the earth story. But where the truth is to be found here, I don't know.

Phil

Brad wrote:

<<Frankly, if you’ve ever seen a truly talented artist at work drawing something, you’ll be struck by thoughts of the spiritual. Artists practice their skills but the origin of this talent is truly mysterious. I’d be less impressed by knowing that aliens painted those crop circles then I would by knowing where this talent comes from. And apparently amazing abilities are inside each of us. >>

I've had this sort of experience. I wouldn't venture to say just how "truly" talented I am, but I've created some things and afterwards thought to myself, "Wow....how did I do that?" (There is a real "high" that comes with it, too.)

I know that writers also experience this, especially fiction writers, as they wonder just WHERE their stories come from??? It makes one a bit insecure, though. You're experience a sense of fear that the world will find out that you're a fake, since you KNOW that you can't quite take all the credit for your creation.

If you read "The Artist's Way" by Julia Cameron, she attributes our creative powers to "The Great Creator...(God, the Higher Power)...whatever words work for you." She says that you don't have to understand this "spiritual electricity" in order to use it.

Enough on that.....I think I'm getting away from the subject of crop circles.

"Wow....how did I do that?" (There is a real "high" that comes with it, too.)

Anne, that�s a great description. On those rare (very rare) occasions when I do something that�s a step above a �hack� that�s what it feels like, although � strangely � instead of feeling like a fake (which is what the rest of my bloody life feels like) it feels real.

Enough on that.....I think I'm getting away from the subject of crop circles.

Let�s do it!

"At that time the Nephilim appeared on earth (as well as later), after the sons of heaven had intercourse with the daughters of man, who bore them sons. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."

Man�don�t those pseudo-scientists have enough ammunition with which to spin their theories without the Bible of all things giving them more? Sheesh.

About things like this I (obviously) just don�t know. One hates to invest too much intellectual energy in the thousands of possible (and crank) theories out there. I mean, I�ve got only so much (not much) faith in reserve and it must be parceled out carefully. I find it fun to speculate on these sorts of things but, in truth, I generally don�t believe much of the stuff people construct with the odd painting here, the odd artifact there. Granted, at one time plate tectonics, evolution or the modern model of the solar system was laughed at for being too �out there.� With that in my, and with caution thrown to the wind...

The Nephilim, huh? Not only that but �When men began to multiply on earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of heaven saw how beautiful the daughters of man were, and so they took for their wives many of them as they chose.� I assume the �sons of heaven� are neither man nor Nephilim. I really can�t blame them for getting in on the whole �begotten� act. Those must have been absolutely GORGEOUS women, being that it was before the time of business suits and all. [Sexist reference � deduct 5 points]

So, in no greater source than the Bible itself, we have references to strange beings. God, as a concept, I can handle. But Nephilim and �sons of heaven�? What are we to make of this? Well certainly, according to the Bible, God is a creator. Maybe we weren�t the first sentient beings he created. And people who just hate the evolutionary theory of man�s development might find the idea of extra-terrestrial beings mating with early man (oops, I mean woman) more palatable. They say we were made in God�s image. Fine. But that might mean that Adam and Eve looked quite different than we do today. Perhaps they looked like an entirely different species altogether. After all, we�ve got to account for the �cross-breading� with the �sons of heaven� and perhaps even the Nephilim (maybe they just gave us make-overs).

I wonder if the traits of �original� man still show themselves from time to time? There�s decent enough evidence (although not absolute) that Neanderthals (or was it Cro-Magnons?) weren�t displaced by modern hominids as much as they were simply absorbed through cross-breading. And they say that we can still see evidence of this in people; look for the protruding brow ridges and other �ancient� features, much like you see in Ron Perlman, the actor (no offense, Ron). Maybe we were much more ape-like as originally created (no offense God). Maybe hairy men, who are used to the gorilla comparisons, can now proudly proclaim their heritage as truly being one of God�s own? Or perhaps we have all this sin in the world because God�s original creation was watered down by the �sons of heaven� (them lusty tinkerers). Maybe Beethoven and Einstein give hint of our more ancient selves.

I dare anyone to poke holes in this most rigidly researched theory.