Thursday, March 12, 2015

Extraordinary Evidence For Extraordinary Claims?

The Crop Circle As Intelligence Inseminating Agent? 

Extraordinary Evidence For Extraordinary Claims?  

Suzanne Taylor's What On Earth? Inside The Crop Circle Mystery
By Alfred Lehmberg


Submitted for the approval of ones needlessly impacted and alternatively spastic cognitive colon: Occam's razor is errantly used to adhere, preferentially, to the "most prosaic" hypothesis as the default one.  Bold heresy leavened with bald anti-science!  I understand and commiserate.

Seeing equine tracks, we're patronized, "don't theorize Zebras where Horses are likely."  With equal smugness we're warned, "Don't look for evidence of 'alternative intelligence' in crop formations where the activities of the misinforming, the misinformed, or the mentally ill are likely."   I accuse that this is an error of understanding, employment, and attitude with regard to the Occam meme.  Aristotle, it's argued—eminently self-limiting—fails to deliver on issues beyond the purely mechanical.  We appeal, of needs, to a marginalized Plato.

With regard to that "misapplied" Occam, I offer instead that always satisfying Occam's simplicity is not even what Occam, himself, proposed, eh? See, it may be that our wrongfully fearful reluctance to "complicate a hypothesis" is a measure of how much imagination we lack or even how unbrave we are.  Sometimes, consider: one must complicate the hypothesis, of  those aforementioned needs.

Too, BEWARE!  Anyone warning about crossing the line into "fantasy" is missing the point by the obligatory parsec!  See, today's "fantasy" is ever tomorrow's "reality."

Indeed, humanity "thinks" it, time passes—less time all the time—and it is "so"!  The point: you cannot easily, accurately or dependably draw the line separating these entities of fantasy and reality in key considerations, I propose. Further—and "Key"—is the actuality we endure of mistaking reality for misidentified fantasy, regularly, and so facilitating the aggregate human misery. 

Moreover, the "facts" of reality as opposed to fantasy seem to have goalposts moving all over the field and even to the other side of trepidation's town... or across the freaking galaxy!  It is argued, too, that fantasy begets reality in the same fashion that "order" leaps from "chaos."  Haldane, remember, said "Truth is not only stranger than we imagine but stranger than we can imagine."  We're largely clueless as to even that "imagining," eh?

The ill-motivated employers of Occam alluded to above; however, remain smug.  They are confident that their unearned, unqualified, and so absurd hubris will continue to show that their understanding is enough to validate their worldviews, forever crediting a science ironically enjoyed as a... religion.  See, these whistle loudly as they cross our existential graveyard.

It remains, as Terence McKenna points out, "where's it writ large" that "talking monkeys" are supposed to feel comfortable with regard to having things "understood" and in tight little bags "all figured out," ...ever?  See, a proper humility demands we avoid all hubris—not be too proudly secure in our hypothesis; at the end of the day that that hubris is likely BS. In other words, enjoy the "ride" and don't anticipate a "destination," it's proposed.  You likely won’t get to your destination in the first place and, getting there, it's not what you would have thought, anyway, in the second.  We're better to "Evolve" our understanding... as we go; enjoy the ride.

Also, do not dare to be bored! The philosophy provoking our "complicated hypothesis," apropos of a justified humility, has abundant validity and vitality.  This is to say: more Plato! Less Aristotle!

...And, I say again, sometimes it is required to complicate the hypothesis!  Occam, himself, doesn't rule that out. He says, "don't complicate without necessity."  There's a lot of room to move given "necessity"!  Sometime your necessities are real. It seems reasonable to be on guard for the path newly traveled in them, as a result.

Crop Circles:  Sundry incarnations of "Doug and Dave," Gaia consciousness, or "crop-circling Mother-ships"?  What do we know; we're talking monkeys!  We're but a few countable breaths from veldt or savanna and humanity's entelechy is nonexistent where it is not wholly infantile.  Read the papers.  This explains our unwarranted smugness.  We don't have it together.  "We know not," as a species, "and know not... that we know not."

Suzanne Taylor


To the chase: Suzanne Taylor!  She was a talented character actor of conspicuous credit in the sixties, even stealing scenes from the likes of Mary Tyler Moore and Bill Bixby.  She out-cuted Billy Mumy once... That's tough from ANY wheelhouse!

She is, et sig al,  a Summa Cum Laude graduate of New York University and a tireless natural student of an obvious "para-existential."  That's right, folks, it's living and breathing.

More to the point and the exploration of this essay, she is a producer of compelling film documentaries of significant note regarding these subjects.  Finally, a mature and intelligently considered woman rather seeing the handwriting on the wall, she is an explorer of human consciousness and the expansion, elevation, and enlargement of same.  My hat is decidedly off.

With a focused deliberation fully aware that "reach must always exceed grasp," she has the requisite humility to remember, for all her considerable experience, that she is—as we all are—a "talking monkey," still... even if a comely one and even as that intrepid ape bravely reaches for the stars!

Crop Circles?  Sneer at your peril.  As the executive producer of William Gazecki's film, Quest For Truth (2002), a landmark production regarding these altogether baffling crop formations, Suzanne Taylor shows that she is aware of the singular mystery they very unthreateningly illustrate.  The errant Occam Thumpers alluded to above ignore abject mystery as the work of a "misinforming" or "mentally ill" leading a "misled" down the primrose path in the Crop Circle's regard, but that seems to be just more whistling passed the graveyard, eh?  

See, ss it is well pointed out in Taylor's films, where are the failed crop circle attempts?  Where are the expected mistakes invariably made in the construction of any complicated artifice?  Where are these selfless, anonymous, and genius-class artists of incredible note who produce the "genuine formation" without recognition, reward, or remuneration

Finally, what information can be gleaned from these formations that could be said not to be from the artifice of humankind, but must be, by its very nature, alien, or of the... "other"?  From what other?

Enter now Suzanne Taylor's current film, What On EarthInside The Crop Circle Mystery.  Introduced, also, may be just the kind of smoking-gun artifice alluded to last paragraph!

Remembering that truth is stranger than we CAN imagine, and that an alien entelechy may only be masquerading as an "interplanetary" or simple "spaceman" so as not to alarm us regarding their actual if un-Englishable composition, corporeality, or agenda... as McKenna and Vallee point out.  A question is begged, reader. 

How would this conjectured "unspeakable and unutterable other," vastly superior in every regard to the point of that same inexpressibility—and understanding a nascent humanity only too well—how might this "entity apart from us" approach an emerging humanity at all?  

Presuming, for argument, that it's not like us and aspiring first for domination, control, and subjugation, preferring for reasons all its own, also, to have us keep a shred of our self-respect and sense of security in the exchange... would they know that a singularly non-threatening contact might be communicated in something we could eat, implying that it is a nourishing thing, perhaps, and leading to some kind of new growth?

Further, might they not first go halves on an observation we have shared, already, about the nature of a "reality" apropos of that which we, ourselves, have demonstrated an understanding of... since before the common era?  I present the smoking gun. Revealed: Squaring The Circle.

A marriage of humanity and the divine... 


Simply put, as Taylor takes pains to do so, Squaring The Circle concerns the process of constructing a square out of any given circle, using no measurement devices and only a straight edge and compass... ...where the area of the one is equal to the area of the other, or where the perimeter of the one is equal to the circumference of the other.  Because Pi (3.14>) is what's known as a "transcendental number," it is said to be impossible to construct with 100% accuracy.  Still, we humans can get close.

Why is squaring the circle important enough to be reflected in the architecture of all civilizations and at all times?  Simply put, it is a symbol of humankind's relationship with the divine.  Man and God. 

It is a marriage of "God," as it's symbolized in the "circle" and the human being, as symbolized by the "square."  It is a wedding of the spiritual and the Flesh.  It is the TOTAL reality.  As above, so below... ...as above!  It's the symbol for the Greek "agape," or the highest form of love.

As I said before... we humans can get close.  Before 1983, Taylor informs us, if the literature were combed for such, one could find four or five abstruse and unpretty methods of Squaring The Circle encompassing varying degrees of accuracy... most of these are tortured and inelegant or awkward as already stated... even ugly. 

...After 1983?
  
Worked into the cereal formations of even the earliest circles, Taylor demonstrates, are currently recognized if jaw-dropping solutions to this age old problem; moreover, they are simple, they are elegant, and they are beautiful!  There's your tell.

Taylor reveals that some 50 new, very handsome, and graceful ways to Square the Circle can be derived from these enigmatic crop formations.  Let that sink in.

Now, another big tell:  Who steps forward to claim authorship of these astounding solutions to an ancient old problem?  No one, Reader!  There are only the circles, Sir and Madam, enigmatic circles speaking in a logos that can be beheld as holistic elements in a language that is breathtakingly beautiful!  Where did we do THAT before 1983?

Consolingly, our fragile sensibilities protected and accounted for, these glyphs seem to be a communication with an "other" that can be ignored if too unsettling. They can be laughed at if one feels the need!  They can be or marginalized where one is provoked by his intellectual panic to presume that necessity...

But... for the one able to embody a justified humility!   ...For the one able to imagine a  likely accurate perception of some "lower station" humanity must hold as the cosmic is liable to measure these things?  Swallow hard and hunker down, reader!  Do they not become that existential expression of just what the Cartesian skeptibunky or reflex-reductionist—faux-skeptic—pretends they want:  Extraordinary evidence supporting extraordinary claims!  Smoke THAT, arrogant and officious klasskurtxian swine!

Extraordinary evidence supporting extraordinary claims!


Verily, these "skeptics" pontificate and proclaim their baseless antithesis while "not knowing" even more profoundly than I don't "know."  They, the most titled, the most lettered, the most rewarded, the best educated, and supported by the most well-positioned and powerful of us... these won't even lookThat's science?  No.  That's self-interested and cowardly hubris!

This proceeding is enough and abundant... What else is great in Suzanne Taylor's monumental testament to the state of the art that is our inadequate understanding of these seemingly very informative crop glyphs?   What ELSE could be in there?!  Well, much more than can have a stick shaken at it in under 2500 words, by Crom... but there are some 20 categories covered in the film; there is potential for abundant satisfaction.   

Explored are the strange energies encountered in the glyphs, their relevance as art, and the misinformation provoking a suspicious disinterest commonly attributed to the consideration of them.  Additionally, one can become informed how crop circles may be (1) a vehicle for a re-connection to some lost wisdom of the past, (2) where crop circles are revealed to be, truly, a global phenomenon, (3) why they seem to cluster in England, and (4) when they seem to lend themselves to consciousness, hopefulness, and healing!  Geometry, (5) as has already been pointed out, is revealed as extraordinary evidence supporting extraordinary claims, an evidence leading humanity to efficacious new world views, perhaps!  Finally, arrayed are some tentative conclusions that can be drawn from all the preceding.  Breathtaking stuff!  Though, bringing tears to my eyes, there is one further item...

From what I have been able to see and hear thus far over the years... ...Michael Glickman, A-List croppie, just may be the absolute coolest person on the planet.  This is in full recognition that he has confidently and perhaps even accurately assessed most ufologists as time-wasting "trainspotters."  I digress.

Michael Glickman
As a feature in the DVD extras, Glickman, a very sincere, compelling, and gifted speaker, gave a tribute/eulogy to the late Doctor John Mack—a Pulitzer Prize winning Harvard Chair holder, psychiatrist, and late-blooming croppie in his own right—as moving as it was humorous and as respectful as it was insightful.  Glickman wept unobtrusively at one point... I suspect that there was not a damp eye in the packed house.  Certainly none at my home where, alone, I went ahead and got all kinds of "obtrusive."   Very poignant, reader, and worth the price of admission all by itself.

Check him out: http://www.michaelglickmanoncropcircles.com/

Reader!  Stop and think for a minute!  We live in the remotest defilade of some forgotten and backwater corner of a universe so expansive, grand, unreachable, unknowable, ...and incomprehensible that it could qualify as God the "unnamable."  Perhaps some thought could be given to complicating a hypothesis in its regard, or at least be less fearful of same. 

We have self-aware imaginations for just that purpose; we could show a little more courage in their use.  Suzanne Taylor, eminently sane and seemingly sober, does not appear to be crippled with that fear.  ...And we can take a further lesson, reader: 

Be intelligently and imaginatively brave and mighty forces will come to your aid. 

Read on and check the link at the bottom!

You don't do this with a board and twine!

.,¸¸,.»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«***»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«·.,¸¸,.

.,¸¸,.»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«***»§«,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§«·.,¸¸,.



5 comments:

Suzanne Taylor said...

Can you imagine my surprise when my Google Alert for crop circles led me to this? I thought the cartoon you made for me, that graces my Facebook page, www.facebook.com/CropCircleQueen, was over the top. Are you married? I am yours!!! But so should the world be. This is so intelligent -- the world owes you.

Alfred Lehmberg said...

Thank you ma'am! I am _hugely_ honored. The cartoon of which you speak is the considered work of Dennis Rano. I covet his talent and very much appreciate your validating note.

Suzanne Taylor said...

Oh yes, moving too fast and got you two cyber pals mixed up.

It’s been said that all you need is one other person recognizing you to empower you. I miss having a significant other, as I miss my parents before that, for that kind of support. So, what you’ve done is more comforting to me than you might imagine. It really makes a difference.

WA1UFO said...

Excellent piece of writing! I have often wondered about the blind acceptance of Occam's Razor by the media and mainstream science. It seems odd to me and a symptom of fear, avoidance of damage to comfort zones or intellectual laziness.Reality is a stage set anyway in my humble opinion. Thanks for a great read!

Thomas De Pascale said...

Ive taken this communication quite seriously since I first heard and read about it and have been trying to cleanse or clear my mind of obstacles that might be preventing me from being open enough to see and understand the message. I never seem to run out of my own very simplistic explanations that something is wrong and the messages through the medium is a solution to something we can not or will not recognize just yet. Or, perhaps the refusal to NOT have your cake and eat it too ( at least look at your cake first).
Maybe the most simplistic way of show and tell under these circumstances is just not getting through to us as it seems there are consistencies in the message - in my mind anyway - that if we dont surrender the things we covet with absolute certainty and misjudge as good for all, know there is nothing communal in any of it. This way of blind thinking, that if its good for you it's good for everybody is terrible preparation for the things we face.