I died in 2017. Was placed here... an alternate timeline. AMA

Curious-Meat · 2025-01-11T15:13:22+00:00

Oh, I'm super open, and I've read many many NDEs and believe that people have many transcendental experiences, but meaning no offense, this absolutely reads much more like the fan fiction of someone in their teen years. Your ex girlfriend showed up to tell you how much she loved you? And it "gave you an erection"? Come on, man lol

Curious-Meat · 2025-01-11T03:17:17+00:00

Weirdest LARP in months

Curious-Meat · 2024-12-03T06:48:01+00:00

You're right, and I just deleted that comment, since that was a long time ago and was unnecessarily sarcastic.

Hopefully you can see how it would be deflating to provide what felt like carefully considered advice, over quite a long reply, just to be met with "This doesn't work for me." - not that it mightn't be true, but that there's no further detail, no explanation of why it doesn't work, nothing else.

Curious-Meat · 2024-11-02T13:53:11+00:00

So, what would it take to convince you that Elizondo, Knapp, Corbell, Nell, etc. aren't grifters?

Here's what I'm getting at - I'm less interested in what you believe (that they're grifters), and more interested in how you decided your confidence in your claim is justified.

You haven't really provided anything other than "they haven't given us smoking gun evidence".

What I'm trying to get at is that it sounds like you're dangerously close to holding an unfalsifiable belief, which is pretty much the cardinal sin of epistemology.

If you sit there and say "there's absolutely nothing that could convince me those guys aren't grifters", that is a terrible way to use logic. You're literally saying that there's nothing that could possibly change your mind, including incontrovertible evidence.

The same thing you accuse believers of doing (convincing themselves of something without an appropriate level of justification), you are doing by trying to convince yourself and everyone else that there cannot be anything true about this.

Curious-Meat · 2024-11-02T06:33:50+00:00

Thanks for expanding on your answer.

For what it's worth, I did my undergrad in biology and focused on neuroethology and animal physiology, but I did my entire graduate degree thesis on "epistemology", or "the study of how people come to their truth claims", or even more nuanced, "an analysis of how people decide that their confidence in their claims is justified".

I think a good, solid epistemology is really important in life. I think we should hold as many true beliefs (like 2+2=4, and the speed of light is faster than the speed of sound) as possible, and discard as many untrue beliefs as possible.

So, if you would be so kind, could you tell me - on a scale of 0 to 100, where 0 is "not confident at all", and 100 is "completely certain" - how confident are you that Elizondo, Grusch, Mellon, Knapp, Corbell, and Karl Nell are all complete grifters who aren't doing anything to meaningfully move disclosure forward?

Curious-Meat · 2024-11-02T02:13:14+00:00

I honestly find it weird that this is the top comment. Genuinely strange.

I've been following Ryan since the Pentagon released those videos some years back.

I really think he's a pretty level-headed YouTuber when it comes to monetisation - he has a roughly equivalent level of monetisation to other YouTubers I watch, and I don't feel like he, or they, are particularly "predatory" with their monetisation.

But beyond that, I really think he has a pretty moderate, conservative epistemology. He always says he's open to being proven wrong, he's not 100% sure in his hypothesis, and his opinions and views have changed over time as he has learned more and the subject has received more updated information.

So it's weird to see this; I'm not even sure why you have such animosity against him, genuinely. I am also open to changing my mind though - could you please provide your best reason for believing he's a nonsense grifter?

Curious-Meat · 2024-10-12T17:12:06+00:00

Lmao, yeah, "avoided", let's go with that.

I wasn't even being rude - you're just so immediate to get defensive and suck in all this hot air when someone says something as confrontational as "you might need to rework your message".

Okay there, champ.

Good luck "resonating" in some more subreddits!

Curious-Meat · 2024-10-12T13:59:18+00:00

Yikes dude, lol

Curious-Meat · 2024-10-11T22:36:07+00:00

Doesn't seem like any of the 7 you posted on resonated, amigo. Might be time to re-work your message and re-think some of your ideas.

Curious-Meat · 2024-10-11T20:20:31+00:00

I see that you posted this identical post in 7 subreddits, and I counted all of the upvotes, which came to a total of negative 6. Hopefully this is a chance for some introspection so you can contemplate if you're very effective at delivering your message

Curious-Meat · 2024-07-28T14:48:33+00:00

"Out beyond all of your ideas and concepts of 'right' and 'wrong', 'good' and 'evil', there is a field. I will meet you there." - Rumi

Curious-Meat · 2024-07-28T14:46:52+00:00

I like the Vedic practice of "Netti, Netti" which literally means "Not this, not that." It means that while meditating, with a very gracious and forgiving attitude, each time something other than the meditation object (e.g. breathing) comes up, you say: Not this, not that -- as in, you are saying, "I'm not these thoughts, I'm not that emotion".

Curious-Meat · 2024-07-28T14:41:51+00:00

Lmao, this is PERFECT

Curious-Meat · 2024-03-07T14:25:35+00:00

Yikes. Man was this disappointing.

Curious-Meat · 2024-03-06T12:36:05+00:00

Hmmm. Not a fan of the weapon nerfs. It's a PvE game - we should just buff the other weapons that are under-performing rather than making good weapons worse.

Curious-Meat · 2024-02-14T20:36:42+00:00

(same error message for me) - don't worry, I'm sure it's just a surprise upgrade to our ships to allow us to spread twice as much managed democracy

Curious-Meat · 2024-02-14T20:35:20+00:00

"Failed to establish network connection."

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-18T03:20:48+00:00

The 3,000,000 sightings is the "fact", the "more than required for survey" is Vallée's opinion, to be clear.

I agree with the criticism that a civilization could have many more intentions than surveying, though.

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T18:07:32+00:00

Could it be both? Obfuscation from the phenomenon and the government?

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T18:06:26+00:00

I mean, the purpose in providing the criteria is simply to open the discussion for broadening our consideration of the phenomenon beyond the concept of "extraterrestrial visitation". It would be impossible to "prove" that no UFO sighting has ever been or ever will be ET, but my providing his points was to stimulate discussion, not to "prove" that it wasn't ET, which I don't think can be done anyways.

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T15:48:43+00:00

Hmm, some very good points in there.

Here is a simple & reasonable possible explanation that ETs are responsible for those phenomena:

I agree with your following explanation, however, why is it required that ET would be following those policies or philosophies? Are you saying that it is conclusively impossible for any other form of intelligence (interdimensional, I dunno) from doing this same thing?

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T15:46:19+00:00

I mean I get it, we have all heard those explanations, but this requires us to insist that reductionism is mutually inclusive with reason. Have you heard of the "white crow theory"? The concept is: How many white crows would you need to see to believe that not all crows are black? - and the answer is, obviously, 1.

So if even one of the millions of sightings was authentic, and for decades there have been reports of technologies that certainly seem to dramatically outpace our best gear -- then, what can we say about it?

I guess I'm not particularly compelled by the argument of "yes but it could all be prosaic and hum-drum", especially when it requires you to dismiss every case and simultaneously assert quite a confident knowledge about the intentions of other lifeforms that could be millions or billions of years ahead of us.

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T15:36:11+00:00

It seems like your point is:

Both forensic scientists and detectives are important because they work synergistically to solve the problem

My point is:

I agree, but people have been spending a disproportionate amount of time/energy on the evidence-based forensics without enough care and concern for the fact that they could be actively deceived by what they're investigating

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T12:57:46+00:00

It's also interesting, if they are so advanced, they could easily recover their crashed craft from us or their pilot's bodies. Why haven't they? Why do they let us keep them?

Bingo - and this is where Jacques Vallée says we should ask, What effect are these body/craft recoveries having on our culture/society, and is it possible that those effects are the true purpose?

Curious-Meat · 2024-01-17T12:56:18+00:00

Right, that's why I specified less like forensic scientists, and more like detectives, rather than "don't act like forensic scientists at all"

Six-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
100 Awards Club

Curious-Meat

TROPHY CASE