Declassified FBI Document: Beings From Other Dimensions Visit Earth Regularly

The definition for interdimensional beings or interdimensional intelligence is usually described as a theoretical or ‘real’ entity that exists in a dimension beyond our own.

Despite the fact that such beings are believed to exist only in science fiction, fantasy and the supernatural, there are numerous Ufologists who refer to them as real beings.

The Interdimensional Hypothesis

The interdimensional hypothesis was proposed by a number of Ufologists like Jacques Vallée who suggests that unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and related events (such as alien sightings) imply visits from beings from other “realities” or “dimensions” that coexist separately with ours.

Some have referred to these beings as visitors from another universe.

In other words, Vallée and other authors suggest that aliens are real but exist not in our dimension, but in another reality, that coexists with our own.

This theory is an alternative to the extraterrestrial hypothesis which suggests that aliens are advanced spacefaring beings that exist in our universe.

The interdimensional hypothesis argues that UFOs are a modern manifestation of a phenomenon that has occurred throughout recorded human history, which in earlier times was attributed to mythological or supernatural creatures — Ancient Astronaut theory.

But despite the fact that modern Ufologists and millions of people around the globe believe we are not alone in this universe, many ufologists and paranormal researchers have embraced the interdimensional Hypothesis, suggesting that it explains the Alien theory in a much smoother way.

Paranormal investigator Brad Steiger wrote that “we are dealing with a multidimensional paraphysical phenomenon that is largely originating from planet Earth.”

Other ufologists, such as John Ankerberg and John Weldon, who also favor the interdimensional hypothesis argue that UFO sightings fit in the spiritualist phenomenon.

Commenting on the disparity between the Extraterrestrial hypothesis and the reports that people have made of UFO encounters, Ankerberg and Weldon wrote that “the UFO phenomenon simply does not behave like extraterrestrial visitors.”

This Interdimensional Hypothesis took a step further in the book UFOs: Operation Trojan Horse published in 1970, where author John Keel linked UFOs to supernatural concepts such as ghosts and demons.

Some advocates of the extraterrestrial theory have embraced some of the ideas set forth by the Interdimensional Hypothesis because it does a better job explaining how ‘aliens’ could travel in space across vast distances.

The distance between the stars makes interstellar travel impractical using conventional means and since no one has demonstrated an antigravity engine or any other machine that would allow a traveler to move across the cosmos at speed faster than light, the Interdimensional Hypothesis makes much more sense.

According to this theory, is not necessary to use any method of propulsion because it maintains that UFOs are not spacecraft, but devices that travel between different realities. However, they still need to get from one reality to the other, right?

One of the benefits of the Interdimensional Hypothesis according to Hilary Evans — a British pictorial archivist, author, and researcher into UFOs and other paranormal phenomena — is that it can explain the apparent ability of UFOs to appear and disappear, not only from sight but from radar; as the interdimensional UFO’s can enter and leave our dimension at will, meaning they have the ability to materialize and dematerialize.

On the other hand, Evans argues that if the other dimension is slightly more advanced than ours, or is perhaps our own future, this would explain the tendency of UFOs to represent technologies close to the future.

Declassified FBI Document — Beings From Other Dimensions Exist
While all of the above may sound like something coming from a sci-fi movie, there is a peculiar declassified top-secret document in the FBI archives which speaks of interdimensional beings, and how their ‘spacecraft’ have the ability to materialize and dematerialize in our own dimension.

The document can be accessed HERE.

Here Is A Transcript Of Some Of The Most Important Details Of The Report:
Part of the disks carry crews; others are under remote control.

Their mission is peaceful. The visitors contemplate settling on this plane.

These visitors are human-like but much larger in size.

They are not excarnate Earth people but come from their own world.

They do NOT come from a planet as we use the word, but from an etheric planet which interpenetrates with our own and is not perceptible to us.

The bodies of the visitors, and the craft, automatically materialize on entering the vibratory rate of our dense matter.

The disks possess a type of radiant energy or a ray, which will easily disintegrate any attacking ship. They reenter the etheric at will, and so simply disappear from our vision, without trace.

The region from which they come is not the “astral plane,” but corresponds to the Lokas or Talas. Students of osoteric matters will understand these terms.

They probably cannot be reached by radio, but probably can be by radar. if a signal system can be devised for that (apparatus).

Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) Is A Totalitarian Dystopia

Individualistic western societies are built on the idea that no one knows our thoughts, desires or joys better than we do. And so we put ourselves, rather than the government, in charge of our lives.

We tend to agree with the philosopher Immanuel Kant’s claim that no one has the right to force their idea of the good life on us.

Artificial intelligence (A.I.) will change this. It will know us better than we know ourselves.

Artificial Intelligence (a.i.) Is A Totalitarian Dystopia

A government armed with AI could claim to know what its people truly want and what will really make them happy. At best it will use this to justify paternalism, at worst, totalitarianism.

Every hell starts with a promise of heaven. AI-led totalitarianism will be no different. Freedom will become obedience to the state. Only the irrational, spiteful or subversive could wish to chose their own path.

To prevent such a dystopia, we must not allow others to know more about ourselves than we do. We cannot allow a self-knowledge gap.

The All-Seeing A.I.

In 2019, the billionaire investor Peter Thiel claimed that AI was “literally communist”. He pointed out that AI allows a centralising power to monitor citizens and know more about them than they know about themselves. China, Thiel noted, has eagerly embraced AI.

We already know AI’s potential to support totalitarianism by providing an Orwellian system of surveillance and control. But AI also gives totalitarians a philosophical weapon. As long as we knew ourselves better than the government did, liberalism could keep aspiring totalitarians at bay.

But AI has changed the game. Big tech companies collect vast amounts of data on our behaviour. Machine-learning algorithms use this data to calculate not just what we will do, but who we are.

Today, AI can predict what films we will like, what news we will want to read, and who we will want to friend on Facebook. It can predict whether couples will stay together and if we will attempt suicide. From our Facebook likes, AI can predict our religious and political views, personality, intelligence, drug use and happiness.

The accuracy of AI’s predictions will only improve. In the not-too-distant future, as the writer Yuval Noah Harari has suggested, AI may tell us who we are before we ourselves know.

These developments have seismic political implications. If governments can know us better than we can, a new justification opens up for intervening in our lives. They will tyrannise us in the name of our own good.

Freedom Through Tyranny

The philosopher Isaiah Berlin foresaw this in 1958. He identified two types of freedom. One type, he warned, would lead to tyranny.

Negative freedom is “freedom from”. It is freedom from the interference of other people or government in your affairs. Negative freedom is no one else being able to restrain you, as long as you aren’t violating anyone else’s rights.

In contrast, positive freedom is “freedom to”. It is the freedom to be master of yourself, freedom to fulfil your true desires, freedom to live a rational life. Who wouldn’t want this?

But what if someone else says you aren’t acting in your “true interest”, although they know how you could. If you won’t listen, they may force you to be free – coercing you for your “own good”. This is one of the most dangerous ideas ever conceived. It killed tens of millions of people in Stalin’s Soviet Union and Mao’s China.

The Russian Communist leader, Lenin, is reported to have said that the capitalists would sell him the rope he would hang them with. Peter Thiel has argued that, in AI, capitalist tech firms of Silicon Valley have sold communism a tool that threatens to undermine democratic capitalist society. AI is Lenin’s rope.

Fighting For Ourselves

We can only prevent such a dystopia if no one is allowed to know us better than we know ourselves. We must never sentimentalise anyone who seeks such power over us as well-intentioned. Historically, this has only ever ended in calamity.

One way to prevent a self-knowledge gap is to raise our privacy shields. Thiel, who labelled AI as communistic, has argued that “crypto is libertarian”. Cryptocurrencies can be “privacy-enabling”. Privacy reduces the ability of others to know us and then use this knowledge to manipulate us for their own profit.

Yet knowing ourselves better through AI offers powerful benefits. We may be able to use it to better understand what will make us happy, healthy and wealthy. It may help guide our career choices. More generally, AI promises to create the economic growththat keeps us from each other’s throats.

The problem is not AI improving our self-knowledge. The problem is a power disparity in what is known about us. Knowledge about us exclusively in someone else’s hands is power over us. But knowledge about us in our own hands is power for us.

Anyone who processes our data to create knowledge about us should be legally obliged to give us back that knowledge. We need to update the idea of “nothing about us without us” for the AI-age.

What AI tells us about ourselves is for us to consider using, not for others to profit from abusing. There should only ever be one hand on the tiller of our soul. And it should be ours.

How to Have Deeper, More Intimate Conversations

In a time of disconnection, deep conversations can make all the difference.

David Brooks, the opinion columnist for The New York Times, wrote an article last month titled “Mental Health in the Age of the Coronavirus,” describing how the anxiety and isolation of the pandemic were impacting everyone in some way. He quoted Bonnie Badenoch, an expert in trauma, who felt one antidote to this stress was a need to have “deep reciprocal attunement (with others) that makes you feel viscerally safe,” and Martha Welch, a professor at Columbia University, who stressed the need to connect with others by having “vulnerable,” deep conversations. 

Deep conversations may be an important way to connect with those we care about in these difficult times, but they are always a good idea. They are the foundation of strong intimate relationships — those “we talked all night” conversations when dating, or those seemingly rare but cherished, heartfelt times when you lowered your guard and spoke from your heart with someone you trust. They connect you to the human race, to those important in your life, in some way to yourself.

Good idea, but often easier said than done. Here are some tips of going deeper into your conversations:

Make sure it’s a good time to talk

This is a matter of logistics. It’s hard to have a deep conversation when someone is on their cell phone driving to the grocery store or when they are trying to get their three kids to bed. These times are for quick check-ins — how-you-doing, catch-you-later speed conversations. For those deeper conversations you need time; find out if the other person has some. Simple question: Is this a good time to talk?

Set the tone

Because you’re the one initiating this, you need to be the one to set the tone, the one to let the other person know that you’re interested in having more than a how-you-doing check-in. There are two ways of doing this.

One is to set the tone by talking about yourself more deeply than you usually do. You want to move beyond the standard, “I’m good,” to more honest statements about how you are really doing – I’ve been feeling down lately; I don’t know about you, but my kids are driving me crazy; I had been doing okay until Tom and I had this argument last night. This is about self-disclosure and revealing more of you and your feelings. With this introduction, you are letting the other person know what kind of conversation you want to have, what emotional level you are comfortable talking about. You can then turn the conversation towards them.

The other approach is to ask hard questions at the start: Not the “Doing okay?” but “Have you been having a hard time?” “Have you been feeling depressed or worried?” “Are your kids driving you crazy or struggling?” People only know what is safe to talk about based on what you talk about and what you ask. By drilling down into specific, more emotionally difficult conversations, you are letting the other person know that you are ready to hear what they have to say, that you are ready to go there.

Ask about details

Good therapists do this instinctively. They try to move from broad statements (“I’ve been feeling anxious“) to the details: What about, what thoughts have you had, how do you talk to yourself? You don’t need to be a therapist and try to deconstruct the other person’s psychology, but you want to ask about details (about an argument they had or about how the kids are driving them crazy) because emotions ride on content. Broad questions yield broad, bland emotions; detailed questions stir deeper, more poignant feelings. And expressing these deeper emotions and having them accepted glues people together.

Give space between emotions

And when these emotions arise, you only need to acknowledge them (“That must have been hurtful; that sounds so frustrating”) and then stop and be silent. This can be hard—our instincts are to repair, to fix, to make it better by saying the right thing right then to calm the waters. Don’t. Take a few deep breaths, allow room for you both to absorb what has been said (or for them to finish ranting or crying).

Slow down, focus on them

In the same vein, you want to slow the conversation overall. Move through the conversation like a turtle, not a jackrabbit. Keep the focus on them, give them the room and attention they need, and resist using their stories as launchpads to talk about your own. Only when they are done is it time to turn the conversation towards you.  

Take risks

You know if you are moving into more vulnerable and intimate territory if what you want to say makes you feel uncomfortable, you get those butterflies of anxiety. Intimacy is not about disclosing some big, dark secret, but saying anything that is, for you, difficult to say. Take that risk for yourself, and listen for it in the other person. They may say “I’ve never said this before or thought about this before,” or there may be a hesitation or an unfinished sentence and a sigh. Ask them to finish the sentence. Give them space to say what is hard to say. 

Use your anxiety as a sign that you are emotionally plowing new ground. Go deeper to connect.

To All That Don’t Believe In Love Anymore

I know the feeling. I know the sound of a shattering heart and crumbling soul all too well. The damage makes you want to hide. You subconsciously build brick walls around you to keep everyone out, even the people who already love you now. You find excuses as to why you don’t deserve them. You push them all away and deny yourself the love you truly deserve.

Take the walls down. Love still exists. It will find you when you least expect it. It will find you even when you work so hard to hide from it. Like the first sliver of sunlight breaking the darkness of the night, it will light up your life again. You may not recognize it at first for what it is, you may deny it all together. That’s okay. Take your time. Good things, no, great things, take time.

You forgot what love is because someone hurt you so badly you no longer remember. Or maybe, what you experienced before wasn’t love at all. Let me help you remember what love truly is.

Love is kindness. Love is a warm embrace. Love is soothing words. Love is not just listening, but understanding too. Love is humor and laughter. Love is never ending support. Love is a prayer on a bad day. Love is enjoying all the time spent together. Love is being able to speak your mind without fear of judgment. Love is friendship. Love is faith. Love is respect. Love is perseverance. Love is openness and honesty. Love is patience. Love is a hand that will always hold yours. Love is letting someone go because you believe they deserve better. Love is them holding on regardless. Love is fun. Love is excitement. Love is comfort. Love is whoever makes you feel like you are home in their arms. Love, my friends, love is real.

What a monumental realization.

You’ll know what I mean when love comes to you, because as hard as you try to hide, as hard as you try to deny yourself of it, love will find you when it’s time.

The Purpose of Synchronicity and Causality

Today’s topic I’m going to be discussing upon is synchronicity.

Synchronicity was first explored in depth by the famous psychiatrist Carl Jung. He explained that synchronicity as “acausal connecting (togetherness) principle” and “meaningful coincidence.”

The main point to gain from Carl Jung understanding of synchronicity is that he viewed not only causality as being a means in determining synchronicity, but also meaning as well. Causality deals within the realm of the physical existence.

With every action there is a equal and opposite reaction. People who base synchronicity upon causality see everything as a reflection of cause and effect. Cause and effect become the template in evaluating synchronicity.

Most people call this just causality and Carl Jung separates the meaning of causality and synchronicity, but also unifies them as being equal to one another when it comes to the purpose of explaining coincidences.

I for one see causality as synchronicity in known form and synchronicity as causality in unknown form. Causality is objective and synchronicity is subjective.

Here’s an example of causality; let’s say you invest $100 into a stock, a week later you need $200 bucks for a overdue bill and you check the stock and see that it’s worth $300 bucks.

The synchronicity is found in the fact that you were able to discover some money when you most needed it.

Most people don’t see this as synchronicity, but instead call this causality since they see the cause and effect.

They see the extra money as being the effect of the cause of investing money in this stock. Many of us don’t equate causality as being the same as synchronicity because of our awareness of the cause, but none the less it is a form of synchronicity.

Now the other form of synchronicity involves meaning. Carl Jung also viewed synchronicity as a “temporally coincident occurrences of acausal events.” Where the meaning of events is found within the informal realm of reasoning. Events that are acausal are dependent upon the individual.

Thus these meanings are impossible to prove because of it’s temporal nature. In this realm synchronicity occurs as a result of the internal world of consciousness. An example Carl Jung used is this:

“It is impossible, with our present resources, to explain ESP, or the fact of meaningful coincidence, as a phenomenon of energy. This makes an end of the causal explanation as well, for “effect” cannot be understood as anything except a phenomenon of energy.

“Therefore it cannot be a question of cause and effect, but of a falling together in time, a kind of simultaneity. Because of this quality of simultaneity, I have picked on the term “synchronicity” to designate a hypothetical factor equal in rank to causality as a principle of explanation.”
Carl Jung

Carl Jung viewed synchronicity as equal to causality only in instances that causality is unable to explain the reasoning for the event.

Thus it is important for us to consider the subjective nature of things that happen in our life, just as much as the objective.

In today’s society we’ve relegated much of the idea of synchronicity to the acausal events that happen in our life.

When we cannot see the cause for a certain coincidence we have the tendency to call this synchronicity, but at the same time we ignore the causality that happens in our everyday life as well. Synchronicity and causality have interchangeable principles, but different contextual application.

This unbalanced understanding of synchronicity creates many problems in our life. We need to see synchronicity and causality as being one and the same. All of life is one big synchronized cause that we’ve agreed to partake in.

There is nothing that happens randomly, only our free-will gives us the flexibility to believe that life is random. When we start to see synchronicity and causality as one we’ll be able to see the unity in life.

Most of us know about the Law of Attraction

The Law of Attraction teaches our thoughts and beliefs create a certain frequency that forms the vibration that our consciousness will vibrate at. This vibration attracts things and events into our field of experience.

What we think and believe literally creates our reality. Thus you could from a philosophical standpoint state that everything that happens is a result of our consciousness, even the events that causality cannot explain.

This helps in unifying Carl Jung’s understanding of causality and synchronicity, thus creating the synchronicity/causality paradigm. As the saying goes:

“What is in is out and what is out is in.”

The purpose of synchronicity is to help individuals remember that everything happens for a reason. Synchronicity is basically our way of remembering with the Higher Order by recognizing the symmetry in life. Things that happen in life do not derive out of randomness.

What may appear to be random at one moment, is only random because of our lack of awareness. When your awareness increases, the randomness in life slowly fades away and you start to see the unity in all things.

Thus we see the wisdom in Carl Jung’s understanding of synchronicity. His philosophy and explanation on synchronicity forms a underlying foundation that explicitly proclaims that there is a underlying force for all of creation.

With this understanding comes the ability to see synchronicity everywhere. Both the objective and subjective nature of existence become tools for discovering the synchronicity(unity) that has always been around us.

The only requirement is for the individual to be-come this awareness. Be-come stands for:

“Coming to the awareness of unity by being it.”

Seeing synchronicity in your everyday life helps one realize that We Are All One. That there is no form of separation whatsoever, except for the ones we’ve decided to experiment in with for reasons of learning more about ourselves and this reality.

Synchronicity can be found anywhere and the only reason we cannot see it is because we’ve formed ideas that are based upon separation.

When causality cannot explain synchronicity it is important for the individual to find the synchronistic meaning to the coincidence, but also important for us to continue searching for the cause and effect reason as well.

We must utilize causality constantly and use meaningful explanations only when the cause and effect escapes our awareness. As you can see with the chart below, meaning should be used to explain coincidences that are a result of contingency.

In the event that there is the absence of certainty in circumstances we should use meaning to explain this event, but only after we determine there is no immediate cause in which can be seen.

That’s a very important factor because all things we eventually can understand through the lenses of causality. Which is why we should strive to understand and discover things in life. There isn’t anything we cannot understand, whatever we place our focus on we can understand.

Synchronicity is equal to causality when cause and effect are unable to explain the coincidence. Nonetheless though, that’s a temporal condition that shall fade away when our awareness increases.

Both causality and synchronicity have a place in our lives; because in the end they are just a different facet of the same understanding.

Be the synchronicity in your life, be the unity in your life and be the unifying force that sees all of existence within the backdrop of the One. For all is one and one we shall always be, now and until the end of eternity. E Pluribus Unum, “Out of many, One.”

That is the anthem for those who wish to be one with Creation. Be One my friend, be your True self and see the beauty in the One Creation.