UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 15

Re: NASA Commissions Book To Prove Moon Landing

From: Colin Bennett <sharkley.nul>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 20:34:57 -0000
Archived: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:24:51 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA Commissions Book To Prove Moon Landing

>From: Larry Hatch <larry.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 17:54:31 -0800
>Subject: Re: NASA Commissions Book To Prove Moon Landing -

>Sorry for the gutter talk, but you completely sidestepped
>the little matter of whether you thought man had walked on
>the Moon or not, and now do so for the 3rd time. Again,
>coming from anybody else this would be considered totally
>evasive by any reasonable person.

>I asked two questions really: (1) Do you think that
>American astronauts walked on the moon or not? {2) Do you
>believe there even is a Moon, as opposed to something
>illusory? If you choose not to answer, or feel that there
>is no such thing as objective reality, then please just
>say as much.It saves us all so much time.

Sorry for the delay in replying Larry, but you will no be be
pleased to know that my computer had an argument with the real,
as did my mentor, Charles Fort.

In my opinion Larry you are far too binary. We are in a Fuzzy
age. No philosopher, or any thinker else for that matter (except
Young Bob and Mr. Rimmer perhaps) would claim to have found that
fabulous mythological beast called absolute reality. This is a
Loch Ness Monster of the intellect. You see Larry I am one of
those wretched creatures who have as great a problem with the
absolute as others have with the Loch Ness Monster.

Other people have problems with train-spotting, their car
insurance, or obtaining explosives to further their religious
cause, but I have a problem (don't tell anyone else please) with
people who ask me to solve the greatest philosophical problem of
all time in one pass of UpDates.

Your request is rather complimentary both to UpDates and myself,
if you do not mind me saying so. Mr. Errol-Knapp and Mr. Velez
must be pleased that they have aroused such cosmic expectations.
I blush with shame. Even I need a bit more time to locate
absolute reality, yes or no. You see I may think a lot of my
silly self, Larry but I don't think I am quite up to answering
the ultimate question you have asked, well not before lunch,
anyway. I blush.

I have always had this problem about disliking perfection. I
feel the need to reject perfection. I have thought about having
treatment for my sad condition, but there appears to be no one
qualified to help me. But now I blush again You are clever. You
have caught me out. I bow in shame. I am afraid that I am one of
those people who think all minds are a bit of an unrealistic
mess, rather like my own. But I am rather glad about this.

Those who do not have messy minds usually have terrifying plans
for us all, and are to be avoided.

The last attempts to straighten out the mess and get rid of
impurities left approximately eighty million corpses in the last
century alone.

Of course Larry I appreciate your difficulty, which is mine too.
Like yourself, I would prefer what we call reality to be clear-
cut, and readily accessible. If reality could be made thus, we
could market reality as a product, available at corner stores
and advertised on TV. We could hence develop and design it, make
reality into a kind of original packaged consumer dream, give
small packs of it out as free gifts with shampoos, false teeth,
silicone implants, and contraceptives.

However, we have a lot of work to do, because reality at the
moment is not nearly stable enough to come out of the
laboratory. At the moment, the test models of reality are
dangerous. None of the separate bits hang together or move
according to precise deterministic laws.

There are other deeper problems.

Reality it appears is alive, and not dead. That is rather
inconvenient. It raises the question animal rights and all kinds
of things. This remarkable discovery was made when it was found
that reality itself cheated, hoaxed and tricked, was indeed a
thoroughly scandalous entity whose behaviour was often quite
atrocious. And it ate like a horse. We couldn't control it. The
real got lost, fell in love, looped back into itself, swerved
and crashed, and made outrageous statements about itself.

Last but not least, sometimes reality withdrew its labour
altogether as a matter of principle. It seem that a noiseless
system was a something that we had to do a lot more thinking
about. In the small print of the electronic manual, if you look
carefully, you will find even the interface of the binary switch
is full of noise as old naval broadside.

Like you Larry, I would like a reality package that was a very
simple set of binary yes or no switches, but the definitions are
always crumbling at the edges. Who are we? I myself am analogue,
continuous tone, not digital. Do you know yourself so completely
as to say yes and no to anything at all? Do you know the
ultimate nature of the concept behind the word America?

Are you noiseless? Answer yes or no? Do you and I fully
understand the means by which we are at present communicating?
Do we understand the ultimate reality of good and evil, and more
to the point of the present question, do we understand the
nature of time and space, magnetism, gravity? What landed on the
Moon was a bundle of mysteries engineered around by American
genius but not solved by anyone at all. As such, the Moon
landing was pure wonder-management.

The Moon landing, like all experience, like you, like myself,
and everybody else, was a complete Fuzzy mess. It was full of
anomalous noise. There were old naval broadside everywhere. Like
the strange movements of the LEM, the equally strange behaviour
of the descent computer, and the equally strange disappearance
of the aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11, there
were bits that were almost real, bits that could hardly be
believed, and in the middle a pot pourri of basic human averages
to take your pick from and live easily with as a reality
compromise, the lives most people live. But the demon reality is
always complex, made of all these ill-digested tit bits that are
in varying states of decay and growth, and finally infinitely
mysterious, stranger than we could imagine, as Haldane said.
Reality is dynamic, ever changing, and like our noisy selves,
will not stay still for a moment. To say that it is concrete,
fixed, and on occasion does not talk back to us would be very
foolish, although it might behave like that on occasion just to
please us or to hide from something.

It certainly does not consist of a cellular sequence of binary
switches of yes and no. Reality is an animal, and when we think
we create a form of life. Of course such complex live ambiguity
is very difficult to live with. So like the scientists, we chop
off bits of it until we get a proper yes and a proper no, and
give this half-dead mutilated creature the name reality. After
that, it doesn't wag its tail anymore. Some dreadful folk say
science is about control, not truth.

So to me the reality of the Moon landing is somewhat complex.
But I think we may be at cross-purposes here. I do not think
that nothing happened at all. Yes, certainly there was a very
significant event, but significant events tend to hit us like a
custard pie in the face and bits go all over the place, some to
be found behind settees years later. The custard pie cannot be
reassembled exact and complete in order to describe exactly what
hit us. Thus we make an noisy approximation. We haven't got all
the bits, but that really doesn't matter. We know that it was a
custard pie. But supposing some fine art connoisseur such as
your good self wants the real original pie, and like your good
self, will not satisfied by anything less? Since we are not
going to be able to find every crumb, you will have to be
satisfied with an approximation, or perhaps a simulation or a
model of the pie whose interior certainly will be full of
guesses and yet further approximations a to what happened to
what or whom and by what and when (an even more difficult
matter, especially with pies of this nature).

Don't worry, Larry. I am not of the "it didn't happen at all"
group, That is too absolute for me, as is the claim that NASA
did it without a little help. Something absolutely wonderful
happened yes, but I still don't know quite what it was, if you
see what I mean. The Moon landing was pure magic and please
Larry, do not ask me what magic is. You know very well what it
is. You are possessed by it, or you would not have an urgent
need to ask these questions. Your problem is like mine. We are
some of the few still alive and asking such questions.

And again you question: is there a moon at all, you ask? Well as
above, I say which one would you like, Larry? Would you like the
disappearing moon of John Keel's Mothman Prophecies, the moon of
Coleridge's inspirations, the moon of A Midsummer Night's Dream,
the Dylan Thomas moon of all legend's sweethearts on a tree of
stories, or the moon Aldrich put his boot down on? (a bit of an
admission there on my part I think, Larry).

As the Devil said to Faust, you have a choice.

Any good American salesman opens his magic box of products,
looks hopefully into a customer's eyes, and makes the same
statement. What is it today sir, would you like the brilliant
and beautiful minds of Rudiak, Maccabee and Aldrich and Hall, et
al, or would you prefer David Icke's under the counter stuff in
an anonymous brown paper envelope, really cheap just for you,
and absolutely guaranteed to thrill you to death?

What is truth, said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an
answer. Don't dismiss this as verbal salad Larry. Without verbal
salad we are the walking dead, reduced like prisoners to silent
points without size or mass moving down an inclined plane.

What is reality, you ask? I sit here in London, in a pre-War
autumn, in what is called a Heightened State of Alert, writing
an Update posting about John Rimmer's chronic need to
disbelieve. With my stirrup-pump, hosepipe, and my dustbin full
of water I am a definitive twenty-first century citizen. With no
firemen and 19 Tube stations shut down, I look at my small stock
of tinned food and wait for those who worship an alien God to
try and kill me, and you ask me about reality?

Am I totally despicable because I reject both crude mechanical
reality, the alien God, and John Rimmer's claims that there is
nothing whatsoever in any manner extraordinary between here and
the Proxima Centuri?

Am I an inadequate because I am not only suspicious of Rimmer's
concept of the concrete but his recent recommendation that we
investigate our friends, colleagues to check that they behaving
themselves? Am I being unfair when I equate completely noiseless
systems with Nazi architecture: silent, monolithic, deserted,
built on the shaky foundations of the vast hordes of the dead?Am
I mad because I not only see several moons, I see for my sins,
several different Moon landings according to the cut of the
advertising cloth?

Which one is the real one is the biggest sixty-four dollar
question of all time.

As they say on TV, the choice is yours.

Christmas blessings to all UFO UpDates savants, and those heroes
who pursue the true Grail of the absolute real!


PS UFO UpDates will be undoubtedly the cave painting of the
future. Eyes will gaze through cave-wall shadows and wonder who
was John Rimmer and who was the man waiting in London for the
alien God to attack, with his eye on a stack of Smithson's Best
Pork & Beans labeled with offers of a cheap weekend in sunny
Skegness Butlins Holiday Camp with free garage space and full

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com