published by Eugenia Loli-Queru on 2017-05-31 17:33:36 in the "Metaphysics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

David Jacobs, PhD is the foremost hypnotist in the UFO world, and the first one who asserted that since early 2000s, the alien hybrids already live among us. His opinion is that we’re been invaded “from the inside” by alien beings that happened to discover our world a couple of centuries ago. He finds the whole deal extremely negative.

While I fully agree with Dr Jacobs on the “how”, the mechanics of the abduction phenomena, I disagree with him on the “why”.

Jacobs: They’re invading us.

Me: In a way, they are. However, when the current 1st gen earth hybrids interbreed, their children won’t necessarily see themselves as alien. I’m sure you don’t see yourself as British, even if your ancestors generations ago might have arrived to the US from there. They might even forget their origins, and consider themselves fully human — despite the upgraded abilities of theirs.

Jacobs: We’ll be a second class species.

Me: Yes, that will suck for a few generations. I give you that. That’s the only truly negative I see in this whole thing, how the silent transition will be dealt as. It might be possible to bridge the “ability gap” with technology anyway, until things normalize in the population.

But then again, you must consider the various sub-species of the Greys as well. There are the tall ones, the short ones, the ultra-short ones, the old-looking ones, the praying mantis ones, etc etc. Surely, not all of these types have the same level of consciousness and abilities. And yet, I didn’t see the powerful mantis exterminating the short Greys, or the ultra-short ones. I also never heard of lower class Greys getting abused, or being unhappy about what they do. Each sub-species has found its place in the system and it does the job that it’s intellectually equipped to do, and no more. You might argue that this is because they’re not as individualistic as humans are, but have you put any thought on the possibility that humans are so chaotic exactly because they’re so individualistic and self-centered, and that part of us might need a bit of taming?

Remember your own words: what Greys are afraid most in the humans, is violence.

Jacobs: They arrived a couple of centuries ago.

Me: VERY unlikely. Statistically speaking, this is almost impossible to be here for only so little time, for only their species to find us all this time, and only to find us right as we entered our industrial & technological era. These are too many assumptions to be true at the same time. A more logical explanation would be that they’re here for much longer, and they have intervened the same way in the past, and they do so again now.

Jacobs: The abductions are purely physical.

Me: I disagree. While a large number of them are physical, not all of them are. Discounting as “confabulation” so many people’s reports that they could see their sleeping body left behind while pulled away by the Greys, is closed minded. Another thing to consider: The scope of daily abductions on the planet is massive, and yet, very few sightings are been reported, in comparison. That could mean that a lot of these abductions just don’t happen in our space-time. It’s in fact this inability of yours to think past the material that has left you thinking that:

Jacobs: They’re sinister and they have no right.

Me: If you look at it from a local point of view, they’re sinister alright. Monsters who abuse innocent people (and cows)!

But if you look at it from outer space, they are doing the best for the planet. If you haven’t noticed, humans aren’t the only species on the planet, and all the other lifeforms here are suffering because of us.

I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that their program intensified right after our atomic age. In fact, I find this to be the strongest clue as to “why”, and “why now”. To me, that’s a dead ringer.

See, landing on the White House lawn and dictating policy will not work, because humans can’t comprehend what would be asked of them (e.g. only eat pastured or no animals, stop cutting more trees, stop consuming etc etc), and so they would see this as a literal invasion, and a dictatorship. Terrorism and guerrilla fighting would ensue, just like you see in the traditional alien invasion movies and TV shows.

The only way to fix our predicament, is to fix our species from the inside out. If we’re not part of the solution, we’re part of the problem. And homo sapiens is THE problem, because it’s as far as it can go intellectually to clean up its own mess. We need a new, derivative species to be able to tackle the problems that homo sapiens created.

And yes, eventually, even that new species will be replaced out with something even more capable. I don’t doubt that.

After a species becomes technologically advanced, it should be technologically evolved (via transhumanism), rather than evolving naturally, because nature simply doesn’t work as fast as technological progress does. This creates an imbalance: byproducts of the new technological advancements that aren’t dealt with, because the consciousness level of the species hasn’t evolved in unison with its technology. The two must be paired together to balance themselves out. Right now, we’re not capable of evolving ourselves in any major way, and so the Greys are doing it for us. Eventually, we will bastardize ourselves, just like they have done with their own species. It’s either that, or destruction of the species via its inability to control its own advancements.

Let me put it another way: let’s say all countries in the world come together, and they amass about 20 trillion dollars to fight one of the two things:
1. Fight the alien invasion that replaces homo sapiens, or
2. Reverse global warming, and change the way we live to be sustainable

Analysts would find that sharing 10 trillion for each wouldn’t work, the whole amount would be required to fight one or another. So, the question arises: what is more important of the two to pursue?

If we choose #1, we’d be nothing but selfish pricks, and there’s no guarantee that we’d win anyway. If anything, global deterioration will continue at a higher rate, while creating technologies to fight these guys.

If we choose #2, we fix the planet and we ensure its good health, and we prove these guys evil for not believing in us in the first place. We do get replaced, but we go out with our head held high.

In the first case, we engage in planetary destruction, while in the second case, we engage in selfless healing. I’m with #2.


Comments