Here's another interview with Grant on the subject of 'Tom DeLonge, Steven Greer and evil aliens'. Grant eloquently explains how Greer and DeLonge are 'messiahs', individuals fed information by the military and security services so that they can feel genuinely motivated to talk about what they have been told is going on. Unfortunately, as I've noticed with Greer over the years, nothing useful is ever released. By comparison, Paul Laviolette's writings are far more useful, as he's worked stuff out using science and engineering, not through testimonies fed to him by dubious sources. Grant makes it clear that he doesn't think DeLonge (with his evil aliens belief) and Greer (with his belief that all aliens are lovely) are lying, just that they are being fed dubious information by insiders with their own secret agendas. Recommended.
The interview includes an absolute gem of a comment from John:
"If people can't control their own emotions, then they have to start trying to control other people's behaviour."
Isn't it fascinating? What is that device? I have no idea but it does seem to possess an ability to hover and move through the air without any need for wings or rockets or a jet engine or propellers even a gas bag. In a sense, it's the best UFO I've ever seen footage evidence for because it is completely alien. No one would come up with such a flying device. This sort of encounter I think shows why it's so hard to be a responsible science-fiction writer, because there seems to be advanced stuff out there that makes no sense at all, so how can one write believably about it? I think I'll stick to writing stories about people in metal boxes; it's so much easier.
The progress of the researchers has a familiar ring. As has often been the case when enthusiasts have tried to discover the secrets of the Giza site, one person has almost always obstructed their efforts. Zahi Hawass, the head of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo at that time, first stated categorically that there were no underground chambers at the Giza site, even though the researchers had found and photographed underground chambers. He then barred the entrance to the temple concerned. He followed that up by taking a film crew down those same passages but made no effort to explore further. This tactic of Hawass's, of rubbishing theories and then blocking access to the site so that no one can explore further, has occurred multiple times. For example, after Jean-Pierre Houdin developed a sound theory of an inner ramp within the Great Pyramid, he went to Giza and discovered a collapsed corner of the pyramid wall, high up, exactly where an inner ramp could have weakened the pyramid's outer shell. Houdin had a quick look and then rapidly found the site barred to any access. Since that time, no one has been allowed to explore that collapsed corner. Similar events may happen again. Hawass is currently not the head of Egyptian Antiquities, possibly having been sacked (again), but it is possible he may be reinstated, which has also happened before.
The more important the topic, the more erroneous the official explanation.
Unfortunately, the presenter's call for revolution at the end of the documentary is, I think, naive. Revolutions are very risky endeavours, can involve huge bloodshed and often don't bring improvements to a country as they can be hijacked by very shadowy characters. A far better plan is to systematically improve a country's institutions, such as was done in post-war Britain. The demise of that wonderful programme is another story but I'll blog about that later; one (or four) grand conspiracies is probably enough for one day! :-)
If I find more interesting documentaries, I'll post them up here. It can be very tedious, trawling through youtube, looking for decent documentaries, and so I'll try and act as a filter, posting those programmes I find that I think are worth watching.
I also really enjoyed the style and pace of the documentary. I do enjoy watching 'Ancient Aliens' now and then, but this earlier documentary's measured pace and calm reflection is a breath of fresh air compared to the 'whizz-bang-flash!' of many modern documentaries. It was aired in 1999 but it seems like it's from the early 80's! Love the beard…
I found the documentary both engrossing and bizarre. Throughout the program, the people involved in the project were convinced that it was a viable and brilliant way to send humans into space and the other planets in our solar system. They pointed out, sensibly, that rocket motors did not produce enough power to effectively fling humans to the edges of our solar system, or our nearby astral neighbours. Chemical rockets were good enough to go to the moon, but that's about it.
This all made sense, but at no point in the documentary did anyone say 'wait a second, how on Earth are you going to accurately steer this craft as you explode nuclear weapons under its 'spring plate'? Also, how are you going to safely detonate a whole series of nuclear bombs under this 'spring plate' without them frying the crew with radiation or running the risk of one of them blowing up while it's still inside the bomb bay? The practical problems seem endless, and yet they carried on with idealistic zeal. Fascinating stuff.