Deception – The Art of War and Non-human Input

This piece may be a bit challenging to follow. Perhaps it is indeed about deception. I’m going to give a little background and then leap forward to some pretty deep subjects. We’ll start with a bit of my childhood, referencing some important stuff for setting up the rest. The path will lead to an exploration of developing beliefs and exploring quantum physics to reveal a potential reality you might not have considered, yet will probably find at least some resonance with by the end.

As a teenager with limited understanding of life and my mission and purpose in it, believing that I had one, I knelt in prayer (the only thing I’d been taught to do) and offered this, “Father, I want to know truth and I’m willing to die for it if necessary.” At 18, I was in the Pre-Med program and an Honors student at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. As with many teenagers in college, I was questioning my future.

In looking back, I surely didn’t appreciate the intelligence I was gifted with in this life. I had advanced through 5 quarters of general education credits through the College Level Examination Program (CLEP) tests. It really didn’t matter when it came to the deep questions I had remaining from being an orphan at birth, even though I was adopted by a very loving and supportive couple who gave me an experience of unconditional love.

Challenging the Purveyors of Truth

That being said, I still wasn’t prepared for the events to come. I wrote about it elsewhere, yet suffice it to say I was shown things beyond this world that few in history have experienced, let alone reported. It humbled me and gave me strength to confront the insidious behavior of modern day purveyors of truth that deceive the public into false belief systems that propagate separation of people and wars generated by the greed of a few.  I learned that nearly our entire economy is built on the premise of war, feeding millions of people through the companies, corporations, organizations, suppliers and vendors affiliated with this fear-based system.

As a youth I learned fearless through events that I certainly didn’t seek, although I found them to be a respite, a solace of truth and a foundation of my life. I had my first Out-of-Body Experience (OBE) at 7, confronting my fear of death in order to ascend beyond my body and retain the awareness of my mind. I was able to do everything I could in body, yet with the freedom of movement through physical walls and traveling about town with a thought of where I wanted to be and arrive there instantly. I didn’t have them often, they were spontaneous and with the exception of the first one which was in the middle of the afternoon, they happened just prior to sleep as my mind relaxed and became quiet.

The following year I awoke one night to find myself looking at my body from above and to the left, in the corner of my bedroom. I watched as my physical body got up, removed the covers, opened my window and climbed outside. Years later it became a habit when I’d sneak out and take my mother’s car for a spin around town, way before I had my license. As I passed through the wall and continued to watch, I walked across the neighbor’s back yard and over to a fence surrounding a 10-acre pasture. I climbed the fence and walked out into the pasture and as I did, I began rising into the air.

I looked up and saw a bright orange cigar-shaped cloud that must’ve been a quarter-mile long at least as it covered the entire length of the pasture and extended beyond it on both ends. As my physical body got close to the perimeter of the cloud, my observer united with it and then we entered the cloud. I woke up in bed the following morning, distinctly remembering the experience, with no recollection of what went on inside the cloud. I did, however, have a yearning to go back as soon as possible. I felt compelled to go back, like there was something there I felt intimately connected to and part of me.

That sequence of events happened nearly monthly for about two years. I never spoke of it to anyone. My parents didn’t believe me when I first heard my ‘ally’ or ‘guardian angel’ or ‘spirit guide’ or whatever you want to call this near-father figure who spoke to me often after I found out I was adopted and began questioning who my ‘real’ parents were and why I had been abandoned. So keeping those experiences to myself, I felt like I had a special relationship with something beyond this world, however I never associated an off-planet civilization with it until much later when I found out the most common contact experience in the Midwest during the late 50s and early 60s were the orange cigar-shaped clouds.

Years Later – Experiences Escalating Experientially

There is certainly a lot more that happened in the years to come, and I’ve explored them from multiple points of view in Stubbing My TOE on Purpose. For now, I want to leap forward to August of 2002, nearly a year after 9-11 and the shock of what happened. By now, it is apparent that what we were told about the event was far from the truth. Back then, we still wanted to have faith in our government and its leadership.

It doesn’t take a whole lot of research or fact finding to understand there is something insidious going on among the elite rulers of the world and the corporate structures being used to carry out their plans. The crop circle from August of 2002 that I’ve included here, along with the decoded binary message, is yet more evidence of the benign, if not beneficent, intent of our star visitors, the non-human relatives most of us are so afraid of still.

I refrain from engaging the conspiratorialists and most ufologists in discussions about the nature and purpose of the contact process we have been witnessing develop over the last 3/4 of a century. The idea that races from other worlds might be completely beyond the need for domination or war is apparently beyond their comprehension. The rhetoric regarding the need for protection from ‘them’ borders on the bizarre in how effectively it deceives and distracts the majority of the population that are interested in things beyond our world. The reality is we need more protection from ourselves.

Ancient texts revered by mystical orders reveal that what some are promoting as ‘evil aliens,’ called Archons, are actually existing in another dimension of reality that is just as permeable as our own, yet few ever explore to any extent. They aren’t evil, just a bit mischievous at times. Why? Because they test our mettle, our truth and challenge our belief systems in order to get us to evolve toward self-actualization. Raising consciousness in a population gets a lot of help from other worlds. We’ve been told these worlds exist and many believe they do, yet when the experience of them happens we tend to go into denial immediately.

Then there is M-Theory, which supports other dimensions, and also the Higgs-boson discovery, which I posit demonstrates some kind of fabric between dimensions that was torn during the explosion of the protons rather than a separate particle which ‘decayed’ into nothing. Quantum physics is only just beginning to explore the nature of reality and scientists are finding consciousness has more to do with it than once thought, even though scientists at Los Alamos proved thoughts affect experiments decades ago. I admire the work of Tom Campbell, who wrote My Big TOE and has been sharing his discoveries.


How do we tell the truth? How to we know what is ‘real.’ I suppose how you read those questions is where it might start. There are at least two ways to read it. One way is truth telling has a certain vulnerability that comes along with it, an inner looking place that becomes transparent in conversation. The other also has a different kind of vulnerability in seeing things as they are, not how we want them to be. The later question involves both subjectivity and objectivity, perhaps even a synthesis of the two.

retrocausality - truth, lies & belief systems

Some investigators of quantum physics (theorists) understand that ‘reality’ doesn’t occur until we observe and report it. Perception varies as awareness increases; truth is always paradoxical in simple statements. An advanced consciousness that uses much more of its cranial capacity (obvious for non-human visiting races) and understanding of universal laws surely has a different concept of truth. Perhaps synchronicity may also have a part in our constructs of reality, recognizing a greater connectedness in our surroundings.

It might be possible for a being that is perhaps exponentially more aware of universal laws and order to actually set up an event for a human to experience that might take them years to fully comprehend. Such is the case with most contactees and their continued questions, more intricate as understanding comes, fuels the compelling investigation of truth. There are resonant fields in the tests of truth, questions that reveal answers that create a sense of vibrational harmony within the human consciousness that is exploring any phenomena to seek understanding of it. These fields create sensations, sublime and subtle, that one can experience and are evident in the vast majority of ‘contact’ events involving an intelligence beyond human.


(Brent Cunningham – 

Before we take a look at what I think are the three essential tests for evaluating any truth-claims, let’s briefly look at some popular, but less than stellar reasons often used by people to test whether or not something is true—the claim and then a response:

1. Instinct — “It seems true to me.”
To this statement we must simply ask . . .
. . . Why?  What is guiding one’s instinctual ability to judge between competing truth-claims?
2. Feelings — “I like the feeling I get.” or “It feels right.”
. . . Can feelings be mistaken?
3. Wish fulfillment — “The God that I (want to) believe in would never send someone to hell.”
. . . Maybe not, but the God one wants to believe in may not be the God who actually exists.  We can never determine objective truth simply by what we want to be true.
4. Custom — “This is the way I / my family / my culture has always been.”
. . . Can they be mistaken?  What if one came from a Nazi background?
5. Popularity contest — “Well, ‘everyone’ believes it.”
. . . Again, can ‘everyone’ be wrong?  Counting noses is never a good means of determining truth.
6. Pragmatism — “It works for me, therefore it must be true.”
. . . However, almost anything can ‘work’ for a time.  Truth works overall.  For instance, a belief may ‘work’ at ridding oneself of guilt by denying it rather than absolving it.
7. Significance — “It gives my life meaning.”
. . . Is the meaning simply the result of wish-fulfillment or is it connected with reality?

Obviously, all of the above reasons for believing something to be true seem deficient and not the best tests to determine whether or not a truth-claim is really true (although, #s 6 & 7 do seem to be better candidates that #s 1-5).  Nevertheless, I think there are three criterion for testing truth-claims which, when used together, offer us the best chances of determining true beliefs.  Here they are.

1.  Internal Coherence — This is a test for rational consistency.  This asks if a belief makes sense?  We need to determine whether beliefs are rationally consistent within themselves and in relation to others beliefs of one’s larger worldview.  Some beliefs are known to be self-referentially inconsistent, or self-defeating.  An example might be the belief that all “knowledge” is scientific knowledge.  This is obviously self-defeating because the belief itself is not a scientific statement.  Therefore, the belief dies by its own standard for knowledge.

Another way a belief can fail this test is when two beliefs are in contradiction with each other, meaning that at least one of the beliefs must be false.  So, we must ask if the beliefs hold together?  For example, if a person is a Naturalist (believing that human life is accidental, random, and without ultimate purpose), he cannot then introduce the belief that we have an objective moral obligation to treat another person justly or with kindness.

Now, while the internal coherence test is essential for determining if something is true, it is not sufficient.  That is, consistency alone does not determine truth.  Consider this example: If Hillary Clinton is President, Bill Clinton is the First Man.  Hillary Clinton is President.  Therefore Bill Clinton is the First Man.  This argument is completely coherent and consistent.  However, it’s not true.  So, we need to add other criterion to the internal coherence test.

2.  External Correspondence — This test asks if a belief fits the facts of reality.   Does it correspond to the real world?  Proposed truth-claims must have explanatory power, or the ability to give account for our experience of the world (whether it be history, science, psychology, human nature, etc.).  For instance, a worldview can be tested by its ability to explain cosmological questions like the origin of the universe; anthropological questions like the existence of minds and free will; moral questions like the existence of evil and our experience with guilt.

Further, the explanatory power of truth-claims should (a) be comprehensive in scope—able to explain more or better than alternative theories; (b) have predictive power—suggesting new evidence and problems; (c) have precision—accounting for more details; (d) be illuminating—integrating otherwise unrelated data; (e) avoid ad hoc hypotheses—functioning only to explain away counter-evidence; (f) be simple—not needlessly multiplying the basic concepts, assumptions, and principles of an explanation.

3.  Functional Adequacy — This tests the livability of a truth-claim as a belief.  Is it a viable belief “on the street”?  Does it work in real life?  Some views sound good on paper, but are proven false in the laboratory of life.  Consider an eastern guru who asserts that the physical world is an illusion, yet he still looks both ways before crossing the street.  A person cannot live out such an illusory belief of the world for very long (or he’ll be hit by a bus before long!).  Even more than that, a belief system must integrate one’s life.  It must incorporate and meet the deepest human needs.

In evaluating the truth or falsity of  propositions/truth-claims/beliefs, we must be sure to always look for three things: internal coherence (the logical), external correspondence (the factual), and functional adequacy (the livable).  For a belief to be true it must be meaningful, it must line up with the real world, and it must not only help us survive in daily life, but allow us to flourish.  Consequently, these are also the three areas in which our thinking can and does go wrong: logic, facts, and values.

A New Living Awareness

Religious belief systems tend to stifle the exploration of truth because of their limitations in viewing it. Things have to fall within a certain structure and when they don’t, evil is the cause and some entity is to blame instead of acknowledging the limits of understanding. We fear what we don’t know, especially if it comes from some other place or space. Apparently at least some of the other races visiting here have the ability to at least change their appearance and physicality at will. That kind of life form could certainly seem threatening. To date, though, from reliable contactees, experiencers and even government officials in the know there is no threat from any off-planet population.

What does that mean for us? Well, it first means we need to take a serious look at how we behave toward each other and why. We need to determine, individually, what kind of life we really want to live and support. Breaking away from the current pervasive belief system that acquiesces to war mongers means we have to confront ourselves and what we are willing to commit to in order to survive and thrive in the near future. We have to consider the millions, perhaps billions, who depend on the corporate and military industrial complex for their supposed safety and security.

Are you willing to give your life for truth; harmony among people and planet?

Harmony among people and planet is indeed truth, universal law and order supported. Coherence, correspondence and adequacy requirements are all met as well. In the purest sense, even religious aspirations are met in that we love each other as another of ourselves. This is the simple test of truth – does it promote or prohibit life and love? In a universe teeming with life, we’ve managed to cause the extinction of nearly all life that has existed here on Earth. In the last 40 years, according to the World Wildlife Foundation, over half the animals have gone extinct. Why?

Now I’m only one guy with an experience that most people would deem incredulous. I’ve had experiences with dozens of races, intergalactic councils and non-corporeal beings responsible for creating us and our solar system. I know, you want proof. So do I, it would certainly be solidifying. I have an above average intelligence that has been both a blessing and a curse, aggressive to some and passive in resonance to others and I’m rather used to the perceived incredulity. I get it.

They were MY experiences and I’m still skeptical. Being one that seems to be available to the beckon call of mission and purpose on many levels of consciousness, there are consistencies that bring it into a singular focus of advancing consciousness toward understanding the mysteries we’ve questioned and had inferior process and technology to explore. I’ve questioned authority and presumed truth with a vengeance. Doesn’t the pursuit of truth deserve that? I know it sounds a bit much to ask anyone to be willing to die for truth. I did and I’m still wondering how to make sense of it all, even more challenged by what I have experienced and learned.

There is something more, though, in that letting go of the fear of death there is a defining truth of incomprehensible freedom and potentially a path to ascending without the loss of consciousness we’ve been accustomed to for millennia. There was a guy who demonstrated that it is possible and told everyone else they could do it to, but that story had been so subverted and trampled that it takes a lifetime of sincere seeking to garner the understanding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *