Profound Wisdom from an “Alien Video” by Whitley Strieber

A video has been uploaded to YouTube that purports to show an alien under interview by an unidentified young man sometime in the 1960s. I am not going to essay an opinion about its authenticity, but I would like to comment in detail on the statements made. The reason that I am not interested in whether or not it is a puppet, an animation or a "real" alien is that the commentary is valid, no matter what the origin of the video. If you asked me to guess, I’d say it’s probably a hoax, just on the odds. But it is a "true hoax" in the sense that it accurately reflects the message of the visitors, and in some very subtle ways.

Just because something is manmade doesn’t mean that it’s worthless, or even inaccurate. Here, quite the opposite is true.

1. The interrogator asks, "State planet of origin." The answer is "Earth." This answer is consistent with my own impression of major aspects of this very complex experience mankind is having with the unknown. There are three levels:

1: Some of our visitors, most particularly the short, dark blue figures I call "kobolds" are, I believe, human beings in another form.  2. The "grays" are creatures that also live in this form, in which consciousness governs the degree of penetration into physicality, but are not originally from Earth. 3. Human beings from the distant future who have bodies that are interbred with the grays and appear somewhat similar to them. This being, if I am correct in my surmise, is such a person.

2. The young man then states, "OK, yesterday and I quote, you told us, and I quote, ‘thousands of light years to get here.’" The entity answers "Yes." The interrogator then demands that the entity tell the truth, and delivers a threat that has been sonically redacted. The entity answers, "It is truth. I am from Earth. From your future. To travel in time is to travel in space. Offset spatial divergence."

This is a correct description of movement through time, which also involves movement through space back to where an object was during the target time, or forward to where it will be. As an example, Earth is not circling a stationary star, but following it on its long orbit around the center of our galaxy. Our solar system moves at about 500,000 miles an hour and takes approximately 225 million years to circumnavigate the galaxy.

The interrogator then asks, "So aliens took over our future?" The response is "No" and the entity then explains that it evolved from us.  It is then asked what it is doing. It answers, "Observing. Since evidence was destroyed." The interrogator then asks "How" and the answer is "Nuclear war."

I am given to understand in my own experience that what is expected here over the next few years are the following:
    1. The planet will heat up rapidly, causing widespread social unrest.
        2. Extragovernmental religious entities and religious states will acquire nuclear weapons. This process is already far advanced.
    3. Widespread death due to overheating and starvation will occur from Morocco to India.
    4. At some point and for any number of different reasons, one or more of the disintegrating nuclear armed states will initiate a nuclear attack.
    5. This will escalate to a generalized nuclear exchange.
    6. The human population of the planet will become negligible.

It is too late to affect or plan for the changes in the planetary environment that will lead to the unrest described above. If there is some authoritative confirmation of this warning, it may result in a change of direction that will derail the nuclear conflict that, as matters now stand, is probable.

The interrogator then suggests, "How about we concentrate on your time?" The entity responds, "You are not capable of accepting or understanding the discoveries of my time." The interrogator responds, "Try me." The response is, "the nature of the universe, the origin of so-called life, it is known."

At this time, we are beginning to understand that the universe is, in its essence, data. When Anne Strieber, during her lifetime, would state "god is a mathematical formula," she was reflecting this knowledge. However, this does not mean that we are only a simulation. We are in a simulation, which is a very different matter.  Consciousness is not a nonphysical field or a state of matter consequent to its organization into a brain, but a reflection of the motion of essential reality, by which I mean something like electrons, but not as they may be conceived mechanistically as tiny, whirling states of energy, but rather as conditional presences, each with its own energetic potentiation, and existing in numbers too large to conceive or manipulate. This is both universe and consciousness. What we call "living beings" are a reflection of this reality, like a shadowy imaging looking back at us from a pond.

The interrogator asks, "So you know the meaning of life?" The answer is, "Not meaning, nature. " The interrogator asks, "What’s the difference?" The answer is, "Meaning is ascribed. Nature is the objective reality."

This reflects the entity’s view of the difference between "meaning" and "nature." Meaning is a cultural response to phenomena. Nature is phenomena—essentially, numbers. Meaning is a response to the conditions that emerge out of nature, and changes as cultures change. Nothing changes nature.

The question is then asked, "So you know how the universe was created?" The answer is "Yes." The questioner than asks, "So you’ve seen god?" The answer is "We have evolved past a need for superstitions, the need for a god and other myths."

The operative word here is "need." We need the protection of deities because we do not understand nature. A man of the past, seeing a great storm or feeling the shaking of an earthquake, experiencing illness or any sort of disaster, will by instinct call for help. When no visible channel of rescue exists, he will turn to his gods. As we come to understand fabric of reality more clearly, that need fades away, and is replaced by a more accurate response, one that reflects an understanding of the conditions that have brought about the challenge. We know that the tornado is a storm, not an evil being. We know that the earthquake is a natural event, not the result of an angry god shaking up the underworld. We know that our disease is a part of nature, and may or may not be cured by science, but that it is not a demon hiding in our flesh.

The question is then asked, "What is death?" The answer is, "Death is a human construct. It does not exist. You will experience—all have experienced—every instance of so-called life. You. Me. Him. All instances of the same life.  Separated by what you call death." The questioner then says, "Let me get this straight. There is no death and we all experience each other’s lives. Right?" The answer: "In essence, yes."

When a soul enters our level of reality, it is completely enveloped. The physical body’s profusion of cells causes it to completely lose sight of everything that is not coming directly at it down the river of time. It is like a horse with blinders, able to see only directly ahead.

As it is meant to, it forgets that it is using the physical as a tool. Its purpose here is to do two things: 1. Use its life experience to gain self-understanding; 2. Obtain energy. In order to gain self-understanding, it must suppress its true level of self-knowledge. This way it will act in each instance from its own deepest truth. Additionally, in order for its experiences to be as energetically potent as possible, it must not be able to anticipate future events and outcomes. Surprise is the essential ingredient, and that cannot happen unless we are deeply embedded in the time stream.

The body and personality are the tool we use to draw us into time. But we are not our names, Joe, Fred, Mary. That is personality, a construct that grew up around the name, that is used for social interaction. It is mortal and will die with the body. What is immortal, the soul, is not normally accessible to the physical part.

As we open ourselves, we find that the whole of life is there, ready to be tasted and used. We can look back across not only our past lives, but all past lives, and pick and choose which fragments are useful to us. We can also do this with the present, and into the future as it becomes fixed.

The interrogator then asks "Why was the universe created, and why is it so perfectly made for us?" (I will add parenthetically here that this question the only one that suggests a hoax. This is because the idea that the universe is "perfectly made for us," which is indeed true, was not a matter for certainty in the 1960s.) But even if this is a hoax, the answers offered here do reflect the actual responses that the visitors might be expected to make to such questions.)

The answer is, "There are an infinite number of physical universes. Virtually all do not support life such as you know it.  We exist in a universe that does support so-called life. That is all."

When I met with the Master of the Key in 1998, he said that there are many universes. I did not inquire about how many support life.  The greater interest here lies in the use of the phrase "so-called," the second time it appears in the text. Its use correctly implies that life is not as we imagine it., but rather a mathematical process out of which biology inevitably emerges.

The questioner then asks, "So why do we destroy ourselves with nuclear war?" The being responds, "Dogma. Political and religious dogma. It is the root of all major conflict of your species. In your next century, access to weapons of mass destruction by states ruled by dogma will destroy your species."

The phrase "weapons of mass destruction" did not enter general use until Israeli Prime Minister Menachim Begin used it in a speech establishing the Begin Doctrine in 1981. However, it was in used prior to that date, but only rarely.

However, the statement made here is consistent with what I learned back in the 1980s and 1990s, and have seen coming true. Nations such as Pakistan, North Korea and Iran are all ruled by dogma, and all possess, or are attempting to possess, nuclear weapons. At present, Pakistan is an Islamic state but not a radical one, and radical elements do not yet have possession of its nuclear arsenal. In a time of unrest, though, this may change. While Iran has apparently stopped its weapons program, when the coming difficulties cause an even more radical regime to emerge, that may happen. North Korea is already an unstable state entity in possession of nuclear weapons.

The interrogator asks, "What do you base your morality on?" The answer is "Compassion and evidence." This statement, once again, is consistent with what I have been taught. I have learned that there are three pillars of a strong soul: love, compassion and humility. But compassion is not in and of itself loving kindness. Compassion arises out of wisdom and insight. It is not simply a matter of giving a beggar some money or helping a sick friend in his or her suffering. When Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple, he was acting out of compassion by giving them a chance to see their own greed.

The use of the word "evidence" here has a double meaning. Real morality is both a matter of observing the acts of oneself and others to determine their real intent, and understanding the evidence of such actions.

The material presented in this video is consistent with what I have learned in my close encounter experience over the past 30 years. Again, I take no position on the status of the video. Even if it is a hoax, as is likely, that does not change the fact that it accurately reflects the position of the visitors, insofar as I have understood it. You can watch the video here.