Notes on new data on "undercurrents": Working Annotated Bibliography*

*Indicates "work in progress" in research; or work referred to by secondary source.

Part I : Tim and Me

Synchronicity:

Websites:

http://www.trufax.org/cnet/synch.html

Go to The Synchronicity Website

Takes to screen that has an essay. Follow main headings: "Consciousness Network Ongoing Research on the Subject of Synchronicity- Return to CNET Main Menu"

--will then get this essay/statement:

"The term "synchronicity" is otherwise viewed as the term "coincidence" by those who do not find themselves perceptually within its flow. With the basic frequency of the environment of the universe increasing, the concept of synchronicity is very important, because the ongoing perception of it is a "marker" of the relationship between your consciousness and the subjective reality you perceive. As most of you have no doubt noticed, the rate and perception of synchronicity is increasing, as is the perception that the linear time flow is speeding up.

"Perhaps the best overall composite commentary on synchronicity that we have so-far seen is as follows:

" 'Synchronicity is the conscious perception in a physiological time track of the simultaneous manifestation of the multi-dimensional universe. It is the conscious recognition that all events, objects, relationships, points of view, perceptions and interactions are ONE thing viewed from different perspectives. As the basic resonant vibration of the system increases, synchronicity becomes more easily perceptible within experiential reality. Synchronicity is also a reflection of what you believe you reality to be. Synchronicity, relative to reality, IS what reality IS, and it is the WAY it is.

"Now, many people have discussed the subject of synchronicity, all the way from Carl Jung to Bashar. However, it is from Bashar, representing the Essassani, that we get further clarification:

" 'Recognize that you are all functioning completely within synchronicity, but many of you choose to function within negative synchronicity, choosing a perception of a negative reality, rather than positive synchronicity and a positive perception of reality. Should you choose a negative reality, than those situtations will be negative reflections.'"

Other points on the Website give clarifications of who "Essassani" is/are.( I don't propose any specific religious philosophy, just trying to find the Truth (capital T), I wouldn't want to bog the reader down or give a false impression as to my knowledge in this area of "religious truth.")

I do think I like the idea of "focusing" on positive rather than negative coincidences/synchronicity. "Many of you choose to function within negative synchronicity, rather than positive synchronicity and a positive perception of reality."

That's quite a thought. I wonder if, in the process of NOTICING or taking note of the various coincidences that go on in our day-to-day lives, if we also focused only on positive or "growth" oriented coincidences, we might be better off, than if we focus on "negative" or bad or sad memory types of coincidences.

What is bringing this to my mind, is how the dates of Tim's and Dad's deaths, (my brother died around June 15, 1995, approximately the time of Bush's first crash; my father died Sept. 2, 1998, the exact date of Bush's second crash) "correlate" with the dates in Bush's life in 1944: would that be an example of a "negative" coincidence or synchronicity? It brings up a lot of negative or sad memories or thoughts: the events in Bush's life on those dates weren't pleasant either; could it be that my association of that fact with those dates, helped to create a "climate" in my own life, such that it "attracted" further negative things for those dates?

I'm speculating here, trying to think something out. This wouldn't necessarily have to involve any "spiritual" principle--perhaps this is something electromagnetic in nature--that is, seemingly spiritual in a way, but having a physical explanation.

Similar in principle, perhaps, to the "positron" physicists now talk about as a possible physical explanation of the "glimpse of the future" we sometimes seem to get: as particles move backwardrather than forward in time, and that maybe that is what causes "precognition." It wouldn't be anything spiritual, then, but actually something quite physical, in reality. That being the case, like Jack '0' lantern, will 'o' wisp, St. Elmo's Fire, etc., it could seem weird, and not exactly be an everyday occurrence, yet still be essentially physical in nature.

I can't help but wonder about things like Ouija boards in this regard, too. People really do seem to have glimpses of the future. But that could be this positron business, again, just in another setting. Maxwell Maltz has written several books in which he gives examples of how "focusing" our thoughts can cause things to be more likely to come into our lives. He even says anxieties can tend to become reality, if we're picturing something we are nervous about, it tends to happen, because of a principle similar to magnetism.

Similarly, it could be that the Ouija board user, if using it repeatedly, forms a certain "image" that they'll be able to see the future. Over time, that image, since it is mental and therefore involves electricity (the brain/nerve system operates on electrical principles --"synapse" and all), could also have an electromagnetic quality. Maltz says if you're afraid something will happen, you increase its likelihood to happen if you continue to picture it; switch to a different image.

Books:

Bolen, Jean Shinoda. The Tao of Psychology: Synchronicity and the Self. San Francisco:

Harper and Row, 1982. 75-80; 82-5. Insightful analysis of some aspects of Synchronicity and Jung, though some events chronicled were subsequently discredited.

Koestler, Arthur. Postcript Renee Haynes. The Roots of Coincidence. New York: Random House, 1972. 61-8; 72; 77; 85-7; 111-113; 118-119. esp. "orderly behavior" of metals under some stresses, repeated "disorderly" behavior of metals under different stresses. Though author's views have sometimes been controversial, material in this book is somewhat credible scientifically.

Progoff, Ira. Jung, Synchronicity, and Human Destiny: Noncausal Dimensions of Human Experience. New York: Delta, 1973. 131-6; 140-44; 147-8; 151-7. Insightful, unique look at Jung, too Eastern philosophy-oriented to be credibly scientific.

Zukav, Gary. The Dancing Wu-Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics. New York: William Morrow, 1979. 85-8; 212-215; 228-9; 313-15. Especially impressive is Zukav's recount of scientific data on the behavior of photons and postulated "positrons." Credibly scientific.

UFOs:

There is a more cynical view on UFOs than is offered in my main text (with high-quality research to back it). Thus, I prefer to write of "encounters," rather than UFOs.

Berlitz, Charles and William L. Moore. The Roswell Incident. NY: Grosett and Dunlap, 1980. 16, 17-20; 21-22; 24; 26; 27; 32-33; 35-38; 40; 63-70; 86-7; 89-90; 104-7; 122; 133-4; 135-6; 141. One of the better researched "believer" books on UFOs.

Bryan, CDB. Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind. New York: Knopf, 1995. 49-50; 133- 9; 142-5, esp. 145; 161-2 ("No" African cases? Recall Dogon of Mali fn); 266-76.

Edwards, Frank. Flying Saucers, Serious Business. New York: Bantam, 1966. The most interesting reference in this book for us today, may be that which pertains to "Roswell." (41-2). Here, just the fact that this massively-circulated and read paperback even mentions Roswell is a powerful argument against one important part of the Roswell "skeptic" position--which is generally that "Roswell didn't start being mentioned until the 1980s, after Unsolved Mysteries and Stanton Friedman." Here, Edwards definitely refers to Roswell, in 1966--smack in between the infamous "Scully fraud" re: Aztec New Mexico of 1948-51, and the subsequent Friedman "era" claims. Otherwise, this book is today probably largely uninteresting and tends to reinforce much of the overall claim of Klass and others (below) that much of "UFOlogy" is regurgitated (and factually inaccurate) folklore.

------------.Stranger Than Science. New York: Lyle Stuart, 1959; Bantam, 1967. Perhaps among the most interesting sections, is Edwards' reference to what seems to be the sighting of a "McMinnville" object (174-6) shortly after the Trents snapped their famous photos, for which I've offered one "conventional" explanation and backdrop. Along with the alleged "Rouen object" photo (from either 1954 or 1957--the sources are murky), this is somewhat more interesting, though still too subjective in tone, from the standpoint of "validating" the McMinnville "object."

Klass, Philip. UFOs Explained. New York: Random House, 1975. (e.g., of several texts).Experienced researcher and skeptic, Klass attacks all "classic" UFOs, including the "Trent photos" of 1950. (See, e.g., 178). Tour de force on general UFO skepticism.

Korff, Kal K. The Roswell UFO Crash: What They Don't Want You to Know. New York: Prometheus, 1997. 44-6; 46-8; 56-7; 58-68; 74; 76-8; 78-81; 82-6; 86-91; 91-2; 92-3; 95-9; 103-4; 124; 125-6; 128-30; 134-7; 165-8; 176-185; 193; 199;.225-6; 227-9. Probably the best researched "skeptic" book on Roswell, "expert" UFOlogy. It should be noted that this book is excellent when cross-referenced with "believer" books such as Kevin Randle and Donald Schmidt's The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell. (NY: Avon, 1994.) One of the only "interesting" references I still find in this Randle/Schmitt book is to the "deputy sheriff's report" (38-9) of a 'burned area" north of town. (Though they are a good "secondary source" re: the AF's post-1969 --when AF supposedly stopped investigating UFOs--"Project Moondust" and "Operation Bluefly", which refer to sending teams to "investigate . . . objects of Unknown Origin" in their "task descriptions.") The questions re: the deputies' report, then, would be (1) Is there documentation of this report? (2) how far north? (3) what could have caused such a burned area? Since the report is separate from either Air Force or civilian reports and affidavits, it has the potential to be a "tie in" with the slightly later (March-May 1948) Aztec, New Mexico report that started the Scully "fiasco." It should also be noted, to Korff's credit, that co-author Kevin Randle, an Air Force veteran, now tends to be less of a "believer" on Roswell, due, in part, to Korff's research. Dr. Lincoln LaPaz was subsequently to investigate "Green fireball" reports (1949-53) in New Mexico; he tended not to think the green fireball was a naturally-explained phenomenon. One wonders if the "deputy sheriff's report" was ever on his desk (assuming it existed) and if he ever "flew over"such a site.

Lorenzen, Coral. Flying Saucers: Startling Evidence of the Invasion from Outer Space. New York: Signet, 1962, 1966. The most interesting parts of this book, written by a woman ("different" and refreshing in 1962) and former co-Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) head, include: her own professed 1934 sighting (15-17), which is an "unusual" date for UFOlogy (even most "believers" acknowledge a possible "awkward" gap in sightings in the 1920s and '30s); and her reference (193) to a "young meteorologist" who had told her, in 1956, of seeing "small spacesuits" in 1952. If this appears in the original 1962 edition, it has somewhat more credibility. (Otherwise, if it didn't start appearing until the 1966 edition, one might suspect a foggy memory, since 1956 only preceded by one year the 1957 space tests involving chimps and "chimp suits".) One other interesting area, is her reference to the discovery of Phobos and Deimos, Mars' two satellites, by Asaph Hall in 1877, after a diligent search by astronomers with larger instruments in 1869, during a closer Mars approach to earth, had failed to detect them. She refers to this, and asks ( 262-4) why they weren't found earlier, and notes their discovery coincided with "the incredible decade" of 1877-87, when numerous seemingly inexplicable other astronomical phenomena were also observed. She wonders if it's possible "several gigantic interstellar ships arrived in our solar system in 1877 or earlier" (265) and went into orbit around Mars as "Phobos and Deimos." Now, recent spacecraft close-up photos of Deimos and Phobos seem to reveal them to be simply pockmarked, large rocks, ala asteroids. And the conventional wisdom would be that they were simply "captured asteroids" in Mars' relatively weaker gravitational field. The conventional theory also posits that the earlier searches for Mars satellites, though done with larger telescopes, was not as efficient and done with poorer quality 'scopes; Hall, at the US Naval Observatory, was using more methodical and scientific systems to search for the moons. Nevertheless, see Asimov, Isaac. Is Anyone There? (New York: 1956-67, Doubleday; Ace) for his references to the idea of a "spome" ("space/home"), which could be a "hollowed out" asteroid, used as a covering for a long-flight spacecraft, allowing a tougher "skin" and more living area. "The asteroids, however, can be spomified completely. They can be riddled and honeycombed. They have no internal heat for discomfort and no significant gravity to make more difficult the shifting of mass. Nor need the caverns be buttressed more than minimally to counter possible collapse . . Nor need an asteroid be considered too small to make an adequate spome. . .[Even an asteroid with a surface area] only three-fourths the surface area of the state of New York [would provide]. . . A sphere of 50 miles radius [and] volume of well over half a million cubic miles . . .(Asimov 270-2)." Is it possible that cross-referencing between these two books forces us to ask whether Phobos and Deimos are, in fact, "spomes" that arrived here circa 1877? Lorenzen's book, too, like that of Edwards, tends to disprove the claim by Roswell skeptics that "no one talked about alien bodies until the 1980s"; the earlier (1962? versus 1966?) the "better", though.

Mack, John E., MD. Abduction: Human Encounters With Aliens.New York: Simon, 1994; Ballantine, 1995. Harvard psychiatrist. Page 26 provides a contrast between Mack's personal findings with abductees and those of Budd Hopkins: Mack has never had a case of a person not being "returned to their bed". Mack provides clinically-languaged observations on the phenomenon.

Saler, Benson, Charles A Ziegler and Charles B. Moore. UFO Crash at Roswell: The Genesis of a Modern Myth. Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 1997.13-17; 22-5; 26- 9; 44-5; 58-60; 74; 76-89; 78-9,Table 1; 108-14; 170-8; 182 n.3, 4.

Other things:

Mirsky, Jonathan. "Mission Impossible: An Account of the CIA's Secret Operations in Tibet." Rev. of Orphans of the Cold War: America and the Tibetan Struggle For Survival. by John Kenneth Knaus. (New York: Public Affairs, 1999). New York Times Book Review July 18, 1999. 29. Interesting perspective on CIA and the seeming semi-obsession which Allen Dulles had for "holding" Tibet. Raises interesting questions about whether Dulles had input from some of the Nazis he'd "rescued" about possible German "travel agents" (see Part II) having an inside track on "ET" materials or writings from ancient Tibet, as some, such as D. Hatcher Childress, (whom we noted in the Bibliography (Go to The Bibliography), have claimed they did.

Go to Annotated Bibliography Part 2

Go back to The George Bush-Undercurrents Website