IFO

It is interesting how we get stuck with a word or anachronism and find it hard to shake off, like sticky fly-paper.  The old anachronism of ‘UFO’ (Unidentified Flying Object) is so trite and full of denial it no longer applies.  Perhaps folks need to back-up and wake-up and simply change the entire scene.  They are IFOs (Identifiable Flying Objects); or, perhaps, AACs (Alien Aviation Crafts); or any number of correct and applicable brevities.

However, since most of these folks are not alien at all, how do we structure a terminology that actually applies to the various realities we are in denial of?  There exists, and existed long before our species, a variety of living folks who have been a part of the history of this planet.  Why, then, do they not interact with us or communicate with us?  My question is: If you were they and could witness what we are as a species, would you?  Of course not.

The reasons are far too many to dwell upon.  To do so would only be despairing to the most aspiring individual.  It has often been a temptation to go into the details and depth of our plight as a species in comparison to the realities and aspirations of life throughout the infinite universe.  Yet, such an effort would only feed the negativity that desires its place in the human consciousness.  The paradox of our self-conceit versus our potential enlightenments pacifies the temptation for honest critique.

The simple bottom line is that we are far too dangerous and emotionally erratic, religiously dogmatic, violent, infiltrated with a portion of psychotic souls, to capably interact with lifeforms millions/billions of years beyond us.

Consequently, we are more of a curiosity, an innovation for observation; and, with a motive of ‘hope’ we will not destroy ourselves in the course of our evolutionary consciousness as individuals and as a species.

Clay  (The Universal Infidel)