Bruce Cathie only ever referred to the fast bright light ‘UFO’ type as far as I recall and related that to the harmonic code being mathematic code that when understood together with the movements of planetary objects explained the nature of what appeared to be a ‘grid’ providing power for these “UFO’s”. He detailed the maths in his first book “Harmonic 33”, which was too expensive for me to buy on Amazon (but is available I think). I have a .pdf version of a later book (link is on the blog). I can’t follow the maths myself. Is he disinfo? Could be. If he is someone has gone to some trouble to create a character that people like me can pick up on and absorb his disinfo. He is currently so far outside the public consciousness that I doubt it. Until we understand the bigger picture it’s hard to know. Discussing his credibility is the kind of topic I would like to discuss on the blog. Whether real or an elaborate cover story it appears he dedicated the latter part of his life to this and paid the usual prices for it (not the ultimate one, in this instance). The implications if any part of what he’s saying is true are huge.
What are the views of experts in physics on the harmonic code?
The physics are outside conventional accepted science. The physics and maths are ‘hyper-dimensional’. An ‘expert’ in physics will not accept the fundamental premises being postulated because his ‘education’ and the ‘laws of thermodynamics’ do not allow for the flight characteristics observed. However, these flight characteristics are observed unless you dismiss all of the diverse eyewitness accounts when you start looking into the ‘UFO’ phenomenon. Any ‘expert’ will put his career on the line the moment he takes any of it seriously – so he has no incentive to do so. I’m not saying that represents a conclusive argument either way, but it is an unfortunate fact of the world we live in.
In this realm you come across characters such as Victor Schauberger. They appear to have lives of trial and tribulation dedicated to ‘alternate science’. Why are they so persistent?
What predictions did he (Cathie) make and were they true?
He successfully predicted the approximate (to within a day) dates of two of the French nuclear tests using his maths.
What is the evidence for flying saucers?
A subsection of the overall UFO phenomenon. You’ll see from the below video that depends really how we want to think of the topic. If you want to see a saucer shaped vehicle flying about, you can, but it won’t necessarily be the impressive kind of device we imagine for an ‘alien invasion’. Work on these secret projects is obviously compartmentalized so that even the people working on them do not see the whole picture.
How Roswell fits in is difficult to determine. They love confusion (smoke), so the more the better. Wikipedia is only good for a quick overview in many cases. It’s clearly a disinfo device (e.g. look at 9/11) no doubt CIA backed.
“for a clear example of funded disinfo check out the Disclosure Project on UFOs.”
So when you ask ‘What is the evidence for UFOs?’ THEY will give you whatever evidence they have regarding the subject. You may be more or less impressed with the answers, but whatever conclusion you reach it will become clear that there is a desire for large numbers of people to believe in this phenomenon and ‘inexplicable’ events in the sky. This is occurring with increasing frequency and it’s credibility is gaining in people’s minds. It’s the IDEA that counts, because this is an epistemological war.
So, are they capable of creating something that could convince people that we are under attack from aliens?
This is a rather long winded (most usually are) video discussing some aspects of the development
(the main point comes near the end)