When anthropologists approach the task of knowing a new ethnic group, they build their knowledge layer upon layer. At first all that might be available to them might be some anecdotal accounts from travellers, explorers, traders, captives, or others who had come into contact with the native group and who were usually not trained observers.
Then trained anthropological observers would arrive and create the next layer of literature, the foundational body, consisting of their observations of the daily round of life. For the greatest part, these came from having “gone native.” Generally called “ethnological” (anthropologist Leslie White would call them “historical”) studies, this body of literature looks at specific behavior in discrete time and space.
Once they have a good ethnological or historical literature, anthropologists would begin to examine sets of behavior patterns freed from discrete time and space. They would draw on the ethnologies for their data so this literature was one step removed from direct observation.
They might study a pattern of rituals, marriage institutions, or inheritance rules, without consideration to the historical dimension. These studies White called “structural-functional.” They’re like snapshots, rather than stories.
When enough of both types of studies had been assembled, the anthropologist might begin to produce what White called “evolutionary” studies, which were examinations of trends or classes of events through non-discrete time. The development of money or the evolution of railroads are examples of evolutionary studies whereas the history of the British pound or the Union Pacific Railroad would be a historical study.
I cannot claim to have read a great deal about our space family. For the most part I’m simply speculating here. I’d imagine that what we have to draw on are mostly the anecdotal accounts of contact – sometimes abduction, sometimes willing engagement.
I’d expect that we also have some ethnological studies as well. I’d also expect that we have some structural studies, but few evolutionary studies, which usually arise in a mature field. I wouldn’t expect exoanthropology to be a mature field yet.
The study of our space family is unlike the study of the people of Papua/New Guinea, say, in that the natives that anthropologists often study were technologically less advanced and undoubtedly less educated than the anthropologists themselves. In the case of our space family, they are undoubtedly more technologically advanced and probably more educated than us.
I don’t feel qualified to say whether all space visitors are spiritually more advanced than us or not. I don’t even feel qualified to say whether terrestrial anthropologists were necessarily more spiritually advanced than the native populations they studied. I can only say that anthropologists were more technologically advanced than their native ”subjects” and exoanthropologists will, in all likelihood, be less than their galactic “subjects.’
In a sense, once First Contact has occurred we can learn much better by being told what we need to know by the galactics rather than by studying them on our own. We’re at present in a transitional period where we still rely mainly on our own observations for what we know.
We on this site also accept the testimony of channeled galactics like SaLuSa, Mira, Adamu, Hatonn, Ashtar, etc., but most of our compatriots do not. At some point we’ll have the evidence of non-traditional sources like the Looking Glass, a device by which one can see through time, (1) or the Akashic Records. (2) For now, the observations of contactees and the evidence of the galactics themselves through channeled messages are the two sources available to us. Oh, yes, and we also have some NASA and other space-agencies’ data, whose truth value we have no way of estimating.
When dealing with the anecdotal evidence of contactees, we run up against the difficulty that the observers may not understand what they are observing and that even those who do understand somewhat or have been told by the galactics themselves about some matters may not fully appreciate or be able to interpret what they’ve heard. Even the passage of a few years from when Alex Collier made some of his observations shows us, who may never have seen a galactic, how the baseline of knowledge has moved forward quite a bit.
When relying on the channeled evidence of galactics, we’re often in the position of having to accept whatever evidence is provided, which may be superficial or may lack detail. We cannot question our informants. We cannot ask them for more detail. We are left with bits and pieces with which to construct whatever picture we can.
From whatever angle our situation is viewed, we have scant details upon which to make deductions from, scant facts from which to create systematic knowledge. We have Alex Collier mentioning a 900-square-mile spaceship located beyond the asteroid belt and then saying nothing more about it. Or the Arcturians listing some of the members of the Galactic Federation and then saying no more on the subject. We have perhaps 50 pieces of a 1,000-piece jigsaw puzzle and the 50 pieces stand alone; they don’t border each other.
So that’s the situation we find ourselves in as we begin a new map of the universe.
Moreover, I have daily responsibilities and cannot simply abandon everything, zero in on this one topic, gather up all the available pieces, and put as many pieces in place as I’d like.
I cannot even arouse in you an expectation that I’ll be offering a cross-section or a balanced picture. I can only gather together a few photographs and create an art exhibit, an installation, a show of photographs. I can only furnish you with a taste, find a few novel items, excite interest.
I can’t even create a show of photographs because I’m not sure that many exist and I don’t have time to find all that do.
I’m not even aiming, say, to create a booklist of sources or give you all there is on even a sliver of a subject. In some senses, it’s the equivalent of a child saying to its parent, “Look what I’ve found.” That’s all I have time for.
So I say this to you to head off you approaching this line of articles with unrealistic expectations. The subject is not far enough advanced, we know very little about the field, and I don’t have sufficient time to review what’s out there. I only have time to lay a few items before you and hope that that creates interest in you.
I’ll be rustling around, finding articles of interest on the various space groups but without pretending in any way to be an expert. I hope you enjoy reading about them. And I hope doing this primes us and sets up our listening for when the galactics actually do arrive in the near future. At that point the real learning will begin.
(1) Go to this webpage and search on “Looking Glass”: http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/fc/corrob1.html
(2) See “Akashic Records” here http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/fc/life1.html#akasha1 or here http://www.angelfire.com/space2/light11/nmh/reincarn1.html .