Essay on blindness

I have chosen the title that defines the famous book by José Saramago, because I think it is the most appropriate for what I intend to explain here.

It all started with a discussion with a friend about the results of NASA investigations in relation to the UFO phenomenon (UAP, in its current English version), presented at a conference held on the last day of May 2023. As it is seen below, the general press covered the event widely. I pointed out to my friend that the main anomalous objects in the sky that have been reported in recent years are spheres, which coincide with two spheres observed by me, in the Baix Empordà (Girona province), in the months of November of the 2022 and May 2023. 

ESFERA-11-2022.jpg - 95.60 KB

ESFERA-5-2023.jpg - 102.61 KB

Spherical objects detected in the Baix Empordà (Girona) in November 2022 and May 2023 

NASA-6-2023.jpg - 80.88 KB 

La Vanguardia echoed the NASA conference on UAPS

Faced with this, my friend limited himself to saying the following: "Unidentified anomalous phenomena... We don't talk about aliens... But about sightings like yours, what don't know what they are." I responded as follows: “Is it the Russians, the Chinese…?” And he replied: "Maybe yes, spy vehicles." I told him rhetorically: "I guess you're kidding" (since if the Russians had such technology, another rooster would crow for them in Ukraine). My friend replied: "Evidence of aliens, as far as I know, does not exist... Images of anomalous phenomena do exist, so it is good to investigate to identify them."

I will not go into detail about the evidence that undoubtedly exists about the presence of extraterrestrial intelligence on the planet, which has multiplied in recent years. Everyone has to document themselves, in the way they see fit, about this increasingly pressing reality.

Nor will I go into detail about the eternal discussions about the origin of Columbus, which usually lead to the usual giggles when it is stated that he, although he was born in Genoa, was of Catalan origin. You can find a brief summary of my investigations, which will be exposed in my next book ( Colom el Descubridor ) and in the following article Colom el Descubridor – Introducción .

When talking about issues like these two, “serious” interlocutors tend to answer with jokes, like the “little green men” or “Catalan Donald Duck”. That makes me, José Luis Espejo, who believes in aliens of the past and present, and in the theory of the Catalan Columbus, a "freak", a laughable and not very serious guy. To this I reply: "Yes, I believe in UFOs, so what?" What's more, I not only believe in the little green men, but also in the reality of Atlantis and in ghosts. Debunkers and trolls, as well as serious and circumspect people, can already start preparing their darts against me. I am aware that there are not a few who try to discredit me with these solid reasons. Given this, I can only say one thing: "Hello!".

If I am convinced of something, it is that it is possible to believe in UFOs, and have your feet on the ground. In other words: those who know me well know that I do not believe in anything (I do not practice any religion, I am not moved by any political, economic or philosophical dogma, although obviously I have my ideas...). If something defines me, it is the phrase: "I don't believe in anything, but I am willing to believe in anything, if it is supported by evidence." I insist, there is more than enough evidence about the presence of extraterrestrials, today and yesterday, on Earth. And there is also evidence of Columbus's Catalan identity. Now is not the time to talk about them, so I will continue with my argument.

My reasoning is based on an obvious finding: in the official doctrine on History, and on reality in general (which, I cannot help but say, is anything but real), anomalies and inconsistencies are not rare. That is where the object of my work resides, and of my investigations. And hence the title of this blog: “Hidden History”. 

There are numerous episodes in literature that tell us about those blind people who have eyes to see and yet do not see. We can find them in Plato's Banquet (it is the “myth of the cave”) or in Andersen's tales (the naked King). There are also many proverbs and phrases that allude to this type of blind, not in the eyes but in the heart. For example: "There is no greater blind person than someone who does not want to see", or "They have eyes and do not see", or "In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king".

In the "land of the blind" in which we live at this moment, the "one-eyed" (he who sees, who does not allow himself to be blinded by preconceptions and censorship) is considered a charlatan, a buffoon, a whipper-snapper. The "one-eyed" (the one who sees beyond the dominant prejudices) is ridiculed, and for this reason he is hidden from the public eye (blind, par excellence).

And what is blindness, as I interpret it in this article? It is the "blind" belief in the dogmas and canons of authority. In a blind society, like the current one, uncriticism (that is, belief in the dominant dogmas) is confused with seriousness and circumspection; and the breadth of vision, the open mind, with frivolity and irresponsibility.

Those who either do not want to see what does not fit into their conception of reality, or those who, having evidence, do not perceive it, are blind, since their gaze goes through it (it is said that the Native Americans did not succeed in seeing the ships of the first Europeans because they did not fit in with their conception of the world; those ships were for them something like invisible; the same is happening right now with contemporary blind people). 

The blind are stubborn people (“obcecado” derives from "ciego", “blind”), not to say obtuse. They believe that those who do not share their sphere of belief, in which there are neither aliens, nor vanished civilizations, nor ghosts, are liars or stupid. No matter how much the "heretics" present irrefutable proofs: they either do not see them, or they do not consider them worthy of study or attention. Before their gaze, it is as if they did not exist, as if they were transparent. And if they see it, that evidence is removed, hidden, destroyed, automatically ceasing to exist (for their blind "order of things").

Blindness is arrogance and pride. Like any disease (because it is still a disease of the spirit) it is highly pernicious. Blindness is like an autoimmune disease: it is an internal defense mechanism against pathogenic elements that put the “social body” at risk. The antigen of change is blindness, in its expression of scholasticism and "cult of authority."

The blind man shies away from the evidence that opposes his reductionist interpretation of reality. Blindness is confused with scientism, with realism or with pragmatism. Nothing could be further from the truth: scientism is based on evidence, not on dogmas, preconceptions or restrictions.

Blindness is the worst threat to change and social advancement.