No you haven't but isn't that the prevailing counter theory known as the IDH that some cosmic trickster god is to blame for ufos and paranormal matters?...My question was more leaning towards why should we start believing in gods again just because we have not yet figured out these mysteries...We are still a fairly primitive, it may yet take another hundred, five-hundred or a thousand years before we solve all these riddles, if we survive that long, but its a monumental step backwards to blame everything we don't understand on some unknown, mostly likely fictional god...
With that said I do hold out some things may be from other dimensions, as I also think our detonation of nuclear devices in our atmosphere attracted a lot of spectators and visitors, some could be from other dimensions, if those dimensions exist...Many of our visitors are most likely from our universe, perhaps not all but many, it would seem to be the most logical and rational notion until evidence reveals otherwise...
...
No, I don't hold that particular theory, in fact I don't support any one theory. I just want to make sure that we keep all possibilities in mind until (or if) some decisive piece of evidence emerges. It may be that as an organism, humanity as a whole is going to have to make some huge leap in its level of understanding before solving these riddles. I hope not, though, because I would like to see
some substantial progress before I depart.
I have an idea that if we knew all about what was happening in the late 1940s, in regard not only to UFOs but secret weapons testing, changes in human awareness, etc., we would make some progress. If you read Kenneth Arnold's book
The Coming of the Saucers (it took me decades to get a copy), you find hints not only of physical UFOs but of the high strangeness elements noted decades later by Keel and Vallee, all making an appearance in 1947.
I think all the weird happenings
are part of our universe, but as a culture modern developed countries have preferred to ignore them or reject them ("there must be a rational explanation" -- for "rational" read "conventional").