(11-08-2012, 04:20 PM)TheEternal Wrote: "We (the scientific underground), prefer density over dimension

(11-08-2012, 04:20 PM)TheEternal Wrote: Especially the reference to Yang as being spatial, and Yin as being temporal, something I never considered before.

(11-08-2012, 01:16 PM)marielle Wrote: I'm finding them everywhere in the last couple of days

(11-10-2012, 02:21 PM)Icaro Wrote:

(11-08-2012, 01:16 PM)marielle Wrote: I'm finding them everywhere in the last couple of days

Could you give some examples? Your typical fringe websites?

(11-10-2012, 03:12 PM)Icaro Wrote: That's my assumption but I'd be interested to know.

"The physics of sound vibrational complex Dewey is a correct system as far as it is able to go. There are those things which are not included in this system. However, those coming after this particular entity, using the basic concepts of vibration and the study of vibrational distortions, will begin to understand that which you know of as gravity and those things you consider as “n” dimensions."

What do you think vibrational distortions refer to? Physical phenomena, or distortion as it is used in the material? Will those with a more holistic view be making discoveries?

(11-10-2012, 03:14 PM)Icaro Wrote: Wilcock posing as this Daniel?

(11-10-2012, 03:12 PM)zenmaster Wrote: Well I for one am glad "daniel" is one of the few "insiders" reaching out. Excellent catalyst. Would not surprise me if he was the reincarnation of Daniel.

(11-10-2012, 02:21 PM)Icaro Wrote:

(11-08-2012, 01:16 PM)marielle Wrote: I'm finding them everywhere in the last couple of days

Could you give some examples? Your typical fringe websites?

(11-10-2012, 08:28 PM)Oceania Wrote: i devoured this stuff. it's so exciting and makes sense to me. i'm gonna look into dewey larson. what Daniel says makes so much sense to me.

(11-11-2012, 05:11 AM)Oceania Wrote: yeah it's in the conscious field thanks to people like you studying it i don't have to work as hard

(11-08-2012, 04:20 PM)TheEternal Wrote: "We (the scientific underground), prefer density over dimension when describing the increased complexity of organisms, since the number of spatial (yang) dimensions does not change—the number of available temporal (yin) dimensions, does, resulting in a compaction that has properties similar to the physical concept of density."

Quote:I know there is a lot of talk about divine intervention, ETs, angels and whatnot coming to “save us”… sit back, the Calvary is coming. Being of Cherokee descent, that never sounded very good to me. But all mankind really needs is an anti-globalist inoculation, so these monsters dry up and blow away. I won't call them human, because after what I've seen at Montauk, I don't believe they are.

Personally, I don't want ETs intervening in our society, dumping their version of “absolute truth” on us. One thing I've learned in my life is that nothing is “absolute”… everything is measured relative to something else. It cannot be absolute truth, just truth relative to what the ETs have accepted as truth.

What bothers a lot of people is that many of us have spent most of our lives looking for truth, and now some alien is going to drop by and hand us a copy of The Universe for Dummies, which will do nothing more than make us feel like our entire life was wasted. I don't mind a few pointers, but I want to do the work for myself.

Now if the ETs want to come by with a big vacuum and suck off all the parasites that have retarded human consciousness and evolution, I'll be the first to shake their hand, claw, tentacle or whatever. But I don't really want to get rid of a world order, just to have it replaced by a stellar order, reeducating and reprogramming me with their truths so I don't have to think for myself.

Consciousness doesn't grow from being told facts—it grows from the search for them. And I think that is what the people of this world really need—a chance to grow up on their own in a free society. Hopefully, you can use this information to help people get that opportunity.

(11-11-2012, 08:09 PM)zenmaster Wrote:

(11-11-2012, 05:11 AM)Oceania Wrote: yeah it's in the conscious field thanks to people like you studying it i don't have to work as hard

That may be true. But understand for me it was "catalyst" used to develop a secondary function of thinking. It may no longer serve a similar purpose once it is made conscious. "There is no experience which is not purchased by effort of some kind, no act of service to self or others which does not bear a price, to the entity manifesting, commensurate with its purity. All things in manifestation may be seen in one way or another to be offering themselves in order that transformations may take place upon the level appropriate to the action."

(11-12-2012, 05:27 AM)Oceania Wrote: what secondary function? don't be cryptic

(11-12-2012, 04:13 AM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: I wonder what the author means by "globalist."

(11-12-2012, 09:45 PM)zenmaster Wrote:

(11-12-2012, 05:27 AM)Oceania Wrote: what secondary function? don't be cryptic

http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/secondary_function
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/understanding-mbti-type-dynamics/the-auxiliary-function.asp

Quote:...Thus right-brain attitudes lead to a "contextual" or "context-entangled" understanding of truth, where the meaning of a statement is defined by the real-world context in which the statement is made. Language is not something that you define prior to a given experience. Language is simply a refined way of pointing at things. To understand a statement is to look and see what the person who made the statement is trying to point out. The basic way to communicate is simply to point: to direct a person's attention so that the reality itself will then work on the person's mind and provide the ultimate definition of your meaning...

(11-12-2012, 10:10 PM)Patrick Wrote: I see myself somewhat in this, but the other self does not always see the same thing I do even if I point to it.

(11-12-2012, 10:19 PM)zenmaster Wrote:

(11-12-2012, 10:10 PM)Patrick Wrote: I see myself somewhat in this, but the other self does not always see the same thing I do even if I point to it.

The more earnest the attempt by both parties, the more likely there will be success. The main barriers here are due to attachments.

(11-12-2012, 10:26 PM)Patrick Wrote:

(11-12-2012, 10:19 PM)zenmaster Wrote:

(11-12-2012, 10:10 PM)Patrick Wrote: I see myself somewhat in this, but the other self does not always see the same thing I do even if I point to it.

The more earnest the attempt by both parties, the more likely there will be success. The main barriers here are due to attachments.

True. I try to let go of attachments sometimes in such situations. But often I simply become unhinged and more confused. Maybe this happens when too much was attached to said attachment that was released? And so I cannot reconstruct a new perspective quickly enough and/or big enough to fit all experiences.