Birch

"i LOVE YOU! " I love you too Keep on.

Well it does and it doesn't. in the last, what, 2 weeks: -bird deaths - fish deaths - cow deaths There was a bit of a "bee death" movement for a while but I think that people probably don't "get" the bee death stuff as much as they "get" other animal deaths. BIW I'm referring to reporting. Not actual "what's going on" It ain't easy.

Actually, it reminds me more of http://www.100scifimovies.com/tag/dead-cows/ The link is kind of crap, but i do recall the cow death thing. No more mentions of BSE? Thousands of animals were culled /died then too.

I'm still playing "red car game" so I find this very timely Mr Vortex. Also check out my questions on Mantra and mudra most recently. I reckon, if I could get this stuff sorted out, well, I'd be on the correct track. The "correct" track being no relying on parasitic 4D hitchikers to get your path in order. This being said, I sometimes wonder if I am one (a parasitic 4D hitchiker that is). Know thyself. Best words I've heard in a while

"This is where the idea of a resource based economy is entirely different. It is a long stretch to have the world agree to such an economy, but I fear at some not to distant point in the future, there may not be any other choice open to the world as a means of survival, other than the pooling together and sharing of world resources for all Humans planet wide" Yeah, "long stretches" do not seem to "work" in general. I'd look up "nudging" in the UK, which means they've "got it" but one must IMO remember towards what end the "nudging" is beholden. "Humans, planet wide". That's a really tough can you're trying to open. IMO.

"even though you didn't seem to know much of anything at all." I'd cultivate that for a while

A scone (is gone) is definitely what Mrs Whatsherface probably (sic) advocated for the masses when she said (in the book) "Let them eat cake". -----off to cake corner

"Ghandi was a leader against the caste system" - oh, ok, I wonder where I got the other idea from? "Scarcity is often a contrived and manufacture state." - Scarcity is often a contrived and manufacture state. I've been contemplating this quite a lot recently.

Thanks, that's what I thought/know. However, what about mantras directly related to "gods" (only because I can't spell dieties ;-))? How about "silent" mantras? And how about "physical" mantras (i.e "mudras")? I know, a bunch of questions, but since you kindly answered ;-) Thank you! :-)

It's a rallying post. I agree! But I do wonder about the "spirituality" of the so-called "council of 33" - as well as those close to them and those far away from them. It's something I've been trying to fathom for quite some time. I do not believe they "lack vision" either, just that their particular brand of it is not what I'd like to see happening. Although, as I speak, it is indeed underway. So is there a point at which any given person can "wake up" and start determining the best course of action for themselves (let alone the rest of the world)? Doesn't the TTC say very clearly "Do you think you can change the world?" And I can't recall the answer exactly but I think it's negative. i wonder why that would be the case. Oh, and wasn't Ghandi "Be the change you want to see in the world" in favour of the caste-system? I might be mistaken (as usual...)

Whatcha up to Mr "9th"? Poetry? If you're doing what I think you might be doing, please stop. It's not very kind. But if you're not, no worries Poetry?

"No, I just wanted to hear your thoughts on what you consider to be "free will". Free will to me is nothing more than to say yes or no when given a choice to make. Plain and simple." Okay! Yup, there's a few "things" there that merit discussion. I'm not a philosopher, not very good at it, but I like to try to work things out. Here's a shot. I would start with the idea of "choice". And the idea that we are "given" a choice to which we only say "yes" or "no". That to me is already a problem, right there. IMO ANY situation in which a "yes/no choice" is "given" to us (as opposed to a solution being considered, or thought out, or discussed, or sought out for oneself, or any number of alternatives) tells me that the "choice" on offer is in reality not a "choice" but effectively a pretty well delimited "cage" of options that the "giver" has elaborated for us. In that situation "free will" could propose any number of alternatives/solutions/ideas, including NOT to entertain the so-called "choice" that is so (un/graciously?) on offer but because my freewill stops at the other person's, IMO I'd be smarter if I found a solution that suits both of us so we both get what we want. Of course, the freewill of the "giver" could respond to my suggestions with any number of wonderful alternative options. But in practice, because they probably still want to have their way, the giver may offer up more "choices" that seek to lock me into an even narrower set of options. And depending on what they want, well, that could go all over the place for me. Including (probably) at least one option where I'll decide I don't want/need whatever I want sufficiently badly so I'll give up and give in. In other words, they "stacked the deck". "To survive within a dominating structure, you must conform to the standards that society puts forth. Which to me eliminates the very idea of free will." To "accommodate" a dominating structure, yes, you have to be submissive or become part of the dominant lot. But not if you neither want to accommodate it nor become dominant. In that situation, "free will" could pick and choose which aspects of the society they wanted to adhere to vs the aspects they didn't. But again, watch out for folks "stacking the deck". "No magic is needed, just thoughts on how you see it. " Thanks "I'm not interested in determining who's right or wrong here, because I don't see it's necessary for anyone to be wrong. We all have our own take on what we perceive the world to be." Yes, I suppose we do. However, that argument is probably often used to justify inherently awful things, so I'd need to think about it some more before I respond to it.

"Prove to me the existence of free will. (That is, any decision you have made that is independent of your own desires.)" But that's your definition of it, isn't it? You want a full and proper logical version of my argument on your terms I suppose. And you'll be the judge of whether it is full and proper and logical as well, I suppose. Even if you don't understand what I'm saying, I suppose. Hum, so not only do you want me to prove it to you, but you want me to transcend my reality to come and do all the logical arguing to prove it to you in yours? You must think I'm a magician! Yey!

Oh, I just thought it was interesting. I'm not endorsing him (I actually thought it was a her BTW). I probably should have covered it in caveats. To explain further, having practiced some qi-gong - including healing sounds and whatnot, I'm very interested in the energetic "signatures" of specific "things" (for want of a better word). I can certainly envision a "mantra" as having an energetic signature of some kind (much like other "thoughtforms" or even types of chi have). I thought it was interesting to dig into what a specific signature would be "doing" - or maybe "resonating with" is maybe more to the point. Anyway, as I said elsewhere, I'm making a point in my practice of not "hooking" up with anything apart from "source" - so no "thoughtforms" or "big-dippers" in my cultivation. Yes, that could mean that I'm not going to get anywhere particularly fast, but I'm not in any hurry and I have a bit of an idea that a human being is actually a pretty neat spiritual being all by itself

"The very Idea of having "real" free will is like saying you may do whatever you please. Neither one is a part of the nature of our reality." Oh, well, if you're sure. I think we've probably had this discussion before, Taoists tend to be pretty radical about it. I may do as I please to avoid "the singularity" and "it" may do as it pleases to attempt to get me to accept it of my own volition (that could go all the way down to heavy coercion and torture BTW, not just a neat fashion statement or keeping up with Joneses). We can get to "our reality" in another post. It's blatantly not "ours" unless both of us accept it as such. But hey, if in your reality there's no free will whatsoever and everything is ultimately determined and all the people are sheep (are you including yourself?) in your world, then yes, it's possible your reality is one in which "the singularity" will come along and getcha. But the damnedest (sp?) question, is why did you decide it that way?

Yep, been thinking about this one. I'd say it would once and for all solve the conundrum of mind/body/soul/spirit. But I don't see what the point would be, from the perspective of consciousness itself, having a bunch of plugged in people that have lost all sensuality. Oh wait, I recall that the "singularity" is essentially being promoted by geeks that aren't getting any action because they've atrophied all social skills in favour of the "info-hit" - the surge of dopamine that smacks their immature brains everytime they get to see "what they did" appear immediately onscreen. Anyway, digression aside, to get there, you have to get people to accept it willingly. I.e. out of their own free will. Otherwise, it's violation of basic cosmic game rules Of course you can "stack" the deck and tell people it's "inevitable" or "for the good of the species" or "the good of the planet" or other such nonsense (like being able to "control" games with your brain...or get food stamps or credit if you live in India, or stop "global warming" by buying "carbon credits" hahahahaha) Oh wait, we already have "techno-samadhi" and binaurals with "cocaine" signatures... That'll do it. Still, it's a dodgy one on the "free-will" side. Violate that one my friends and the game is up

Hello! I went looking for an "ignore" button so I could filter posts. Is there one? If so, where do I find it? Thank you!

Found, and in effect. Thank you kindly!

Ah, here you go again. It seems only the other day, you'd picked out someone else. Alright. What do you actually know about my research on your religion? The only reason I'm not into it is because of the research I've been doing. That's all. I've read your posts and they're all fine enough. I just don't want to go down that particular path, personally speaking. My "selfhood" might pain you, but it needn't, if you rid yourself of yours - because apparently that's what it would take - but I wouldn't ask that of you. Ever. What do you know of my cultivation practices? Which, I may add, regularly include intent that all beings awaken. In fact I carry it with me wherever I go. I'll admit to a penchant for human awakening and well-being as a priority, but I suspect that comes from being one. What do you know of my understanding of psychological projection? Do you understand it sufficiently to know when it's operating in yourself? And when it's not? I didn't mention the Hindus recently, so can't speak to that one.

Oh, I think I believe you. I'm not happy that you're hanging with E.Ts but what's a gal to do

"We do have to keep up with the Jones'es don't we? " Um, no. I don't believe it has to be an "adhere or die out" kind of deal (which is a bit too Faustian for my tastes). I also don't believe it's very intelligent to write "the future" based on current desires and technological "advances". It's the illusion of linearity in "progress" that IMO got us into similar messes in the past and present. I was going to add a provocative pic of a fat gamer kid to ironize about the great idea of technologically enhanced "biological ability" but stopped short because it's too damn sad, IMO.

Oh, I can see it from here. I think it's disingenuous to blame "anyone that uses a cell phone and uses the internet" because in both of those contexts the use is relatively voluntary. I say "relatively" because in many situations, the web is the only point of access for people to take a certain action to achieve something they either want or need to do. Chipping someone who hasn't asked for it is, well, involuntary. Big no-no in my book. Personally, I don't care two bits (pun intended) if I get my misinformation faster or slower.

You'd be surprised just how much I have practiced "self-examination" VJ. And while I do feel I should respond to your posts about me, know that I don't take them personally. In other words, it doesn't hurt You've decided on your own "paradigm" and you seem to know where that leads. I think I know where it leads too, and I'm not interested. In fact I'm starting to wonder where the Taoist forum went and whether I should go find a Taoist forum that is not IMO spoiled by such divergence and buddhist leaning dogma. I suppose if you were a friend of mine, well, I might take what you're saying to me and about me to be an indication that we're not only not in agreement but that in addition to that, you have very little respect for me as a person. But, hey. You're not.

Hi. From the quote you posted "is a point where our old models must be discarded and a new reality rules." It wasn't mentioned why this should be the case, just that it "is". And I wonder about that. Unless someone can explain coherently why this should be ushered in then I'm unable to comment further. However, I am aware that this line of thinking is something being actively promoted in a variety of arenas and I personally don't "dig it".

Therapies. For example, I read somewhere that some anti-depressant medication is used to increase brain plasticity that can then be exploited in therapy to correct the patient's "issues". I don't know how reliable this idea is. Sounds fishy when compared with other research that suggests that the brain's plasticity is an ongoing thing. I'd say that qi-gong is the best research tool for plasticity (and many other things) that I've come across so far!