froggie

i think it depends on what one means with complex. i meant complex as in that there are many ways, you mean not complex because everything can be broken down into simpler ways, right?

no i didn't say that and i didn't even imply it. it's much more complex than that. there can be a lot of things going on and changing and so so many things.

my understanding isn't complete, but we are concisounesses in a dense vibratory state, and we call it a body. ghosts are conscousnesses also and they are in another sort of body (and with that also a -slightly- different way of awareness and consciousness. i know at least 2 people personally who can see all kinds of ghosts. i can see energies and 'mists', i can rarely see great details, although it's improving itself in periodical steps, and it i not something that i somehow mind. like in some kinds of buddhism where spirits ar real and part of the world or bigger world, and also i believe in some taoism it is like this (maybe all taoism?). i find it exceptionally useful information, and knowledge

I think that if it can do what it's made for then it's a useful and perhaps in some cases even an extremely good invention. Cynicism is justified about half of the time i reckon, the other half cynicism is damaging to something which may be worth a lot more than what it's made out to be by cynics (cynical critics) who take cynicism way too far and turn it into something destructive rather than constructive (criticism) where it shouldnt hold that place. i.e. if fooling is the mode, it sure doesn't mean by definition that all is 'turds with colorful ribbons' in fact i think it plays into the hands of true cynics who, at a later event, let's say, have way more sinister intentions. it's good to be aware of this nuance also. simple but complete awareness is still a major key. Good video: http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/nbegich.htm http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/deden.htm

Yeah, i have some experience in iron palm and some experience in sending 'energy' very selectively, though not per say in that combination, but also. So it's a bit of a reply from my own insights. But i did want to make it even more clear that talking is far less difficult than doing this, even if i say it's not the highest skill level of brick breaking, it's really quite something, certainly, compared to not being able to do this, it's worth a lot. (i'm not going to talk about this particular price anymore though. i don't know what to say. in a way it's too bad, but it's also very understandable.) What i really meant to add was that it's 'basic advanced', not 'advanced advanced', but i am glad that you picked up on that.

What would be the difference between smoking it and eating it? By the way, you can get 99% cacao chocolate bars also in simple candy stores

That would be the amino acid L-Arginine i think. Too bad they don't mention it. Although natural root hormone for plants is also made from willow bark, seems more handy to use that than the amino acid ..... but who knows .... probably though

biodynamic farming and making plants strong instead of depleting makes more sense. strong plants = more (good) crop. although it may seem less quantity, if done well it will expand exponentially over the years. weak plants = less (good) crop, although it may seem more in quantity, there will be failures, and it will grow like that exponentially over the years. all in all, if both would be done side by side, then the second method will yield more in the beginning, then as time goes by there will come an equal level of quantity, and even further on the 1st method will yield more than the second one. food for thought, right?

please excuse my cander, but i think "just vegetarian" won't do. ideally it will have to be quite rich in nutrients and really perfectly balanced. seaweeds, organically grown superfoods, very skillfully balanced in macro nutrients, micronutrients, and all else. Well, let me rephrase that... maybe it -will do-, but the latter way will be exponentially easyer and i would venture to say much more recommendable than "just vegetarian". (i don't mean to say you're not right, i just wish to expand upon it.) (and for depth of clarity on such in essence and overall not easy subjects, because of mode of thinking of still many people) also biodynamic farming and making plants strong instead of depleting makes a lot more sense also. strong plants = more (good) crop. although it may seem less quantity, if done well it will expand exponentially over the years. weak plants = less (good) crop, although it may seem more in quantity, there will be failures, and it will grow like that exponentially over the years. all in all, if both would be done side by side, then the second method will yield more in the beginning, then as time goes by there will come an equal level of quantity, and even further on the 1st method will yield more than the second one. food for thought indeed, right? edit: i'm going to make this into a seperate topic ...

i'm not sure how i can phrase my reply without seeming too positive or too negative, but... it's an okay feature, not super advanced and not completely unskilled. it would have been quite more impressive if the feature was perfomed one after another and every time on forehand say which brick was going to be broken and not always the bottom one, too. in my opinion. but i realize that just talking about it is -even less- difficult in a way. it's nice to see though at least. and also the price tag seems pretty exclusive. i.e. not too many will be able to afford that? and it kind of diminishes the skill also .... it's less about making pure money than it is to really like teaching it i figure. dunno. i have a variety of mixed feelings about the whole thing basically.

It makes sense with taoism and chi gong and so in my opinion (bone marrow chi gong and so) I understand this is a controversial subject, but then again, what isn't? Coca Cola versus Pepsi Cola for example? I also understand that the possibilities for both good and bad are both big, so maybe timing is key here, where people's should wake up and act morally higher first before doing things in this direction. But that being said, i think it is very wrong of anyone to put it only in the domain of fear and therefore, or actually thereafter, not even doing anything with it. (i.e. use fear, but use it only senselessly. pointlessly. lame fear. unuseful fear. and on top of that all: too much fear, for too long and therefore/after too strong. on top of on top of, making it not only not useful, but in the end: Make it nothing more than sillyness itself, by itself.)

Does it exist? It would be nice if it does, like ebay and paypal kind of seem to attempt to do, together, or like here in the Netherlands where the biggest online secondhand and auction site offers a very complete and so far totally unscammable 3rd party escrow service for just 50 cents for the buyer and 50 cents for the seller (combined effort, which is nice in itself! and so cheap for what you are getting.)

That sounds like a good idea. The cooking pot is my personal practise site on this site by the way in case someone was wondering.

Hey NeutralWire, thanks so much for the book recommendation. i appreciate it really much. Froggie

In Paul Dong's book "China's superpsychics" there is a story of a man (there are many stories in the book, also nice ones where children make flowers bloom from buds in seconds, and children who move things through solid objects (kind of tele transportation) and much more) who could 'transport' coins into another person's stomach or set their clothes on fire from a distance.

Hi Mak, nice to see you again. Hope you will enjoy it here again. Take it easy, Froggie

I just found out it may become illegal to grow fruits and vegetables (sort of anyway) they are making it very hard to buy seeds of unusual and special kinds (for example tomatoes, such as (more disease resistand and cold resistant by the way and more aromatic and tastyer, more enjoyable) black tomatoes). And other things like 'you can buy the seeds but you can't 'eat' them, only look at them, etc. (only for ornamental purposes, etc.) Government has lost track of it's original purpose. To help people, make people happy, take care of them, but not by saying you must or you mustn't, just saying some words why you shouldn't or etc. not a thing more. it's a monster, not helpful in any way almost anymore. FWIW. at least it is still. who knows if it could change for the better actually

This is a nice one <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> by the way to embed a youtube video, copy the 'embed' text-line on youtube and paste it inbetween [youtube ] [/youtube ] here.

They are visible to the eye, depending on your own 'level' though, they can be less clear, or more or less clear than on a photo, or even more clear than on a photo, or they could also be there and one won't see them. It is my opinion that a camera can be quite sensitive in capturing light/'energy', but you are also right that it doesn't discriminate in anything, if it's something else it will also put it on the picture.

hm, well, ok. i guess it's better to do things minutely and try it some times to eliminate any possible mistakes made in the process, when trying to go for capturing something like this. I'm still in some doubt that any random skeptic would just dismiss it with a few easily uttered words, though. Perhaps even in a slightly more unscientific way than the would be taker of a peculiar photo. anyway, i guess it's just as easy to make fraud (i prefer to call it make) if one really wanted to than it is to disprove something if someone wants to (taking into account both professionality and purpose of the claim (when speaking of trying to prove something not fully explainable into undisputable proof) - i didn't have proving in mind with it though, at least not to such a high degree. (just as a curiosity to show, for fun and intrigue, on the fly, and to anyone interested in matters which may, yet, still be unclear (and may remain so unless the interest is high enough)

hey, hardyg, isn't it actually easyer to throw in some numbers than to actually have been there to see it? also, dispite the scientific-fied mashup on display, fwiw, it's actually quite nice to do something like that which you see on the pictures quite conciously. (without any intended malpractise and without much in the way of obstruction to failure of clarity (,as much as possible, given a more than decent 'home' setting, though. i wasn;t making an effort, not at the time and not now, to prove something which in essence is still unclear whether it is or whether it isn't, and it may take some time before or if and if then when or how it can be determined.) i wouldn't call it half bad for a spontanious action, in fact i woulnd't call it even quarter bad, all in all. anyway, that's what i thought.

Yeah, fine. it could also be an ORB (or whatever that may be)

Most of what you are saying is not what actually occured or took place. With the exception of the fact that they were taken a long time ago, much longer than a year, more than a couple of years even. But anyone could have told you that who has the software to look at the photo's exif data. (*and* if it's not tampered with, which it isn't, but alas. you may get the point. that is at least how far my knowledge of this matter goes.) processed on a computer: no. just stored on it. the pictures themselves have never been 'touched' in that sense, by any other means, if one wishes to equate or add storing as touching the digital material known as a digital photograph or lichtgraphic, if you so desire to rephrase the word photograph. as for lighting: maybe a cloud moved to let more sun through the curtains. [i'm sure this may satisfy some rationale] Also, i was pretty sure they were taken closely after eachother with the same settings and the same posture. Just to be sure i had to say 'at least shorter than 'this amount' of time', because 1. i didn't actually time it and 2. i don't even remember it exactly, i only remember the aforementioned details exactly. How's that for your how's that? Did i forget anything? ---- Also, are you implying that these pictures and i are a fraud because of the data you just added, or did you just want some of the extra information? I guess we ALL always can learn something. ---- Also, more importantly: More than trying to prove something absolutely, i felt it a curious photo of which i took to experiment of capturing a form of communication (intended by myself) on picture.

Believe it or not, i have actually studied both things like NLP and energy work, so i see each of your's validation points. But what strikes me is that one kind is not complete without the other. (Can not be) And also, what each of you says about the other's is reflectable in the same way over to the other side. hth, sincerely

<snipped for clarity>