Hello, Cy, hello, OMF II

First topic message reminder :

Testing.......

Yes, it is working.

Congratulations to Cyrellys & Co.!

I will be continuing the BPWH blog from Compass Morainn, which was a continuation from the original OMF site on ProBoards, which is in the process of being re-archived from that site.



(cont.)

Jake,

I'm supposing that materialism is a form of idolatry, finding its origin in the gospel of the Incarnation, the Eucharist and similar beliefs that are subscribed to by all Christians. It is just this that sets us apart and makes us special. After the Incarnation, there logically followed materialism, and that this sequence was essential to our salvation.

God knows that it takes all kinds to make the best possible Creation. His tent is a big one. It is all of Creation. Let us not rush to judge. Let us not condemn, we who do not have access to the whole truth. His truth is even larger than his Creation. It will be inescapable, when it comes.

.

dan wrote:Jake,

I'm supposing that materialism is a form of idolatry, finding its origin in the gospel of the Incarnation, the Eucharist and similar beliefs that are subscribed to by all Christians.

I am supposing that I am like Moses, and that the Golden Calf was the Pinnacle origin of Idolatry. Materialism is an extension, an evolution of the Golden Calf.

Dan, you are a philosopher, a reductionist and a holist, this should be easy for you to understand.

>

What was the Golden Calf all about?

Why should the Israelites make such a thing while their leader, Moses was up the mountain communing with God? Were they idiots to build such a thing? Well we surely know that Moses was shocked by their lack of understanding. But what was so bad about making a Golden Calf? And how does this relate to Scientific Materialism? Most Christians would not know how to answer this. At Least not correctly. But it is important to understand, for it was the day that changed the world forever thereafter.

They were not idiots. In fact they made it in honor to God who saved them from bondage. It was a thanksgiving offering. And it was extremely costly. It required they give up their most prized and costly possessions. They made it to Praise God the most high, for he is good and faithful and has answered their prayers and released them from their burdens of slavery.

Have you heard the story differently, Dan? If you have, you've heard an incorrect account. The building of the Golden Calf was a sacrifice of extreme piousness. They truly felt that when Moses returned, he would be teared with Joy for their Godliness and faithfulness.

But when he returned with the tablets of ten commandments, he was shocked by their errors. Now imagine being one of those who arose the enthusiasm of the people to make this great statue, to sacrifice all their gold which they would have had to hide for years from their captures. To sing praises to God in their joy in the building of it. And Moses is upset!? huh!

Catholics don't understand either. They will say they are not idolaters, they do all they do in Praise to God. Just as the Israelites did.

So why a Calf? Real cattle were a gift from God to man. They bore mans burdens in toiling the earth. They provided milk and cheese for years. And then provided meat at the end of their life. The Cow was the greatest gift to man. And only a God honoring person would be wise enough to recognize this as being something to be thankful for. The Israelites were God honoring. They were full of Joy that God had delivered them from generations of slavery. What better thing could they do, then to build a Calf in Honor to God? And make it of Gold. For that shows even more faith that God will provide, and they don't need to rely on money. God will provide. The Golden Calf was a Beautiful Symbol in the eyes of the faithful Israelites. WHAT COULD BE SO WRONG WITH IT?

This is the true story of the Golden Calf, Dan. This is the way it really was. The story is told differently by Idolaters who want us to believe the Israelites were heathen stupid people to make such a ridiculous thing. But that's not what happened at all.

Surely the Israelites were surprised that one of the commandments on the tablets Moses brought down, was that they should not make any image, graven or otherwise of any thing on earth in honor of God. Nor where they make any image of heaven or even God. None whatsoever was the commandments.

Why? What could be so wrong with that?

And what's so wrong with a Statue of Jesus or Mary? It is a good thing. Their meanings are intended to be Godly, Holy, Reverent. Exactly like the Israelites Golden Calf.

3,400 years later, ~95% of the world still doesn't get it.

con't

[quote="Jake Reason"]

dan wrote:
is an essential component of God's self-concealment.

And that is it!

There is no such thing as "God's self-concealment". In reality it is an oxymoron concept. And the root cause of the thought that God is self-concealing, is Idolatry.

When Moses arrived down the mountain and saw what they had done and the Golden Calf. He was carrying two tablets of stone, with writing on them. The first two statements were:
1. "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me".

2. "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below".

Historically, #2 was one of the oddest, most peculiar, religious statements the world had ever seen. And to this day it is still not understood by the vast majority of mankind. Including Christians and other religious people.

Idolatry is a conscious manifestation of "separation". The conceptualization of being separated from G-d, gives cause and justification to Idolatry. If the thought of separation from God were not present in consciousness, then an Idol would not be made. Because the conscious would not comprehend it. The thought of separation is a paradigm construct of the mind. This paradigm gives fundamental form to a conscious comprehension. If the mind accepts it as reality, then it is a pseudo-reality to the conscious mind.

The thought of constructing an idol is rooted in the desire to represent the pseudo-reality of separation. Forming a symbolic remembrance. The "remembrance", is that the mind is separate, but longs not to be. The symbol that the idol is stylized in, focuses the mind to God, which the mind of the pseudo-reality thinks it is separated from.

However there is no separation. Separation does not exist in reality.

And that is why idolatry was commanded against. For it reinforces 'separation' as real, while it is not.

--------------

In reality, ALL is interconnected in some way or another. Man could not exist without the earth, the earth cannot without the sun, the sun cannot without the Universe, etc etc. And man can not exist without the mind. Man can not contemplate God and Cosmos without the mind. And only through the mind can man experience God.

God is within. God walks with us. God knows every hair on our head. And we don't even know every hair. But our body does. It knows when a new one should replace the fallen one. All is interconnected. There is no separation. There are only degrees of understanding. But God is always there. God knows all our thoughts. There is no place we can go to get closer to God. And there is no thought we can have that is separate from God's knowing.

Idolatry however, permits us to maintain our pseudo-reality. Which is not real. It gives us permission to remain unreal and believing we are separate from God. Idolatry is a mediator between us and God. Yet there is none required.

If we did not permit Idolatry, then the thought of them would eventually fade from our consciousness. And when it fades away, there would be nothing left in our conscious to separate our conscious from God. The ending of Idolatry would end our pseudo-reality.

Hence the seemingly peculiar commandment. The commandment was given for "cause and effect".

-----------------

1,400 years after Moses, Jesus made another extremely odd and peculiar proclamation. The Highest Jewish religious authorities asked him when the Kingdom of God would come. These were men who knew all the scriptures and probably read the Torah everyday. 'Jesus' said, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you"

Yet even today 2000 years later, there are nearly a billion Christians praying to Mary, or Jesus, or their favorite Saint to help them. huh! And even some Protestants will clench their gold Cross pendant while they pray, in hopes that God will hear them better. huh!

Why don't they know that God is within them?

Idolatry.

---------------

To Dan in closing, So where did Scientific Materialism arise from?

I'm supposing that its foundational cause is rooted in the practiced acceptance of Idolatry. This pseudo-mind reality conditions man's global societal consciousness to adapt "separation" as real. The natural evolutionary extension of this, is a societal conscious separation from everything.

Thus Science interprets everything as an object. Scientific Materialism is therefore not the 'cause' of mankind's delusion, but rather the 'effect' of Idolatry.



edit spelling

Dan,
I realize the above is nothing new to you. My rather extended reply was intended to empathize that the end of "Scientific Materialism" will not be sufficient to absolve the delusion.

But rather not until Idolatry is removed as a mediator between the consciousness of man and G-d.

I do like the Pieta though, sorry it has to go. So too the Buddha statues. I don't think Michaelangelo nor Siddhārtha will mind. Maybe we'll have Museums in the Millennium. For the kids. Or not, I guess holograms will do.

And now a brief apologetic to our resident Catholics, including RP's confidant, John S....

dan wrote:Jake,
Let us not rush to judge. Let us not condemn, we who do not have access to the whole truth.

Dan,
I did not write, to condemn. But to bare light upon truth.

You are more a philosopher and scientific historian, whereas I am more a religionist and theologian. You see Scientific Materialism as the root cause of man's failing. I see Religious Idolatry as the root cause of Scientific Materialism.

However, you do not despise science, nor do I despise religious idolatry. Catholic idolatry has paved the way for the production of some of the most creative and perfect works of art and architecture in the world today. Magnificent achievements of sacrifice and genius. And they have served billions of people in countless positive ways.

I am simply pointing out philosophical "origins". Just as you are. That's all.

They both have to go eventually, materialism and idolatry. They have served us well. They have not been without purpose. But they are soon to run their course.

Moses told us 3,400 years ago, neither would be needed. And 'Jesus' reminded us the same. They also told us that materialism and idolatry were not images of eternal reality. And it looks like we're on the cusp of catching on.

It's just sad it's taking us all so long. There is so much more awaiting for us, once we learn to put this childhood behind.

Thank you, Jake. We both see a connection between (scientific) materialism and idolatry. We will need to explore it further.

At the SfA, my 10 minute talk may be preempted by the school shootings. My present intent, however, is to connect the dots...... a pale blue dot and a green dot, as in little green men. In order to connect these two, we will need a third dot. It will be a red one.........


2:05---------

Things went very well, this morning, IMHO. The outstanding question at the moment concerns the followup. None, specifically, was suggested......... Does this mean that the ball is still in my court, or that there is a desire that there not be any followup? I will be exploring this question, at least until my next presentation at SfA.

I have spoken with Sam about this, and I have a call into Ron, who may be about to meet with the Pope, but I have not heard from him since he left, almost two weeks ago.

I shook hands with pastor KS, after the service. He seemed preoccupied. There was barely any mention of Newtown, in the service, and none in SfA.

The plan is that I will brief Sam on the SfA meeting, and arrange for the two of us to meet with Bill S, asap. I will then talk to Paul S of BGF about moving my talk to January. Sam is concerned that this would be tantamount to our taking over the BGF, which would then likely become defunct. We shall see.

And I'm thinking about requesting a second opinion concerning the status and history of the R&A show. I will consult with Ron, prior to making a formal request. If he refuses to cooperate, I will visit the local offices of one or both of my Senators. This is just as a logical preliminary to any serious attempt to move forward.

I would suggest to Bill that he should consult with the GFC board of elders concerning my status at the church and within the Christian community. They have two likely choices...... kick me out, or kick me upstairs. Which will be the path of least resistance?


3:30-------------

Sam and I still have the Thursday meeting with an interfaith group to which he, partly on my suggestion, has invited his Sufi friend, from Pakistan.

It has occurred to me that Adam L could have been motivated, in part, by the Mayan calendar business. We shall see if that timeline turns out to have had any influence in his rather distorted thought processes.


3:50----------

It has been two hours since I called Ron's cell phone # and sent him an email.

I have just submitted the following request @ his agency's website.......

I would like to speak with someone at the agency concerning my 21 year long liaison with Ronald Pandolfi.

I would hope to have some response by tomorrow morning. In the meantime I will be contacting the local offices of my US Senators.

Dan

The request was submitted here........https://www.cia.gov/cgi-bin/comment_form.cgi

The confirmation # for this RFI is EYW33J8.

Given that there is a likelihood of a connection with the Mayan calendar, I would confidently hope that the law enforcement agencies have instituted a special alert for copy-cat perpetrators. The fact that Ron may be speaking with the Pope, on or about this date, may also be of some significance.


4:15-----------

Now, I undestand that normal folks, under normal circumstances, would have made such an inquiry, several years ago. But, in this case, there are extenuating circumstances. Long ago I made public, my previous inquiry to the legislative branch, concerning the R&A show.

I refer you to my timeline...... http://www.bestpossibleworld.com/nexu66.htm#timeline

Therein, you will see reference to a c.1995 meeting with an SSCI staffer. Said staffer was Chris Straub, then the ranking staff member for that committee. You will find several references to those three meetings and to a subsequent phone conversation, on our about 9/13/01, at the BPW site, and at OMF I/II. On that day, I also met with an FBI agent in Catonsville. Since those meetings, I have labored under the impression that my communications with and/or about Ron were being monitored by responsible authorities.

In as much as things continue to move forward, is it not now appropriate for me to seek some assurance, from an appropriate third-party, that these communications are still receiving whatever should be their appropriate level of monitoring?

On 9/11 there were ~3,000 deaths. Let us hope that there will be fewer deaths, even as we enter into these endtimes. Most evangelicals are expecting >~10^9 violent deaths, in the endtimes.


5:10----------

Just had a 9' convo with Jack S. He suggested that I call Geo K or Gary B in order to contact Kit G. Ok, I will make those calls...... and then I'll send emails.


5:40----------

From: Dan Smith
Date: December 16, 2012 5:35:39 PM EST
To: George Knapp, JACK SARFATTI
Cc: Kit Green, Ronald Pandolfi, GaryBekkum
Subject: Attempting to contact Ron and/or the CIA......

Things seem to be moving forward wrt the Endtimes.  I have requested the CIA to contact me to confirm any possible oversight of the so-called R&[D] show.  

I am blogging about this on OMF II....... https://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/t6p690-hello-cy-hello-omf-ii#1514

My understanding is that Ron and Aliyah are having a personal meeting with the Pope, this week.  I would like to speak with Kit Green about this, but he and I have had no communications in several years.  

I will be contacting the local offices of my US Senators, unless any one of you can provide me with some continuing information.  

The only one of you that I've been able to contact is Jack, who suggested this next move.  


Dan

From: Dan Smith
Date: December 16, 2012 6:19:45 PM EST
To: jack
Cc: George Knapp, Kit Green, RonaldPandolfi, GaryBekkum, KimBurrafato, Colleen Thomas , Mollyann Wingerter, Ryan Dube, Jagdish Mann, IFPA GROUP-EUROPE, Paul Murad, Sharon Weinberger, Amara Angelica, StephenBroadbent, Caryn, Paul Zielinski, Leslie Mitts, "Mark, Saunders, COLIN BENNET
Subject: Re: Attempting to contact Ron and/or the CIA......

I thank you, Jack, for this timely followup.  You and Kim seem to be the only ones I can contact when Ron & Co are out of town, maybe visiting Benedict.  

Yes, you and I should reconnoiter in January, to do an update on the possible proximity of the future horizon.  And no more black eyes, hopefully.  

Yes, when the moon is full, many will howl, just by our nature......

Dan


On Dec 16, 2012, at 6:09 PM, jack wrote:

Stay calm and carry on Dan.
Don't take any serotonin inhibitors they cause strokes & homicidal urges. Listen to Michael Savage radio he explains all that. He has a PhD from Berkeley in a relevant field.
The mass shooting has destabilized fragile minds like robert Collins including my Texas cyberbuly who has crawled out from under her rock after a long pause in response to the mass murder in Conn.

(cont.)

My!

Itchy feet, Dan? You're taking this rather seriously. Has 21/12 got you concerned that something might hit the news, besides Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays?

When you told me about a R/A Pope meeting, my first thought was; There are a lot of people in Rome besides the Pope. And it's a nice place to visit.

Que sera, I guess you deserve a confirmation of some sort.
Best wishes

Thank you, Jake. You have been my best correspondent, besides Sam, over these many years. You should get a gold star.


7pm---------

Yes, I still suggest that we be vigilant wrt copy-cats wrt the Mayan calendar. I do think that we do need to restrict gun ownership. And we do need to restrict the use of magazines of ammunition. I believe that the NRA will no longer be a potent political force, in this arena.



.

It looks like I'm staying put, this morning. I don't yet, or still, have the courage to make a federal case out of the BPWH. This morning it is the Sun, or, perhaps, the lack of it, behind the clouds, that is permitting my doubts, my second thoughts. It is not easy for anyone to stand up, point to the Sun, and declare it to be a figment of our collective imagination. Yes, the Sun is a sobering thought. I speak of Creation as a dynamo, but it still is the Sun that seems to power that dynamo. And we do have all the issues of energy conservation.

From this perspective, is it still not much too easy to ridicule the BPWH, just as with Samuel Johnson kicking the stone in the path. Christians have enough problems, without having to bring additional ridicule upon themselves. Is it just as well that Bill S interrupted my presentation, yesterday? I still wasn't ready for prime time?

I'm still suffering from the occasionalism of the Islamic philosophers....... as with the flame and the ball of cotton. Is it not the flame that causes the cotton to burn? Is God required to intervene in causation? Can we wonder that philosophers are held in low repute? We could say the same with the Sun and a magnifying glass. How do we snap our fingers and make this go away? Heck, we Xians will believe anything, even a young Earth, when we feel like it.

I've been here, before, any number of times...... lost in space and time. I usually am able to find my way out, but not permanently, it seems. If it's not the Sun, then it is the stone or one of the innumerable other stubbornly persistent illusions. Lord, why do they have to be quite so stubborn?! Do the ugly facts always have to defeat the beautiful truth? It hardly seems fair, now does it? Why does the correspondence theory always have to defeat coherence, or keep causing it to stumble, quite so persistently? Nonetheless, the weight of the facts is, ultimately, something rather subjective. In that sense, objects can't hurt us, but, still, sticks and stones break our bones..... No?


Each time I get lost, it seems like the first time. That, in itself, is a bit strange. Lostness should be so familiar to me that I should have the map on the back of my hand, but I look, and it's not there. Which state of mind should be the natural one...... being lost, or being found? Neither one seems entirely natural.

Aren't I a bit like the spelunker and the ball of string? Should we not suppose that, after getting lost in the cave umpteen times, the spelunker would remember to bring the string. But, rather, it seems that I keep forgetting it. Dang me!

Which way is up? Which is the beginning, and which is the end? Or am I supposed to start in the middle, somewhere, somehow? Is this rocket science?

Yesterday, at SfA, I started at the easy end...... the pale blue dot and the little green men. That is a walk in the park. Bill stopped me, just before I got to the physical/fiscal(?) cliff, bless his heart. Maybe that's where I dropped the ball of string. Coherence is a bit like juggling........ you see how many balls you can keep in the air, at the same time. But, if you drop one, then you have to start all the way back at the beginning, with or without the string.

Somewhere, I have to find a spot to jump over the river Styx, the metaphysical river of no return. The problem of nothingness may well define the narrowest spot along that river. That would also be where the river moves most rapidly.

I think we all agree that an empty universe makes no sense, and, if you add one atom to that empty universe, it still make no sense. You see, we have the sandpile problem...... how may grains of sand does it take to make a pile? How many atoms does it take to make a universe? This sounds horribly subjective, does it not? This is what is known as the Sorites Paradox.

So, how do I turn an epistemological problem into an ontological one?

On the one hand, we have the appearance of the Sun..... hey, no problemo. OTOH, we have the mechanics of the sun. Have I ever had a clue about this? It's ok to be a climate denier, but being a solar denier seems a bit much.



Noon------------

Why can't we be like the Egyptians, and just have a Sun god, Ra? The Sun and Moon do make a divine pair. Does that explain sunburn? Back on the BPW site, I resorted to using heliotropism to explain Helios. Is that backward, or what?

Trinitarianism is a big step toward polytheism and nature spirits. That's why the monotheists get so bent out of shape by us Xians. But, yet, I do claim that the idea of the incarnation was a necessary spur to the subsequent rationalization of matter, but it did turn out to be a very slippery slope into atomism. Ra is a significant obstacle to getting back up the slope. Or could he help us out? Certainly his helpmate is a Diaphanous one, the very stuff of metaphysics, if we can take Neil with a grain of moon-dust. What do they say..... don't let the smoke get in your eyes, don't let the Moon break your heart.

Why is it not enough just to chalk the Sun up to Anthropics? Actually, it is not easy to answer that question. Should that be a clue? But what else can I do, in the end?

The special problem of the Sun, may have to do with the idea of Creation as a dynamo. But if the dynamo has to be plugged into the Sun, then what is the Sun going to be plugged into? It does seem that our dynamo is hanging by a slender thread, metaphysically. Not to mention the infinite regress.

All the other photons I am content to chalk up to direct perception, but that doesn't seem to work for photosynthesis, now does it?



1:20-----------

The flora are liable to have a very different connection with the Sun, than are we, fauna. We come to an ontological fork in the road. The sun is having to do double-duty, within the BPWH. This doesn't bother the physicists at all. They just chalk it up to good old anthropic luck....... atoms swerving in the dark. They don't have to tell any Just-so stories. I'm saying that the sun is incidental to vision, but crucial to synthesis.

The other problem I seem to have is with fire. Is there not a connection? I return to both problems, periodically. Fire is not doing double-duty, not obviously. I posit it as a natural byproduct of metabolism...... only a bit dodgy!

Instead of the sun, we could have an an ecosystem based on hydrogen-sulfide, as with the flora and fauna dependent only upon the deep-sea vents. There is even speculation that life may have originated therewith. Frankly, I prefer the sun.


Hey, wouldn't Creation have been a lot simpler, if we had just had mana? Occam would have loved the mana solution. Wouldn't we have made the ideal couch-potatoes? And why couldn't we have stopped with atomic physics? We did we have to bring in nuclear physics? Look at all the problems it has caused....... much more trouble than it is worth!

What I'm trying to do is find some related, less obvious, problems, to see if they might shed any light on this big problem. It does seem rather unique, however. It does stand out like a sore thumb.




(cont.)

dan wrote:
Why is it not enough just to chalk the Sun up to Anthropics? Actually, it is not easy to answer that question. Should that be a clue? But what else can I do, in the end?

The special problem of the Sun, may have to do with the idea of Creation as a dynamo. But if the dynamo has to be plugged into the Sun, then what is the Sun going to be plugged into?

Is the Sun an independent perpetual machine, or is it plugged in to the Universe?

http://www.plasmacosmology.net/electric.html#

scroll down to "Electric Stars", there is a link to a PdF file;
http://electric-cosmos.org/Rejoinder.pdf

excerpt from page 4:

"A word about helioseismology: This 'science' is an exercise in a posteriori 'curve fitting of observed data'. If we see certain oscillations and fluctuations in any set of data we can always 'model' them – fit a mathematical curve to the data by 'least squares fit' or some other criterion. But then to claim that this model 'proves' what is occurring inside the Sun, where no observation has been made (or is possible), is logically unsupportable. Thompson goes on to say, "The problem faced by solar physicists is not that there is no explanation, but rather that there are too many potential explanations to choose from!" That constitutes a very poor argument for asserting the unique correctness of the standard solar model. And as we shall see below, disconfirming data is pushed to one side in the hope that someone, someday, will be able to explain it away. Dr. Gallagher and many of his colleagues are not as complacent as Thompson. Astrophysicists are all too prone to hypothesize invisible mechanisms (they often call them 'dynamos') and unobservable forces (dark energy comes to mind) whenever their gravity-only fusion model needs propping up. Thompson‘s "many potential explanations" are unlimited in number only because of the keenness of astrophysicists for inventing yet more arcane, fictional, invisible entities and forces – while steadfastly ignoring electrical explanations.

Yes! That's what I'm trying to figure out........

And, yes, electrical analogies do play a definite role in the BPWH. Talbot seems to take these analogies a bit too literally, for my taste.


3:20---------

And this is probably part of my difficulty...... trying to draw a line between the literal and metaphorical aspects of the BPWH. Nature abhors vacuums and boundaries.


So, golly, maybe Ron is right, maybe I should throw in the best possible towel. But where is my pension? Louise was lucky, in that she was able to pass on, with her boots still on. That is one problem with not having a job...... you can't figure out how to quit. There is no retirement party, and no gold watch. Life is tough. Darn that Sun, anyway! It is nothing but a headache for us struggling metaphysicians.


When the visitors come here, they don't usually eat our food, and may not breathe our air. But can they get sunburned? Now, there's an important question, for you! Some suggest that they wear sunglasses. I kid you not!


Look, if we eat, then plants have got to eat, too. But who decided that they should eat photons? Who ever dreamed that up? That sure took some imagination. It's way above my pay grade.

Hey, is it not the snow-birds who cause the Sun to go south in the winter? That is a form of heliotropism. I'm struggling, here, folks.


I have heard of eye-candy, but normally we can't eat our perceptions, yet somehow the plants figured that out, smart little buggers that they are. Was it Jimmy Carter who had something to say about that? Or was it JC?

I think I need to beef up heliotropism.


I don't wish to make light of a horrible situation, but the fathers of the two recent rampagers are both connected to the LIBOR scandal. There is a conspiracy waiting for a theory....... http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2012/12/2-mass-shootings-connected-to-libor-scandal-2446788.html Don't get me started. Well, ok, then, Nancy was a 'prepper'. Need we say more? Where is the comforter, when we need her? Nothing like a tragedy to shrink the world.


Plants have to struggle to embrace the sun. Is that not a direct perception? How do we struggle? What do we struggle to embrace? Our Source? Whither do we go, lest we wither? Is Ra not their Source? Ode to a Grecian urn......?

Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave
  Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;  
    Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,  
Though winning near the goal—yet, do not grieve;  
    She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,  
  For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!

Am I making any sense? Now.......?

Above thy deep and dreamless sleep
The silent stars go by
Yet in thy dark streets shineth
The everlasting Light
The hopes and fears of all the years
Are met in thee tonight.

How much do you want to bet.....?

A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Hey, don't blame me! Are we the body electric, or is it mourning comes Electra? Are we ready to find out?

Will I be able to remember this, next time? Will anyone else catch the drift? How much space is between sink and source? That space is an illusion. It is but nothing. What is the rough beast? We are that. Are we cancer or chrysalis? Death throes or birth pangs?

Though seemingly unrelated, the emotionally wrenching school shootings may soften the hearts of politicians as they try to resolve the fiscal crisis.

Slouching, indeed!

Double duty.......? Geometry finds the geodesic. There is nothing incidental about day and night. Night hawks eat the moonlight. Scurry, scurry. What better proxy for the Monad than ecology? The eclipse pierces the side of the mother. The trinity comes home. Was Babylonian astrology not born out of that shock and awe? Who will believe? Who can believe? It is a slender thread.



(cont.)

Summing up, here was the key advance from yesterday........... there is a metaphoric parallel between the Sun and God. Mention was made of the Egyptian worship of Ra, for one of many historical instances. This is not news, is it? Well, what I wish to make plausible, today, is that humankind does not live by bread alone. Again, is this news? Perhaps it is, in the context in which I wish to deploy it.

The cynic might be quick to agree...... yes, we, humans, need both bread and circuses. I wish to amend that slightly.......

I say that we live by both bread and words, and that it is our consumption of the living word that has shaped our world, much more than has our consumption of calories. And I mean this in both the social and physical senses. I am even suggesting that Ra came before the Sun. Would this fact be newsworthy, were it to be made plausible? I think it might be.


10:20----------

Why is it plausible that words shaped the world.......?

Well, there can be little doubt that numbers have shaped the world. This is a tautology of physics, going back to Pythagoras. And where did numbers come from? Well, they came from logic. Of course, I'm thinking....... Logos..... Can logic and logos be separated? Not on my watch they can't. And which came first..... logic or logos? I'll wager you ten to one that logos came first. Is this newsworthy? It ought to be, and it will be, when the hour is ripe.

So, yes, we do have the Solar logos, a term that has also been usurped by various New Age groups. The sun is the organizing principle for the sky, and for life on Earth.

The sun emerged from the big bang, which emerged from nothing, or so we are told. Well, that is not true. It is a vast oversimplification of scientific cosmogenesis, and the innumerable strands of speculation, therein.

I am suggesting that, as per the logos, there never could have been nothing. There is, instead, the eternal Potentia. That is the mother source. Then there is the 'father' source, the logos spermatikos, the seed crystal that is dropped into the supersaturated, supercooled Potentia. Ra was a crucial aspect of that logos spermatikos. Does this sound like a myth? Well, it is the Mythos, which is the study and etymology of the archetypes, the logoi.


11:30--------

The upshot is very simple, mind/logos came before matter. Why is this simple and irrefutable fact not being annunciated from the rooftops? The time is not quite ripe. Yes, the time is pregnant, but the hour and manner of the parturition has not yet been revealed. We'll know it when we see it.

As of today, the most likely venue will be the SfA. God willing, the time will be Sunday. We shall see. The actual zero hour will depend mainly upon Bill's mood, bless his heart. How expansive will his mood be, on Sunday? When Bill is ready, I'm ready, yes, as of today, just to be specific........

From: Bill 
Date: December 17, 2012 10:35:31 PM EST
To: Dan Smith 
Subject: The end of the world

Dear Dan,

Here is a link to a good article I just read giving a perspective on the end of the world.  See you Sunday.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-end-will-come-just-not-later-this-week

Yours,

Bill

Hmmm............

In the bible there are, at least, three distinct accounts of Genesis. There are the two in the book of Genesis. Where is the third, and, to my mind, the crucial one.......

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Why should there be so much doubt about this? IMHO, the present large extent of doubt is a crucial part of our plan of salvation.


John 1:1-4 says it all. I am merely elaborating on these exact words. It should be passing strange that, when Xians speak of Creation, they do so entirely in terms of the Old Testament. Why do they shy away from John? Are they gun-shy? Bill, for instance, wants to speak of process. This probably comes from the notions of Process Theology. IMHO, John is not speaking of process. Yes, he has no process.

Only in such manner may we reconcile the YEH and the OEH, for instance, or, rather more significantly, may we reconcile the Alpha and the Omega.......

 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Do you see any mention of process? I sure don't.


12:40----------

TBMK, Process Theology is an oxymoron. Well, yes, it is about..... baby-steps, Ellie. God, allegedly, also takes baby-steps, in the Creation 'process'. Well, where does that leave the Alpha and Omega? Where does that leave the big-bang? Nay, where does that leave being born again? Yes, there is gestation, but there is also fruition, and there are also Revelation and Apocalypse.......

 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Have I left anything out? Do any stones remain unturned, lo these many years? I'm sure I'll think of a few, before Sunday, but will they indicate my lack or preparedness for prime time? Will they prevent my making additional comments on Sunday? Will Bill so prevent? Does there need to be another confrontation between the two of us?



2pm-----------

Bill was supposed to have been discussing 'process', last Sunday, but he had also promised me ten minutes to speak about the disconnect between the two RtB books...... C&C and LGM. The other five attendees and I were still going strong, 35' later, when Bill intervened in the proceedings, and gradually brought the discussion back to 'process'. This morning, he sent me the email posted above. I have not responded. I have not ruled out contacting him prior to Sunday, but am inclined not to.

I have also not ruled out attempting to contact any executive or legislative officials regarding the R&D show.

2:45--------

I have called the public affairs office at the CIA, and had an 18' conversation with Molly, and then mainly with Will Morgan. I was requesting confirmation of the legitimacy and/or status of my continuing liaison with Ron. After explaining, in some detail, to Will the nature of this liaison, he said that he would not be able to provide me with any assistance. In attempting to call back to public affairs, Molly will say hello, and then I say that I will speaking with Will, and the line goes dead.

I now wish to contact someone on the legislative side.


5:40-----------

I ended up driving down to Sen. Mikulski's office, in the city. After some conversation with staff-person, Marianne, I was instructed to write a letter to the Senator, which I did, while sitting in their front conference room. I am requesting a reassurance wrt the assurances that were offered to me by Chris Straub, in 1995, then the ranking staff member on the SSCI.

Having completed the one page letter, Marianne told me that it would be delivered to their Washington office, by "snail-mail", where it would be routed to their Intellignce liaison person. I have since left a phone message, at that office, requesting to speak with the liaison person.

I have left another message on Ron's mobile phone, which he said he would be monitoring. There has still be no response. Well, I feel that I have done my due diligence concerning my current status wrt Ron.

If I've heard nothing, within the next day or two, my logical next step would be to revisit the FBI office in Catonsville, which I last visited, I believe, on or about, 9/17/2001. On that previous visit I had a ~15' conversation with a woman, outside the newly fortified building. She took detailed written notes as to my concern that Ron appeared to have had prior knowledge, concerns that I have elaborated upon, on my website and on these OM forums.

I have never gotten any direct response from that visit, but, once again, I will be able to feel assured that I have done my due diligence, just as a concerned citizen.


Here is a followup thought that has just occurred to me. When contacting that Catonsville office, I should perhaps, just to be doubly assured of my due diligence, tell them that I would then head on down to Washington to contact the Secret Service, at the White House. It ought to be interesting to see what, if any, is their response to that information. Yes, I'm beginning to think that this could be an educational adventure, all around.


6:35---------

From: Dan Smith 
Date: December 18, 2012 6:31:53 PM EST
To: Ronald 
Subject: Update.......

Ron,

For various reasons, it has occurred to me that I should be making periodic inquiries as to my current status wrt being just your barbecue buddy.  I had been under the impression that, once upon a time, there was a more serious aspect to our communications.  If that is no longer the case, then I would like some (official?) confirmation to that effect.  

Dan

I should have added that I am currently and actively seeking such confirmation from appropriate third parties.


8pm------------

At the very least, I am owed a response from a public official who can assure me that there once was some appropriate oversight wrt my communications with Ron. Then, should there not be some additional statement concerning present and possible future communications? Even a no comment would be helpful. Failing all of the above, I would put increased pressure on Ron to explain the communications. If he can only offer that I am his barbecue buddy, then I will be more reluctant to accept his calls and invitations in the future, if there should be any such. I wonder if Ron will now deny that there was a briefing, or any meetings with Chris Straub, one of which meetings having been attended by Ron.

Would it be too inflammatory, now, for Ron or any other official to admit that, way back in 1995, I had a meeting with Chris Straub wherein the subject of eschatology was discussed, in connection with my ongoing communications with Ron?

Or would it just be too boring for any government official to provide any comment whatsoever?




(cont.)

Since the sun is shining today, I figure this is a good time to make hay, and not give Ron any more headaches by, say, taking a trip to Catonsville or down to 1600. Let's save those for a rainy day.

Tomorrow comes my next opportunity to make a presentation, this time at the local Interfaith center, with Sam and Bibi. I'm thinking of giving the folks at the ICJS a preview of my next talks at GFC and BGF, which, as I was realizing last night, should be of the same basic substance, with only some differences in emphasis.

I now see that the essential connecting link is likely to be the closed timelike curve (CTC). With this one round stone I can 'kill' both birds..... Science and Religion.

Anyone wish to make a bet? Maybe we'll find out tomorrow.


And you know what the biggest miracle may be is that I have gotten this close to the MoAPS, without anyone noticing. Even in this age of the Internet, and my plotting every step, right out in public view. And this stealth factor has likely been essential to the proper gestation of this baby. I'm also willing to bet, maybe on lower odds, that it will turn out that there has been a deliberate cone of silence wrt my little sandbox with its sandcastle, the BPWH. A cosmic conspiracy of Silence, with a little help from Ron&Co? Sure, why not? If you were God, how would you orchestrate the MoAPS, within a prophetic tradition? Has there ever been a Vision without a Visionary? That's just not possible, is it?

There will be one main difference between the two talks........ for Grace, I start with a straight timeline, from Alpha to Omega. For the Greens, I start with the Circle of Life, which, as it turns out, also just happens to be the cosmic CTC.

Is this getting simple, or what?


With Grace, I just start connecting the dots by using a third dot, above the timeline, which will be labeled as the Logos.

With the Greens, I draw a horizontal timeline, bisecting the circle of life, and extending beyond the circle, on either side, toward the past and toward the future.

Is 'everyone' following this? You should probably have a sketchpad in front of you. I will be using a sketchpad and/or a whiteboard in the talks. My sketchpad is mainly just in my little noggin.

The directed timeline represents the prophetic tradition. The circle of life represents the mystical tradition. Out of these two, diametrically opposed worldviews, neither of which is coherent, I am constructing a coherent synthesis, and if you know where this has been done before, please just post the URL. That would save us all a lot of trouble! No?


2:10-----------

Things continue to move ahead locally...........

Sam and I are meeting with Bill, in a few minutes. The meeting at the Institute, with Bibi is on Friday. I invited Bill to the Institute, but Les was concerned that it might become a circus, so it appears that I'll be the sole representative of the Evangelicals.

Gary sends us the following link....... http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_rees_asks_is_this_our_final_century.html I do recommend it. Notice Martin's reference to the Ouroboros, and to our final century. So near, yet so far!


3pm-----------

Waiting for Bill and Sam to show up.............


5:40----------

Bill and Sam aren't quite ready for me to save the world, not just yet, anyway, but maybe tomorrow or the next day! Nothing is wasted, I keep telling myself.

On Sunday, Bill will be talking about process and purpose in Creation. It turns out that there are many allusions to Creation, in the bible. IOW, there must be a lot of wiggle room for us, metaphysicians.

Trying to make a synthesis of a straight line and a circle should be more difficult even than squaring the circle, but I'm not one to refuse a challenge. Are we surprised that the J-man provides the answer? I pointed this out to Bill, but he didn't see it. My kingdom for a whiteboard! Give me a whiteboard, and nothing can stop me.

Now get this....... http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/02/was-gods-purpose-in-creation-to-glorify-himself/ Nice question. Do I have competition?




(cont.)

It turns out, as per Bill, that there are many accounts of Creation in the bible. I need to peruse these, before Sunday. In the meantime, I have downloaded a copy of Gaston Bachelard's Psychoanalysis of Fire (1938). Gaston is a critical idealist. I hope that he can help me with my rationalization of the Sun. He relies mainly on relationalism, as found in alchemy, astrology, etc. What is the analogy for combustion? I'm coming back to Occasionalism and the consumption of cotton by the flame. How do relations subsume causes?

Gaston goes back to the four elements...... earth, air, fire and water, along with the four principles and the four humors. The relation of fire to the other three are hard for me to intuit. Fire is, clearly an outlier. It is a process, it is alive. Women were said to have a fire in the belly and a baby in the oven. Hey, it just occurred to contrast cooking with combustion, and I am thinking of The Raw and the Cooked, by Claude Levi-Strauss. Certainly there are the sacred fires and eternal flames.

Fire is a kind of naked life, with no limits on its caloric input or output. The function of an internal combustion engine is very similar to that of our muscles. But, still, who ordered fire? Is it not merely a logical spillover from vitalism, or does it have a logic of its own? Is it not the basis of our fabrications and factories? It is hard to imagine chemistry without fire.

Gaston points to a connection between the Promethean and Oedipal complexes...... also to the seminal aspects of fire. The spark of life? Fire and electricity? Where is the nexus? What about spontaneous combustion or ignition? Fire vs. Aether.... the fourth and fifth elements. Fire & spirit, tongues of flame at the Pentecost. Fire & light. Is light an element, or what? Can fire and light be separated? Fire & motivation. Light of fire and light of the mind. Are we getting closer to a nexus?

Where would consciousness be without light? Ask a blind person?

What is the inner light? What is enlightenment? Let there be light. How does the unconscious come to light? Is there not a fundamental synesthesia between between light and thought? Think of the iconic cartoon head and the lightbulb. Where did that come from?

How does blindsight work? Then get this..... anosognosia.

Somehow, I'm thinking that light (and fire) define the boundary between the Cs and the uCs. No? Is this boundary the nexus that we seek?


12:45----------

And, I'm also thinking that this has something to do with Ned Block's panpsychic catastrophe, i.e. the Apocalypse. Not too shabby, IMHO.

What is omniscience, other than an unobstructed Cs? And, then, which comes first, omniscience or omnipotence? Or is there a difference? Viva la difference? Or not?

For an immaterialist/idealist, there may not be a difference, thus the panpsychic catastrophe.


2:10-----------

I have been a bit neglectful, by not following Gary's series of articles on Skinwalker. According to Jack, Skinwalker may presently be the closest thing we have to a smoking gun wrt Disclosure. I cannot disagree....... http://www.starpod.us/2012/12/17/the-monsters-are-due-on-skinwalker-ranch/

Gary makes special reference to a 2010 NYT article that, in an aside, states.......

His space stations are not his only interest in space. “I’ve been a researcher and student of U.F.O.’s for many, many years,” Mr. Bigelow said. “Anybody that does research, if people bother to do quality research, come away absolutely convinced. You don’t have to have personal encounters.”

He added: “People have been killed. People have been hurt. It’s more than observational kind of data.”

Other views that run counter to mainstream science include a belief in the power of prayer and a disbelief in the Big Bang theory.

Hmmm........ It is not immediately clear why there has been a 30 month delay in the probing of this seemingly casual aside.


3:30-----------

At the beginning of this month, Jesse Ventura's TruTV broadcast an episode on Skinwalker, during which there was mention of a possible murder. Gary followed up on this, obtaining denials from John A and from Kit, but he also uncovered the NYT quote from Bigelow, and then Jack recalled a meeting in London, shortly after the alleged incident, in 2004, where this same topic came up.

In another recent article, Gary implies that Jack had come forward with his third-hand account, in response to the earlier NYT 2010 article. But this is the first that I recall hearing this rumor, even though I did read some of the Skinwalker book, wherein this rumor was denied.

Jack is quoted as telling Gary that he had, in '04, relayed this story to someone at the CIA, who asked him to not pursue it.

I called Jack this afternoon about an unrelated matter. About halfway into this 15' conversation, I made reference to the recent series of email exchanges concerning Skinwalker. The person he had spoken to was Ron. Ron said that he would followup on the rumor, and asked Jack to not pursue it.

Do recall that I had been out of communication with Ron, from 1999 until 2004, with the notable exception of a series of communications and meetings from 9/1/01 through 9/16/01. It was on 9/17 that I went to Catonsville, and had my final, brief conversation with Chris S.

It was ~2005 that I met with Ron at his then office in Clarendon. I'm guessing that this was his MASINT/DNI office. I had several meetings across the street from that building, in the Clarendon Grill, with Ron and with various of his colleagues, in the span of one or two years.

After one of these meetings, I drove him back to where his then GeoTracker was parked, at a metro stop within a few minutes of his home. During that drive, it came up the Kit was in town and wanted to meet with Ron. He called Kit, from the car, and suggested a meeting at Kit's hotel near Dulles A/P. He told me that Kit was refusing to meet with me, unless he was along. I believe that Ron told Kit that we would both meet him for dinner at his hotel. He told me, however, to meet with Kit, alone, which I then did. This was the second time that Ron had pulled that stunt. I have blogged about the earlier occasion when I met ...... allow me to do some more fact checking........


4:45----------

The second time that this bait and switch occurred was in the spring of 2007, when I met with Kit at the NAS building in DC. Well, I don't recall, quite so specifically, how this meeting was arranged, by Ron, but I have elaborated upon it, on several occasions, under the rubric of the 'Repositioning', particularly involving Mike McConnell.

But back to '05........ I recall two main topics of the meeting...... the 'briefings' of the former Presidents, and Skinwalker. Wrt Skinwalker, the main topic was his knowledge of Colm Kelleher's investigation into mad-cow-type infections of cattle in Utah, in connection with the ranch investigations. There was no mention of any (human!) deaths.

I note that Kit has denied, to Gary, the Bigelow/Sarfatti rumors.

Could this be a smoking gun? We need the name(s) of the deceased Bigelow staffer. Have we not been able to obtain this information? Bob B would be the most likely source. Will he now be in denial mode? What about RP, or is he too busy with Benedict?


5:06 (2')----------- Jack calls back to say that the death incident was mentioned in his 2004 book, Destiny Matrix II. He said he would send an exerpt. I'll see if I can find it, in the meantime.

I only find reference to the original edition, 2002. I'm checking my old laptop to see if I might have a download of the second edition.


5:40----------

The earliest download I can find on the laptop is from 9/09. Jack will need to send an excerpt from the '04 edition of DM.


6:20---------

Jack now suggests that the Skinwalker incident was related in his Super Cosmos (2005), but it is not available electronically.

Do note, however, that How the Hippies Saved Physics has been selected by Physics World as their book of the year.

From: Gary S Bekkum 
Date: December 20, 2012 8:21:55 PM EST
To: Dan Smith, Ronald P
Subject: 2004-2005

Dan,

Regarding your new post at OMF on Skinwalker (and if the urge strikes,
do feel free to comment below the original articles at STARpod.us), a
few related articles from 2009-2010 ...

http://www.starpod.us/2009/11/19/going-rogue-the-prisoner-mind-control-then-and-now-part-three/#.UNO37CZGJ5Q

http://www.starpod.us/2009/10/17/paranormal-activity-of-the-fourth-kind-aliens-demons-and-men-who-stare-at-goats/#.UNO4HiZGJ5Q

My first stories about the Skinwalker Ranch death rumor were published in 2010:

http://www.starpod.us/2010/06/11/billionaire-aerospace-entrepreneur-tells-new-york-times-about-killer-ufos/#.UNO41yZGJ5Q

http://www.starpod.us/2010/06/12/bigelow-aerospace-lethal-ufo-extraterrestrial-battle-rumor-exposed/#.UNO5DyZGJ5Q

I notice that, in Gary's 6/12/10 article, he reports that Jack had told him of another indirect source to the the Skinwalker death, shortly after Bigelow's comment was reported in the NYT. Jack heard the story in London, in 2004, shortly after the alleged incident.




(cont.)

Well, we can hardly fault Ron on his sense of timing..........

From: Ronald 
Date: December 21, 2012 6:03:30 AM EST
To: Dan Smith 
Subject: Re: Update.......

Big meeting today.  Princess may use some of your suggestions.

Ron

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 19, 2012, at 12:31 AM, Dan Smith 

Ron,

For various reasons, it has occurred to me that I should be making periodic inquiries as to my current status wrt being just your barbecue buddy.  I had been under the impression that, once upon a time, there a more serious aspect to our communications.  If that is no longer the case, then I would like some confirmation to that effect.  

Dan

In another article by Gary, about Jack....... http://www.starpod.us/2012/06/29/stealing-warp-drive-from-the-gods-the-men-who-would-build-prometheus-starpod-us-interviews-jack-sarfatti/ there is reference to the following concept.......... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_self-consistency_principle , which, in turn, is an elaboration of the CTC.


11:10----------

And, now, Sam and I are off to our interfaith meeting...........



5:40-----------

Sam just left from our postmortem of the ICJS meeting, which was amusing. They have a beautiful office home, one minute from my place. They represent the spiritual aspirations of corporate Baltimore, very buttoned-downed, very straight faced. But there are definite possibilities, which Sam and I discussed, at some length.

But, hey, how about that email? Is that something, or what? Will miracles ever cease?



6:40---------

And Sam and I had a chuckle over this one........ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/racist-harvard-finals-club-flier_n_2219468.html

How often are afforded such an opportunity to laugh at ourselves?




(cont.)

Sorry to be awake in the middle of the night, but I do have Novikov on the mind...... and the howling wind is keeping me awake. It is nice to have a home, even if it is somewhat borrowed.......

For all these years, I've been talking about CTC's, but somehow I never latched onto Novikov's version, or, really, his vision, involving, particularly, the problem of self-cosistency.

This does bring into focus the closely related problems of self-organizing, self-reference, bootstrap, strange-loop....... and there must be many other such ideas.

If only I can get Jack to focus on this problem, that would make my trip to SF a whole lot easier. Yes? And, yes, this could easily, then, put the BPWH over the top. No?

Why the heck didn't Novikov figure out this bootstrapped/BPWH version, back in 1990? Maybe he did, but he didn't want to have to play the Jesus card. Lucky guy....!

Now, I just give a careful reading of the Novikov wiki entry. And this oversight is not completely my fault. If you go to the CTC entry, there is no mention of Novikov! How can that be? I'm gonna complain to Jimmy W!

I wonder why Jack has not latched onto Novikov. How could he have missed it?


And lookee here....... they're talking about the Polchinski paradox, which is about a billiard ball looping through a wormhole. Whereas I'm talking about the cosmic soul looping through the Omega/Alpha gap. How are these not the same problem?!

I also notice that Kip Thorne and Robert Forward were collaborating with Novikov, both being acquaintances of Jack's, I believe. Once again, there seems to be a conspiracy to drop the BPWH ball.

Part of the self-consistency must involve Leibniz' least action principle, just being rephrased as the optimal action principle (OAP). Then we can include Feynman's quantum sum over histories. Once again, everybody was so near, but, miraculously so far, especially when you consider Wheeler's Participatory Universe, and Yakir's weak measurements. All these folks knew each other, and they all knew Jack.

Yes, participatory universe/anthropics (PAP)........ talk about self-organizing, self-consistency! It's been right there, in front of our noses, all along. Why do I have to explain it to them? They should have been explaining it to us, lo these many years. What am I seeing that they didn't, couldn't, wouldn't? Conspiracy of the geniuses?

Well, probably this is just another fevered dream. It will have vanished in the morning. But, wait, it is morning, almost....... 4:30--------- and the wind is still howling, outside, I think.....


4:45---------

One of their problems may have been that they were too focused on the wormhole as just a kind of contrivance or add-on, not quite grasping that we are all living in a wormhole, i.e. a self-contained toroid. Surely there must exist such a model. The toroid has many applications in mathematics, particularly in j-functions, I believe, not to mention its important applications in controlled fusion and, yes, particle accelerators, LHC, etc..... What were we all thinking...... asleep at the switch......



10:40-----------

Unfortunately, I'm not finding much on the Novikov consistency that is available online.

I'm going to be out for a couple of hours..........

I need to figure how best to sound out Jack, on this topic. I was hoping there would be more discussion online. What is available is mostly just dealing with the technicalities. No indication of a toroidal universe.



1pm------------

PTL, I was wrong........ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doughnut_theory_of_the_universe .....


My modest, BPWH, proposal is just to shrink their doughnut down by a few orders of magnitude......... well, make that quite few orders! Oh, and make time be the longitudinal dimension...... a four-dimensional doughnut. Just some minor modifications, and we have our best possible Ouroboros.


5:50-----------

I have been reading the following article by David Deutsch......... http://www.hpc.unm.edu/~alsing/Courses/RQI/articles/deutsch_prd44_p3197_Y91_qm_closed_timelike_curves.pdf . He envisions, and discusses at length, time-traveling versions of Adam and Eve. He speaks very cautiously, and points to numerous logical, if not technological, difficulties, but, at the end of the day, he never says never. Bless his heart!

Heck, he even envisions a time-travelling solar system, and uses this possibility to explain the Fermi Paradox. So you cannot blame such speculations on me, alone! Physical plausibility is fully in force.

What I have not found yet is a more immaterial version of these self-referential ideas or models that would help to flesh out Wheeler's notion of a participatory universe and a final anthropic principle. I'll wager that such bootstrapped immaterial cosmologies are lurking in more minds than just Chicken Little's....... but, where the angels fear to tread........!


9:30-----------

I was invited out, when D wanted to show off a new room paint job to her friend. I invited myself to join T and Maggie at the local watering spot. In came Khori of Grace, and so we have a renewed lunch date, for the first of the year. Something seems to be afoot. Are we still slouching toward Bethlehem?


I cannot fail to note that, as a Christmas bonus from the Economist, we get a mild watering down of Hell. I could not have guessed that the staid Economist could ever be so flamboyantly PoMo. Are they breathing down my neck? I'd better not look over my shoulder, or I'll surely stumble.


All I have to do is turn physics inside-out, but, for the life of me, I still have no clue. This is what Jack and I need to discuss, asap.

Is physics a kind of glue, holding our little egos together? How does that logic gain traction? I was attempting to address this with the psychoanalysis of fire. We butterflies have to be careful, lest we venture too close to the flame. Just ask Icarus.

We are the warp, and physics/logic is the woof. But what is logic? Does anyone have a 'clew'? Is it supposed to lead us out of the Labyrinth? Should we ask Russell or Whitehead?

Maybe Godel, Escher, Bach...... strange loops. The aviary had their wings clipped. Were they not getting too close to the flame? Ask Robert. Ask Kit.

How does holography work, metaphysically? Are there not two threads..... two beams? Indra's necklace. Like the old memory cores...... air cores?

Is that how the akashic record works? Doesn't that require a third wire? Third rail? What would that be? Must be the trinity. Something's not computing.


11:15------------

Where is the observer? Who is the observer? What about the processor? It is also the clock.

Are we not a quantum computer? What holds the histories together? I have no clew. We might suppose that the third rail is the SoT. The kingdom within.



(cont.)

SfA topic is the purpose of the Universe. Hmmm......... Ex nihilo, or what?

Who created the world? Was it God or Jesus or the Spirit? Was is out of water and clay, or was it from the Word/Logos?



2:10-------------

We had another great discussion in the SfA this morning, lead as usual by Bill. I was just trying to call him to propose a followup to my earlier contribution wrt C&C and LGM. He was not in, so allow me to compose my thoughts here..........

I believe that I see a viable plan of salvation, which happens to have a considerable overlap with the Xian tradition, more so than with the others. It also happens to be a fairly obvious way to avoid Armageddon, Tribulation or what have you, which eventualities seem to been a particular fascination of Xians, for the last two millennia.

It also seems that the Xians have been laissez-faire, when it comes to seeking long-term solutions to the various threats to our long-term survival on the Earth.


3:40----------

Their prophetic 'apocalyptic' eschatology tends to keep them focussed on their immediate personal salvation, rather than investing in species survival. One may easily observe that the lack of Xian commitment to our long-term survival produces a major deficit in the chances of that survival.

So, I'm proposing to intervene in this sub-optimal status quo, as a putative agent of God wrt her plan of Salvation. Should I not be welcomed by all and sundry, with open arms, or, at the least, with open minds and hearts? Well, so far, that has not been the case, and that may be chalked up mainly to my own lack of grace, inspiration and wisdom. But neither have I thrown in the towel, now, have I?




(cont.)

dan wrote:So, I'm proposing to intervene in this sub-optimal status quo, as a putative agent of God wrt her plan of Salvation. Should I not be welcomed by all and sundry, with open arms, or, at the least, with open minds and hearts? Well, so far, that has not been the case, and that may be chalked up mainly to my own lack of grace, inspiration and wisdom.

Dan,

If you were of the Father, the Father would answer your solitude. If you did the work of the Father, the Father would bless your work and make it flourish. If you do not the work of the Father, the tree will wither and bare no living fruit.

For Christmas, may the teacher in this movie help you to understand;

The Gospel of John - The Movie

wikipedia-
"The Gospel of John is a 2003 film that is the story of Jesus' life as recounted by the Gospel of John. It is a motion picture that has been adapted for the screen on a word-for-word basis from the American Bible Society's Good News Bible. This three-hour epic feature film follows John's Gospel precisely, without additions to the story from other Gospels, nor omission of complex passages."


Blessings

Thank you, Jake, for the inspiring movie. I have watched the part 1/2, an hour and a half long. Every time I am exposed to the bible I am able to learn new things. One is always able to hear things that one had not been able to hear before. There is no end to the potential for meaning.


And please allow me to wish you and Cy and everyone else at OMF II a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, and thank you so much for still putting up with my meanderings. Just now, it's snowing a bunch, back here, and just starting to lay down. Good timing for the eventide.


Not surprisingly, it should be a lot easier to preach metaphysics at GFC than at BGF. There must be a better entre with the greens than what I now have, which is none!

I was going to speak of miracles........ the fact that we exist, just for starters. How could we have come all this way, just by accident? And there is the cancer vs chrysalis issue. There is the question of perpetual progress and the ETH. They are more into transition towns and tree hugging.


There is something unnatural about us, something that naturalism fails to grasp. It may be something as basic as the difference between is and ought. What is natural about that?

Are we simply too smart for our own good, or are we, somehow, too cool for the school of nature? We may be about to find that out.

What is it about our free will, or is it just our cussed willfulness? Too many of us sense a transcendental dimension. This sense has gotten us into a a lot of trouble, but might it also get us out of trouble?

What is it that existentialism points to? How do we, alone, manage to contemplate our own absurdity? How did we manage to get all dressed up, and then discover that we have nowhere to go? Let's explain that to ourselves. It seems we have a lot of 'splaining to do.

.

Jake Reason wrote:
For Christmas, may the teacher in this movie help you to understand;

The Gospel of John - The Movie

I found myself watching this video in the wee hours of the night, practically until dawn broke the hidden horizon. I pondered many things and plucked out the gems that spoke to me on an emotional level. The validity or should I say authentic interpretation as it came to me may not be correct, and I concede this, but it did make me dwell within.

In John 4:44 - I thought of Dan’s plight. Not that I believe he is a prophet, but a teacher in his own way.

“For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honor in his own country.”

Throughout John’s testimony he conveyed numerous times that Jesus knew the thoughts of others as well as their pasts. He knew what people felt and knew events that were to transpire. It made me ponder the lore of the apparent visitors and their capacity to do the same. It is just testimony, right?

If we could know the thoughts and feelings of another being – and they to us – could seeds of darkness, (deception, malice, and malign) remain hidden behind the masks we wear? What would our world look like if we woke up to this reality?

John 12:25 I thought of myself....

“He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.”

Not that I intend to go on public display here……

Jesus laments throughout his travels to his disciples, crowds, and markets about the miracles he has performed and still they do not believe. They saw with their own eyes those miracles and still they did not believe.

This led me to question – ships in the sky – man2k’s proverbial burning bush. How many would refuse to believe what their eyes told them in these days? How many would deny - or rather - who would believe?

And poor Judas Iscariot, with his feet freshly washed by the hands Jesus himself, is singled out as the one who would betray for the next couple millennium.

If Jesus knew what resided within the minds of those around him, knew the future, and saw the past – why did he tell Simon he was being betrayed when he was not? How can one be betrayed, in knowing?

After sending Judas away with coin in hand - “Go, do what you must.” he proclaims in John 13:31 “Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.”

May we all realize one day - our place as gods and guide those beneath us.

Dan:

Why does it seem like the bird flu has stricken remnants of the Aviary? Especially recently....

MD02,

Bird flu.........! I like that, but I think it was many years ago.......



2:30----------

Two previous high-water marks for the Aviary were 1991 and 2004, TBMK.......

In both instances, there followed an abrupt decline, more or less coinciding with the initiation and then the resumption of the R&D show, respectively.

Both high marks have been memorialized......... Robert Collins' Exempt from Disclosure (2005), and Colm Kelleher's Hunt for the Skinwalker (also 2005).



Back to the BGF, in preparation for a talk in February...........

I think I should start out with a review of our physical situation.........

1.) Biophysical Economics - Charles Hall

2.) Too Smart - Craig Dilworth

3.) A Prosperous Way Down - Howard Odum


I then venture into the metaphysical realm via Existentialism.......

How do we respond to the double absurdity of our present existential crisis?

The only two reactions presently being observed are denial and despair.

I'm the only one I know who is pointing to a third alternative..........

I am pointing to the putative MoAPS, the mother of all paradigm shifts........

Let me hasten to say that many spiritually inclined folks have been pointing to a New Age, or more specifically the age of Aquarius.......

BUT, the new-agers make no reference to our Existential Crisis. Why the heck not......?

Because the new-agers are, just by self-designation, acosmic.


But, wait, what does cosmology have to do with ecology, pray tell......?

Well, this is precisely where the MoAPS comes in........

What I'm talking about is an idea coming from the bleeding-edge of physics and cosmology. It was first proposed by John Wheeler in 1990. It is called the Participatory Universe.


4:10------------

Now, watch out, here comes the plot spoiler to end all plot spoilers, IMHO..........

Our Existential Crisis is just that humanity has become a Cancer upon the Earth. Yes? No?

Well, sports fans, here is the other side of that coin.........

When you combine the participatory universe with the holographic principle, instead of the Cancer paradigm, we get the Chrysalis paradigm, and this, as promised, constitutes the MoAPS/BPWH.

Any questions......??


4:40----------

And this answer also answers the above question about the acosmic stance of the new-agers.......

The MoAPS necessarily entails eschatology. No one, but no one, will touch the Easchaton with a 10' pole. TBMK/IMHO, the only previous person to actually embrace the Eschaton was the J-man. Why him? And why me, Lord?


The prophetic tradition has, by definition, touted our ultimate apokatstasis, even though the many who have so touted, have always been flirting with heresy, and, here's another plot spoiler, I am no exception.

Why heresy........?


How did one person get away with it, while no one else has?

Well, speaking quite frankly, that one person had a lot of pull. He managed to get away with a lot, and the main thing he got away with was his embrace of the Eschaton, which most of his followers now suppose was the mother of all failed prophecies.

Now comes Chicken Little......... that being my aviary code-name. My aquarium code-name was reputed to be Sunfish.


My putative mission, as the wannabe SoT, is to reinstate that prophecy, by way of apologizing for its putative failure, simply by pointing out that it was the best of all possible failed prophecies........ to wit, you and I would not be here, were it not for its 'failure'.


5:40------------

Just to be quite a bit more specific, the putative 'failure' turns out to have been the best possible setup for the MoAPS/BPWH.


6:30------------

I have made two calls.......... 5:48 (5') Ron. 5:54 (28') John S.......

The connection was alleged to have been a Fr. Porter, friend of John's. But, it turns out that the Father was not really involved, and so John mainly served as an over-educated babysitter for the Princess-in-training. Also, it turns out that their search for a Greek island, has now turned into a search for a Turkish island that would be cheaper and easier to obtain.

According to R, J's theology tends to be a bit goofy, and so the meetings, on or about 12/22, were mainly dependent on the less goofy theology of the Princess. John left Rome on the 21st.

John has written a cogent letter to the NRA concerning school security, he being a frequent substitute teacher in So. Cal, and also a frequent hunter, thereabouts. But, for the the life of me, I cannot recall the substance of the letter.


Nontheless, the meetings in Italy are alleged to have been related to salvation, and that I am the first to know about this connection, stateside. Should we be a tad skeptical? Yes?


I am expecting a call, after dinner.........


Oh, yes, now I recall the gist of John's letter to the NRA. He pointed out to them that the preferred weapon of terror upon schools, outside of the US, has been bombs. By outlawing semi-automatics, the deranged terrorists will, more likely, resort to bombs and, thereby, increase the death-toll, as has been observed, overseas. I cannot easily find a fault in that logic. Nonetheless, the politics of this logic is probably lacking. Yes?


8:50-----------

A watched phone never rings, that is a basic law of quantum physics.



(cont.)

Merry Christmas Dan & Jake. May your holiday be full of rich ideas and good friends that far surpass ham & gravy in satisfaction.

Cy

On the NRA,

it is sad really that the NRA fails the basic knowledge test for Patriot Community membership. They seem to have a hard time understanding that the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or individual self-protection but rather about the citizenry's obligation to be the deterrent to Government and to have the capacity and capability to prevent it from morphing into a tyranny.

It is thus the citizen's duty to not only be armed but to be equally armed and ready and observant. A duty severely neglected in many quarters and in the process of remedy as we speak. Just ask a certain ammo supplier who has sold three years worth in three days. The tragedy of the elementary school was conscripted by those with agendas. Whilst there may yet be conspiracy there, it is compounded by the imperative to advance a tyrannical global governance and the total decapitation of the economic system & US dollar. O the rumors of Ayers compatriots on the guest book at the WH. Shrug. They are eating cake, failing to see the forest for the trees...but there's been alot of that going on lately.

Chrysalis Dan, always chrysalis. It comes in so many forms that one might need the multi-faceted eyesight of the common housefly to see it all...like the ESA Study about Phobos.

Yet while this evolution of the butterfly moves forward our greatest danger is in allowing ourselves to become ideologically divided beyond any reconciliation or common ground. The PtB desire such division for it binds us from acting on corruption and dissonance. It binds us from seeing stories of maps of economic sectors intended for after the day the atms reveal empty nests. It binds us from listening to sorrowful whispers of foreigners pledged to the 2015 goal?

It binds us from reasonable and effective recourse, these intractable ideologies. Will deists lift a Claidheamh Soluis once more in word and if necessary deed when the day arrives? Or will it wither in the cocoon in favor of a twisted dream concocted by men of illustrative depravity, without perspective, and without universal mind?

Or cannot Esaidh Ruadh escape his perpetual encapsulation?

From hills and firmament the aspirant sheds allusions and steps with character, destination to be determined.

...faint strains of melody from a pied bard, unkempt from watching but merry in optimism...slender of hand; a speckled salmon upon a Constitution remembered.

"...help them remember who they are," echos the salmon in the rushing water with the gleam prominent upon his scales.

What is real cannot be broken or lost, only temporarily forgotten.

Cyrellys

Cy,

Thank you for the Christmas wishes, and I wish you a fulfilling New Year.

I tend to agree that we cannot just legislate our way out of our social predicaments, nor can we transcend laws without fundamental transformation.

Are there those who conspire to do evil against their fellow humans? There are. But, in the end, it is usually the banality of evil that triumphs over righteousness. Can this banality be stopped with firearms? I doubt it.


The enemy, finally, is our ignorance........ our ignorance of our own transcendent power and grace. There has been a conspiracy to maintain our self-ignorance. That conspiracy mostly resides within. It resides in our fear of the unknown. We are comfortable with these self-imposed limitations on our knowledge. We have grown comfortable in our spiritual prisons. Continued material progress is what has mainly lulled us into our slumber of materialism. As that progress grinds to a halt, so will our spirits begin to grow restless.



Now, as a case in point, we have the issue of the recent visit to Rome.......

I was beginning to see some light at the end of my own little tunnel. There was some reason to hope that awakening could be 'arranged' so as to maximize its spontaneity. This would minimize the public participation of the PtB/MJ12/visitor contingent.

Is it now the case that the Pope, for instance, wishes to not be excluded from a possible historical watershed? Should I be glad or sad, at this prospect? Do I have a choice? Should I no longer accept calls from Ron or Rome? Would that be sticking with my protocol, come hell or high water? As a perfectly practical matter, I can hardly sever my communications with the rest of the world. The relative cone of silence, lo these many years, has not been of my own doing. Were there to be a decision, from above or below, to remove that cone, I would have precious little to say about it. I have only ever operated on a daily basis, trying to deal with what is put in front of me.

My only agenda has been for history, not for myself. OTOH, this is most likely to have been another will o' the wisp, vanishing in the light of day.

I can only ever ask myself, wwgd? If God wished to keep the PtB on the bench, I'm sure that could be arranged. They have a need to know certain things. Their need to act is likely to be rather more circumscribed. There have been ample warnings, where warnings are due. Those channels of 'instruction' have been well established. A significant part of the acclimation has been about acclimating the PtB. No? So, no, I have no reason to exercise exclusion toward anyone. I only keep trying to exercise common sense.



10:50--------------

It should be pretty clear that were I to get a call from Rome, it would likely have a disruptive effect. OTOH, were it to turn out that there had been a substantive conversation, possibly having something to do with eschatology, it would be feasible to convey that information, mainly by implication or indirection, at the best discretion of all concerned.


Besides the fact that there is alleged to have been a meeting is the fact that prior to that meeting, there was that abortive visit to R&A, wherein it was suggested that my blogging days were over, and that I should turn my attention to their Kashmiri school project. I made it clear that this suggestion was unwanted, and there has been no further clarification...... just the statement of a meeting. Am I to suppose that this suggestion was not merely spontaneous, on their part? Who knows? Whatever the source, there seems to be more heat than light, with plenty of fog to go around. Just ignoring it all is easier to say than to do.



1pm-------------

The notion of a paradigm shift is the common ground that I have, between Grace and Green. This is a narrow opening that I have in both doors. I need to widen it as much as possible, using somewhat different approaches, in each case.

I recall being at University of Maryland, in the mid 70's, and discussing the idea of a paradigm shift with my physics advisor, Charles Misner. He made the reasonable suggestion that I should refrain from making any philosophical speculations about the future course of physics..... that I should wait patiently for the physicists to do their own work and own speculation. When and if a new scientific consensus was arrived at, only then would it be proper for the philosophers to get involved in explaining the meaning of this new worldview.

Well, there has been a lot of water under that bridge, and we seem no closer to any larger truth.

All the while, the need for a higher common ground only increases. Is there not a need for a new vision that all can embrace, something other than the notion that we are all just meat machines? Can we give up the hope that we might do better than this? What is the price of despair?

But who am I to entertain a vision? What are my credentials? And where else to start that with something that looks a lot like a BPWH?


And who would want to have to pin their hopes on a long-shot, a terribly long one? Would that not only be an admission of the depth of our desperation, and what sane person would wish to admit such a thing, even to oneself? Muddling along is not easy, but it is passable, especially when compared to what seems a reckless gamble. Until there is a reasonable proof of an assertion, there is precious little warrant, even for its entertainment. I am proposing rather more than mere entertainment.

It may well be that our mere existence is miraculous, on almost any rational grounds, certainly on any scientific grounds. But how can we be expected to hang onto that notion, with day after day of just managing to get by? The miraculousness becomes increasingly remote and abstract. Where is the Bank to which we can take this miracle? It is not a legal tender.

I am suggesting that we may take this minor miracle, and, somehow, exchange it for a bigger one. Since when are two birds in the bush worth one in the hand?

Just because we are suddenly in need, does not that mean that God is obligated to rush to our side, we the prodigal ones.


Had a brief conversation with Ron. There was barely any mention of Rome, and nothing of new substance about any meetings therein. So maybe we are just back to the status quo ante. We can all relax, again.


I'm pointing out that there is very likely to be a source of sapience, which, otherwise, has been quite content to leave us to our own devices. Our existentialism has sufficed, unto the day. We have, in general, comported ourselves about as decently as might be expected, without any additional guidance, most of our surplus effort having been efficiently devoted to material progress. Have we not met and even exceeded most expectations? Where we have fallen short, may we not blame our spiritual ignorance, confusion and lack of guidance...... due mainly to our being stranded between conflicting and outmoded paradigms?

Now we seem to be waiting for a revelation, but doing so without outward complaint or impatience. Patience, especially in spiritual matters, is a virtue we have learned, possibly just a bit too well?

Should we be impatient for the scientists to loosen their grip on their paradigm? I don't think we want them to drop a worldview that has proven beneficial, for so many years, until they can see a viable alternative. Even just to let it be known that they were actively seeking a new worldview would open the floodgates to rumor and speculation. We are hardly ready for that.

The last thing that most any religionists would want is to have to compete directly against the pointy-heads of science. They both will say about their respective worldviews that, if they are not obviously broken, then don't endeavor to fix them. Without a tested blueprint or plan, our unguided efforts could well get us into a bigger mess than whatever one we may suppose ourselves to be in, already.


I speak frequently of likelihood and plausibility, but this is hardly the language of religion, and barely even the language of science. Scientists take pride in their trusting of nature no further than they can measure it. The faithful, on the other hand, will trust religion no more than have their parents or peers, and often less.



(cont.)