Hello, Cy, hello, OMF II

dan wrote:Cy,

Yes, each of these disparate events, asteroid vs meteor, was of historical proportions, in it's own right. So, to have them occurring within hours of each other, does seem to beggar the imagination.

The scientists, however, are congenitally incapable of any public expression of incredulity. Privately, over the departmental water coolers, they might be a bit less restrained, we could hope.

Rest assured, however, that they are dusting off their old asteroid grant proposals.

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 15, 2013 5:43:02 PM EST
To: Gary and CA 
Subject: Re: Malachy remote views "The End"????

CA and Gary, 

Initially, about a month before the visit, I was told that its purpose was to support a nuclear free Kashmir, and to provide Benedict, at his request, with further information about the continued ufo sightings near to the conflict area on the Indian border, which is also adjacent to Aliyah's ancestral home in Kashmir.  

In light of subsequent events, both political and astronomical, you may pardon me for speculating as to possible synchronicities, mundane and otherwise.  Should we just turn a blind eye, and walk away, as David suggests?  David, btw, is a closet Jungian, at the very least!  

Well, we will walk away, but just a bit more warily, imo.  

Is Ron an opportunist?  Doesn't he get paid for that?  I go to a weekly evangelical seminar, without even that much excuse.  They have only threatened me twice with arrest.  Spiritual purity may be a bit of an abstraction.  Somewhat in the spirit of John Dillinger, we rob banks, because that's where the 'money' is!  

Dan 


On Feb 15, 2013, at 1:47 PM, CA wrote:

Noble but a muddling of metaphors unless you’re talking about transcending personal boundaries and conflict.
 
Religion is manmade therefore boundaries imposed by human limitations are inherent. I would have thought that if you truly wanted to transcend this you would first need to reject doctrines historically steeped in bigotry and territorial warfare - not embrace yet another one.
 
Organised religion has never been about faith or spirituality….perhaps Benedict came to a similar conclusion and opted to walk away with his convictions still intact.
 
Whatever the subject of your council with the Pope, Ron…I’m pretty sure it didn’t involve alien agendas or the sky falling on Chicken Little’s head so you could of course quash that one in a simple sentence if you really wanted to!

animal2012 wrote:Hi Dan thanks for these posts very lenghty at times , but i'm sure informative , anyways I wanted to weigh in on the meteor story. came across this "THIS JUST IN FROM A SOURCE:"

The white light from the missile cannot be generated by other objects.

Reason: Normal burning causes red glow max. To get other colours that are indicators of more energy (higher temp) more oxygen is required. Only solid rocket fuel and other oxygen generating engines can produce such effects. So it must have been a missile on this evidence alone.

Double check all I said with meteor and missile experts.

This, each piece of evidence I have just given you, is indisputable and non-ambiguous ie it is conclusive of one fact: it was a missile.

Also, it had a corkscrew trail. A corkscrew trail is only possible with missiles...

animal2012 wrote:Hi Dan thanks for these posts very lenghty at times , but i'm sure informative , anyways I wanted to weigh in on the meteor story. came across this "THIS JUST IN FROM A SOURCE:"

The white light from the missile cannot be generated by other objects.
...

dan wrote:

(And, speaking of Sophia, this was several months ago with Aliyah, when we were still on speaking terms, sort of........ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfHye0kzLM4 I'm afraid to watch.)

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 18, 2013 2:40:47 PM EST
To: Gary G. 
Cc: Paul, Michael and John
Subject: Re: World teacher.  No?

Every other environmentalist assumes that the world is broken, and needs to be fixed.  

Paul and I disagree.  We understand that the Spirit moves as it will, and we cannot separate ourselves from that presence.  

The Teacher simply needs to explain what is going on..... Who are we, from whence do we come, and whither do we go?  Then we will have no fear or animosity.  

Who will listen?  Everyone will listen, with the proper introduction.  What would be the proper introduction?  I can think of a message that goes viral.  

Cannot any of you?  Are your imaginations that stifled?  


On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Dan Smith wrote:

Gary, Paul and Michael,  

None of us discount the possibility of Avatars.  In the midst of past crises, great Teachers have emerged.  Why are we not expecting a teacher for these, most parlous of times?  

Will this teacher not need an apology for our dire straights?  

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 18, 2013 3:06:09 PM EST
To: Paul C
Cc: ......
Subject: Re: World teacher. No?

Paul, 

Two points...... 

1.)   An Apologia is, in the first instance, an explanation or an excuse.  

2.)  It has been a long time since there has been a world Teacher/Healer.  Why such a delay, to the point where most of us, excepting you, Paul, feel that we have been abandoned?  

An apology need not imply that there has been a mistake.  It only need imply that an explanation is greatly needed, by the rest of us.  

Is there no rhyme or reason?  Why, then, were we granted the ability to reason?  



On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:45 PM, Paul C wrote:

Why would a teacher at that level need an apology?  If I were that teacher, I'd just look around and say "This is how it is.  No blame attaches to things being the way they are." And I'm nowhere near as evolved as a teacher like that would have to be.  Blame and fault are the first attachments a conscious being discards, no?

What would an apology do for a teacher?  Would it improve the teaching?  If any apology is required, it strikes me that it would be more useful if it was directed inward, not outward.

Paul

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 18, 2013 3:22:25 PM EST
To: Paul C 
Cc: ......  
Subject: Re: World teacher. No?

Paul, 

Yes, everyone has listened to at least one of these, and that was long before mass media and the Internet.  

Nowadays, virtually, our every thought is recorded in the Aether/Cloud/Akashic record.  

All that remains is to fashion these thoughts into a concise and coherent statement or, better, into a cosmic dialog.  

Are there any powers that can overcome Truth?  Do you doubt that the Truth will emerge exactly when and where it is needed?  

When is the time ripe?  When should that Season come around?  Is today too soon?  


On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Paul C > wrote:

Why would everyone listen?  Did everyone listen to Christ, Buddha, Mohammed, or Bahá'u'lláh?
"Let him who has ears, let him hear."

If a teacher arises, they will presumably lack all arrogance, and will be perfectly content with the audience they receive, however large or small it may be.

Paul

dan wrote:My focus remains with the three others, on the Salmony list. If there is any progress, it is slow, indeed. The closer that folks get to the light, the larger loom their shadows. The more cautious they become.

Their faith, love and hope are so fragile that they fear the least cloud on the horizon. They see each such cloud as the harbinger of their final disillusionment. Instead, they suit-up, in their heaviest armor, fearing this to be their final battle. And that it is!

removed an email exchange...........

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 20, 2013 3:07:22 PM EST
To: Michael Kavanaugh 
Cc: .......
Subject: Re: Acting Clueless at Harvard about "ideas that matter"

(cont......6) 

Right the Cartesian wrong........?  Sure, simply by supposing that mind is not unnatural!  

This is how vitalism becomes panpsychism, and how panpsychism becomes pantheism.  

Which is also to say that you and I are not interlopers.  We are not rogue agents.  

Does this then mean that the Earth is our home?  Well, yes and no.......!! 

What it does mean is that you and I are not the passive mirrors of nature...... 

I would suggest something a 'little' bit more proactive....... 

Yes, finally, you and I are co-Creators.  Is that just a bit too much to swallow?  Welcome to a brave new world.....!  Welcome to the participatory universe...... welcome to my mentor's world...... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler  

If life is not an absurdity, then it is participatory.  The essence of every existence is a self-organizing, bootstrap reality.  This is the oldest wisdom, and the newest understanding.  

We have climbed Mt Improbable, just to find the fount of all wisdom.  The knowledge explosion becomes our knowledge implosion.  We live in interesting times.  

Dan 


On Feb 20, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Dan Smith wrote:

(cont......5) 


If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound.  Does ecology have a meaning without ecologists?  Does sentience have a meaning without sapience?  And so it goes...... 

Are we the Mirror of Nature?  Does nature need a mirror?  Perhaps it doesn't.  

Does vitalism make any sense without panpsychism?  Does panpsychism make any sense without a psyche?  Does life make any sense?  Or, is your utility nothing more than an obstacle to my utility?  

Has the Modern mind run off its rails?  When did that happen?  Did it not happen when Descartes suggested that there was a disconnect between us and Nature?  Why would any sane person suggest such a thing?  Well, the answer is excruciatingly obvious...... 

Descartes put our cart before our horse......  He supposed that Creation was fallen.  If you read that last sentence very carefully, you will know more about our environmental crisis than almost everyone else.  That historical fact is what I've been struggling with, for the past 35 years.  How can we set that right?  All the King's horses, and all the King's men...... 

There is only one way to right the Cartesian wrong....... 


(cont.....6) 



On Feb 20, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Dan Smith > wrote:

(cont......4) 


Yes, vitalism is my spiritual foot in the door of Modernism....... 

Vitalism is nothing without that even more 'dirty' word....... teleology.  If Utility won't hack it, then what about teleology?  Am I suggesting that evolution might, pace every (professional!) biologist, have a direction?  

Yes and no!  I only and humbly submit, that life might not be an absurdity, clearly not for you, and not for me, but, more importantly, not for homo sapiens.  

I am only suggesting that ecology could not have been complete without ecologists!  And where is the spirit of ecology without deep ecology?  Are we afraid to admit that we have ever felt a real connection with Nature, or that 'nature' even has a meaning.  Meaning for whom? 

How can we be connected with each other, if we are not also connected to the world?  If we are not connected with each other, then how can we possibly share our ultimate concerns?  If we cannot share those concerns, then what is the point of our communication?  


(cont.....5) 



On Feb 20, 2013, at 1:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:

(cont.....3) 


Ok, here is where I throw my (BPWH) curve-ball........ 

If we ecologists are going to have to depart from Science, in order to breathe fire into the Environmental movement, then, in the eyes of many, we would be making a big mistake.  In particular, I point the finger at Jack Alpert...... my good buddy, and my primary antagonist, in the matter of spirit.  

Jack strongly believes that saving the world is all about mutual utility.  Well, I humbly submit that 'mutual utility' is an oxymoron.  I have my utility, and you have your utility.  If your utility ever gets in the way of my utility, just watch out.....!  

I'm not the only one on this list to question the political pragmatism of RPD.  It is a beautiful theory that runs up against some very ugly facts.  Unless we are ready and able to adopt a global dictatorship, it is very unclear where the RPD 'rubber' will meet the road.  Even the Chicoms are having to back off.  No?  

If Utilitarianism is not the answer, then all we have left is Vitalism!  Is that a weak sister, or what.....?!  



(cont.......4) 



On Feb 20, 2013, at 1:16 PM, Dan Smith  wrote:

(cont......2) 


It is precisely at this point that Modernism receives its comeuppance....... 

How can everything be connected and disconnected at the same time?  And, in particular, where do we, humans, fit into the scheme of Nature?  If we don't fit, then nothing fits.  It's just that simple.  

But, if we somehow do fit, then we must be willing to entertain some form of Vitalism!  If you don't know that vitalism is a dirty word in biology, then you have been hiding in a cave.  

Look, if we are to coexist with Nature, then must there not be some mutual respect, something beyond the simplistic, reductionistic notion that Nature Bats Last, that nature is genocidal? 

Yes, we can take a purely utilitarian view of Nature, but isn't that what got us into our present bind?  Must we jump through logical utilitarian hoops, every time we stoop to rescue a snail-darter?  

Where would ecology be, without Deep Ecology?  I'll tell you where it would be..... it would be soulless.  And you wonder why we are losing the Soul wars?  Wonder no longer!  


(cont.....3) 



On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:49 PM, Dan Smith wrote:

(cont........) 


You see, when science argues against human exceptionalism, it only goes half way..... 

What science is actually saying is that you and I are just accidents of nature, and, in fact, everything we see is just one big accident.  You know the drill...... life is an absurdity in a meaningless universe...... history is a tale, full of sound and fury, as told by an idiot...... 

Perhaps so, but where does that leave us and Nature?  

Well, it leaves everything disconnected, if not discombobulated.  But this is not the picture that is painted by the ecologists.  They see everything as being connected.  Ecology has been a difficult lesson for science.  It is my thesis that this lesson is not quite finished.  I aim at nothing less than finishing the lesson........ Well, someone will have to...... If not Sunday, then Monday....


(cont.......2) 



On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Dan Smith wrote:

Mike, 

[.......]

Yes, here is a new thought...... 

Ecologists quite naturally suppose that Nature was doing just fine, until we, humans, made the scene, and commenced to burn every (natural) bridge (at both ends!), as if there would be no tomorrow.  And now we find ourselves twisting slowly, in the cosmic wind.  

What is wrong with this picture....?  

What is wrong is that it harkens back to that defining moment in the rise of Modernism...... the Cartesian dichotomy between humankind and nature, which is also expressed as the dichotomy between body and soul/mind.  

Science has amply demonstrated that there is no such division.  What then of human exceptionalism?  


(cont......)  

p.s. Sam, here begings the outline of my talk....... 

dan wrote:Jake,

Let us note how patient Aliyah is being with my stumbling around. This is likely to presage Sunday. The intro, however, will be quite different. There will be no mention of the UN speech of Mahmoud, for instance. But, in both cases, we'll be jumping into the Endtimes, with both feet.

>

I thank you for your honest appraisal. Clearly, Aliyah did not have her heart in it. Ron coaxed her into it, and she balked. This leaves Ron in a awkward spot. And me? Maybe there will be a workaround.

From: Dan Smith 
Date: February 21, 2013 9:01:45 AM EST
To: Sam
Subject: Re: Being considerate of your audience's expectations based on what other speakers have done

Sam, 

1.)  We agree that what I owe to the audience is the best possible presentation.  

2.)  We have also agreed that this is a work in progress.  

But now you are acting as if you were my manager.  Even Ron has figured out that this is not his role, and I don't think he delegated that role to you, unless you know something I don't.  

If there is any fault, it is mine for volunteering prematurely.  Maybe I did, but, Sam, in case you hadn't noticed, we are under some time pressure relative to the saving of the world.  

I've been working on this thesis for 35 years.  Any normal person would suppose that I should have gotten my ducks in a row, by now.  You are that normal person.  

When it comes to saving the world, there are many risks that have to be balanced.  Timing is perhaps the one biggest risk.  I, personally, am only a small part of the time equation.  There are many ideas that need to be corralled and tamed.  That is the ongoing process, that is bigger than you or me.  In that process, I am something of a spectator.  These ideas are much bigger than we are.  They have lives of their own.  I can only coax them, and occasionally wrestle with them.  They have their own sense of time.  This is animism, if you want a word for it.  It is about the Living word, if you will, however foreign that notion may be to the academically minded.  I can try to act as a lion tamer.  That is all I can do.  Will these Ideas be on their good behavior, come Sunday?  Well, don't let them sense my fear!  

I will continue with the revision process, up until 4pm, nay, 5:30 and beyond.  It will continue to transpire on the Salmony list and/or on the Forum.  Feel free to make any list of any ideas at any time.  Good luck with that.  You have the right to circulate any list at any time, but not necessarily with my blessing.  We are all participants, when it come to wrestling with the Truth.