|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 11, 2024 8:17:39 GMT -5
Then Rose basically disqualified himself from knowing the absolute truth. Saying that doubt is sacred is like saying the intellect is sacred.
You see, what you are suggesting is the rational approach. And that is good advice as long as we are talking about relative truths and relative knowing. In that sense, I agree.
But as soon as we are talking about absolute knowing, as is the case with SR, the rational approach fails. Because the rational approach limits you to what the intellect can grasp, i.e. 'thingness'. You will never get to 'suchness' with the rational approach, via the the intellect. Because 'suchness' is prior to 'thingness', prior to the intellect, prior to rational arguments.
Imagine Niz or RM saying: "Question everything I say and look at everything I say from different angles. Doubt is sacred!" They don't say that. In fact, they say the exact opposite: "Trust the guru, have unwavering faith in the words of the guru! Don't doubt!" Or imagine Niz or RM saying: "It seems to me that I AM THAT and that the SELF is all there is. But what do I know?!" They don't say that. They make absolute statements of absolute facts: "There is only the Self. I am That."
So you see, there's some deep contextual confusion in your and Rose's perspective. In fact, what you suggest is the exact same combination of ignorance and arrogance that Laughter mentioned in his post about the medical community which prevents further insights and realizations about the nature of reality.
That's the folly of the rational approach and skepticism, they question everything, except the rational approach and skepticism. And so it's just another dogma, another belief system. And as any other belief system, it's just another donkey tethering post, as they say in Zen. Don't be a donkey, Robert!
Don't question everything. Instead, pay attention to your inner guidance and go beyond the rational mind. To know yourself, you have to be yourself, not question everything. To realize God you have to be God. Only the Infinite as the Infinite can realize the Infinite via the eyes of the Infinite. Which means, neither self/SVP nor intellect play any role in SR. They all have to be left behind. The intellect is a tool for relative knowledge. Don't make it your master. The intellect cannot grasp absolute knowledge. And only absolute knowledge of who you are can give you peace of mind. And so the intellect and the rational approach cannot give you peace of mind. Which means the intellect, the rational mind, is not the right tool. It's just going to make you smug and keep you forever discontent. As Zhuangzi used to say, there is no end to relative knowledge and therefore to end to questioning relative knowledge. In short, you are barking up the wrong tree.
On first read, just a couple of minutes ago, I don't get this at all. It seems a purpose of doubt is to negate the intellect. So, regardless of vocabulary, here's the distinction: (1) A process of curious, skeptical challenge (2) An absence of reliance, an opening into a quiescent state of mind (1) is a product of intellect, (2), is not. One way to convey the distinction is with the terms "doubt" (intellectual) and "not-knowing" (from zen translations). And it's not that (2) is strictly passive, either. In fact, when (2) is active, that's the head in the tiger's mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 11, 2024 8:50:21 GMT -5
Love Graham Hancock, he's one of a handful of academics I can contentedly listen to. The pole shift stuff is something I follow. The pole migration has been huge in the last 100 years, and had accelerated in the last 20. This migration connects to changes in the magnetosphere, and could explain interesting weather and climate changes, which are normally labelled as "climate change issues". The auroras that folks are seeing also relate to the movement/ weakening. I read that in other parts of the world, this is openly discussed. TBC, I'm not saying we are due a pole shift at any moment, the insect analogy that Reefs gave is a good one. Nature had its own timing obviously. In the first episode of his Netflix series Graham explains that he's not a credentialed scientist. He characterizes himself as a journalist, if I recall. Don't remember if he put it this way, but, he's just after the truth. You take a guy like this, there are certain advantages to his approach. For one, he's not constrained by the institutional repression I wrote about in an earlier message. To re-iterate, the practice of science bifrucates in to empiricists, who work in the field and the lab, and theorists, who synthesize a coherent narrative from the results. The narrative are supposed to serve as a benchmark for future scientific inquiry, but that has largely become corrupted to the point where counter-narrative empirical results are rejected and suppressed. So, Graham's career is built on the hostility from the establishment, rather than extinguished by it. Furthermore, Graham's approach is multi-discipline. His work overlaps with the fields of History, Archeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Geology and Climate Science. The theoretical narratives in these fields are often silo'd. This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, when you have multi-discipline results that all add up to the same conclusion, it is a major clue. Like, say, for instance, that the ice ages happened. But the silo's can have the opposite effect of ignoring the obvious, ignoring what's right in front of them. Graham's thesis is that there was at least one advanced civilization that existed during the last ice age, or, at least in the period of time when the ice first started to thaw, but then suddenly, the Earth plunged back into the depths of it. That temporal narrative is the current consensus, absent the existence of the advanced civilization. So, Graham is dismissed, in part, because of his interest in the flood myths that are common from ancient peoples the world over, and because he dares to contemplate Plato's stories about "Atlantis". Now, on one hand, there's no need not to take Graham with a grain of salt. He's just sptiballin' after all. On the other, it's patently absurd to dismiss ancient legends of large scale floods as myth. This is because of that silo effect: the current consensus is that coastlines during the last ice age are now miles out and underwater. Underwater archeology is in a nascent stage, and the sneers are likely to be on the "scientists" currently sneering at Hancock as the technology to do that kind of work gets better over time. You don't have to buy into Atlantis to question the current narratives about when and where the first civilizations emerged, and the physical evidence of a sudden and overwhelming flooding event are significant (as are the theories as to the mechanisms), like this, for instance. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 11, 2024 11:49:10 GMT -5
Robert, you are trying too hard. We know it's you. Your fingerprints are all over it again. Exact same style, exact same trigger topic, exact same crusade, exact same member as target. Please, save yourself the effort of registering new emails, new forum accounts and donning new personas with new stories. You are not really good at this. You've burnt 2 accounts in 1 day already! Now, that's still a far cry from Steve who once burnt at least 4 accounts in 1 day, but think about the energy that you put into this childish nonsense just to avenge your bruised ego. Is that really worth it? And who's going to believe what you teach anyway when you do the exact opposite of what you preach and each visit here ends with a meltdown? If you want to be taken seriously and be part of this exclusive community, you have to act accordingly. Take it easy. You can stay here. But you have to stop the trolling.
R
Steve's like....''dammit...this again''  To be fair, his issue at the time was with how the forum was running, and many of us have had issues about 'forum running' over the years. I'd like Robert/newcomers to stay, a variety of voices is good in my view. As I see it, there are 2 key aspects to being part of the forum. 1) If you come here wanting a fight, it's not the forum for you. We discuss and argue here, but within limit. We have tried a free for all approach and I guess we don't want to go back to it (if I want to fight now, I go to twitter lol). 2) For as long as you are moderator (and I don't see anyone else wanting to do it), it's basically your forum to put your stamp on, and that's fine. Although I feel you have changed over the years, you've always been confident in your views, sometimes perhaps a bit overbearing, and this can rub people the wrong way. And I say this as someone that can be overbearing too. I've come to appreciate who you are (as a 'person'), as I appreciate all the personalities here. But for as long as this if your forum to run, we have to accept your personality stamp, and to an extent that means accepting the strength of your views. And that perhaps also means accepting that all forums are flawed. There's no perfect forum. In a way, a forum...by its nature... engenders human flaw to some extent. Maybe we can be forgiving of that. I think I wanted a perfect forum at one point. I think Steve did too all those years ago. But it's really okay for the forum not to be perfect. But it's not for everyone. Faye could be here, but is self-aware and honest enough to know that it's not a good fit for her here. But there are others here that don't necessarily line up altogether with your views, and do disagree with you at times, and for them, it still basically works because they are here mainly to shoot the breeze with generally like-minded people. Maybe it's more the spiritual connection with others that matters for these folks. Steve seems to be a happy camper now, and also a proud dad. So it all worked out just fine. 1) Agreed. 2) I'm rarely even posting these days. The forum runs on its own now with basically no mod intervention required, which was the goal. The recent troll activity was really an exception.
I think the best approach is a balanced approach. We've tried the democratic approach and it didn't work. And we've tried the anything goes approach, which didn't work either. The anything goes approach seems to be even more harmful. People complain about strict rules but when they really are in an environment with no rules and suddenly feel a target on their backs all the time, they long for some basic ground rules again. I mean there's a reason why the people who went to gab came back here and didn't stay on gab where allegedly freedom rings, right? So you gotta find the right balance.
And I agree, there's some sense of community, which is also nice. The most unique feature of this forum though I think is the high quality and depth of discussion in general, plus our rather high standards re: ultimate truth and our very unique forum slang. It's a highly specialized forum actually, a unique niche within the spiritual forums landscape. It's certainly not for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 11, 2024 12:06:46 GMT -5
I did some exploring yesterday and today. This book seems to cover a lot of territory, I ordered it today. (I had never heard of Schauberger, checked him out too. I don't think I have time to spend on him, but I accidentally found a book about the importance of staying hydrated). I do have to admit I'm disappointed BDM did not research the view of Islam on the 'End Times'. He'll need to research the Mahdi and include him in a future edition. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I am pleased to announce that my book " Yuga Shift: The End of the Kali Yuga & The Impending Planetary Transformation" has been released on December 15, 2023. Bibhu Dev Misra As some of you are aware, more than a decade ago, in the year 2012, I had written an article on the Yuga Cycle and the impending end of the Kali Yuga in 2025. Since then, I have done a great deal of additional research on this very important topic that concerns all of us, and come across many pieces of evidence from diverse disciplines that corroborates my initial study and sheds much-needed light on many aspects of this grand cycle of time that regulates human civilization and human consciousness. Almost every ancient culture believed that human civilization and consciousness has progressively declined since an erstwhile Golden Age or Satya Yuga till the current age of greed and lies, discord and strife, called the Iron Age or Kali Yuga. Unfortunately, during our long passage through the darkness of the Kali Yuga, the original formulation of the Yuga Cycle was lost. In this extensively researched book, Bibhu Dev Misra has delineated the common threads that run through the Yuga Cycle doctrines of multiple ancient cultures, taking the aid of scientific discoveries from various disciplines. His reconstruction of the original Yuga Cycle framework indicates that the end of the Kali Yuga is just around the corner - in 2025! Within a span of just 15 years, by the year 2040, the Kali Yuga civilization is likely to collapse due to a combination of global wars, environmental catastrophes and comet impacts. We are living in the end-times that the ancient prophecies had warned us about. The survivors of the impending cataclysms will inherit a renewed earth, bathed in the divine light of the Central Sun. There is compelling evidence from many sources that the Yuga Cycle is a valid scientific doctrine, and is perfectly aligned with the earth’s precession cycle. It explains the periodic collapse and re-emergence of civilizations across the world every 3000-odd years, and the progressive decline in our physical size and cranial volume over the past 11,700 years of the descending Yuga Cycle. But why does our size and consciousness fluctuate in a sinusoidal manner over the course of the Yuga Cycle? What are the triggers for the cataclysmic obliteration of civilization during the periods of transition between the Yuga? What is the significance of the end-time prophecies which tell of a Savior or Avatar returning at the end of the Kali Yuga? How can we navigate through the upheavals and chaos of the Yuga-ending period? This seems different from Yukteswar. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 11, 2024 12:08:23 GMT -5
So, feeling at one with Source and separate from Source at the same as chatbot seems to suggest is absurd. Seems to me that in the case of Adya Source must have wanted to consciously experience living in paradox for a spell. Ha! Right. God's ways are mysterious. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jun 11, 2024 14:17:31 GMT -5
I have been reading a long a bit to these exchanges here and in your defence I think you handled yourself well although in times past I think the Ban trigger finger has been a a bit quick off the mark, but in the grand scheme of things as a once banned member myself unjustly so in my eyes I think letting things go is a pretty good energy to be in. While I am speaking my mind, I think you have entertained a lot of stuff that I was once ridiculed about when I first came to the forums which is another good thing in my eyes. I don't give a monkeys ar$e if you are male or female for the record or wanting to hide an identity of sorts. Perhaps it's a little ironic for non dualers who believe in dissolving one's identity to be so fcukin hung up on what one wants to refer themselves to I mean you can't make this up can you. I quite liked the quotes you posted about the cells of the body from Abe, it's how I see them and that's why I have a relationship with them as not being Separate from what I am or Source. All this appearance stuff of the mind-body that reflects the non duality neti neti approach is way off the mark as I see it. So when you see people acting up here and it doesn't make sense or they go way overboard, you have to be open to the possibility that there's something in their offline life bugging them that also affects their attitude and behavior here.
Behaviour is key. It's a dead giveaway despite what one preaches. Whether something is up offline or online, that shouldn't matter if one has realised that there isn't anyone here to begin with. That's what Jeff Foster was banging on about. He was witnessing many high ranked teachers not behaving according to what they teach. This is why I question peeps on forums who recite things that don't actual mirror their behaviour. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jun 11, 2024 14:25:24 GMT -5
I have been reading a long a bit to these exchanges here and in your defence I think you handled yourself well although in times past I think the Ban trigger finger has been a a bit quick off the mark, but in the grand scheme of things as a once banned member myself unjustly so in my eyes I think letting things go is a pretty good energy to be in. While I am speaking my mind, I think you have entertained a lot of stuff that I was once ridiculed about when I first came to the forums which is another good thing in my eyes. I don't give a monkeys ar$e if you are male or female for the record or wanting to hide an identity of sorts. Perhaps it's a little ironic for non dualers who believe in dissolving one's identity to be so fcukin hung up on what one wants to refer themselves to I mean you can't make this up can you. I quite liked the quotes you posted about the cells of the body from Abe, it's how I see them and that's why I have a relationship with them as not being Separate from what I am or Source. All this appearance stuff of the mind-body that reflects the non duality neti neti approach is way off the mark as I see it.
What I like about the Abe take on health is that it is so simple (at least in theory). In essence, you don't have to actually know anything about how your body or cells work, you only have to know that feeling good is conducive to good health and will lead naturally to a healthy life style and feeling bad is not and lead to an unhealthy life style.
I suppose it boils down to understanding the relationship of what you are that is of mind-body and spirit. Everything is related / connected, so if one aspect is out of balance then it effects other aspects, just like the planets within the universe. If one is out of whack that ripples across to other planets. This is the interconnectivity of all things within experience. When non dualists start the neti neti talk of renouncing the mind and the body then there is no understanding of anything just said. |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 11, 2024 19:51:06 GMT -5
Seems to me that in the case of Adya Source must have wanted to consciously experience living in paradox for a spell. Ha! Right. God's ways are mysterious. Indeed.  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 11, 2024 23:58:15 GMT -5
Love Graham Hancock, he's one of a handful of academics I can contentedly listen to. The pole shift stuff is something I follow. The pole migration has been huge in the last 100 years, and had accelerated in the last 20. This migration connects to changes in the magnetosphere, and could explain interesting weather and climate changes, which are normally labelled as "climate change issues". The auroras that folks are seeing also relate to the movement/ weakening. I read that in other parts of the world, this is openly discussed. TBC, I'm not saying we are due a pole shift at any moment, the insect analogy that Reefs gave is a good one. Nature had its own timing obviously. In the first episode of his Netflix series Graham explains that he's not a credentialed scientist. He characterizes himself as a journalist, if I recall. Don't remember if he put it this way, but, he's just after the truth. You take a guy like this, there are certain advantages to his approach. For one, he's not constrained by the institutional repression I wrote about in an earlier message. To re-iterate, the practice of science bifrucates in to empiricists, who work in the field and the lab, and theorists, who synthesize a coherent narrative from the results. The narrative are supposed to serve as a benchmark for future scientific inquiry, but that has largely become corrupted to the point where counter-narrative empirical results are rejected and suppressed. So, Graham's career is built on the hostility from the establishment, rather than extinguished by it. Furthermore, Graham's approach is multi-discipline. His work overlaps with the fields of History, Archeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Geology and Climate Science. The theoretical narratives in these fields are often silo'd. This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, when you have multi-discipline results that all add up to the same conclusion, it is a major clue. Like, say, for instance, that the ice ages happened. But the silo's can have the opposite effect of ignoring the obvious, ignoring what's right in front of them. Graham's thesis is that there was at least one advanced civilization that existed during the last ice age, or, at least in the period of time when the ice first started to thaw, but then suddenly, the Earth plunged back into the depths of it. That temporal narrative is the current consensus, absent the existence of the advanced civilization. So, Graham is dismissed, in part, because of his interest in the flood myths that are common from ancient peoples the world over, and because he dares to contemplate Plato's stories about "Atlantis". Now, on one hand, there's no need not to take Graham with a grain of salt. He's just sptiballin' after all. On the other, it's patently absurd to dismiss ancient legends of large scale floods as myth. This is because of that silo effect: the current consensus is that coastlines during the last ice age are now miles out and underwater. Underwater archeology is in a nascent stage, and the sneers are likely to be on the "scientists" currently sneering at Hancock as the technology to do that kind of work gets better over time. You don't have to buy into Atlantis to question the current narratives about when and where the first civilizations emerged, and the physical evidence of a sudden and overwhelming flooding event are significant (as are the theories as to the mechanisms), like this, for instance. Interesting link, and great analysis of GH and the context of his situation. I first saw him sometime before 2010 on a Project Camelot interview. Camelot were doing excellent interviews with alternative people. Very....mind expanding. I guess JLY knows Kerry Cassidy, who was at the forefront of Camelot. It was often hard to tell who was truthful and sane, who was speaking their truth but was deluded, and who was lying for whatever reason. Hancock was eloquent, articulate and sane. Also did a great Ted talk on Ayahuasca. For whatever reason I haven't watched his whole Netflix series yet, I'm sure I'll get round to it. Always too many "Married At First Sight" seasons to watch 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 12, 2024 12:16:02 GMT -5
So when you see people acting up here and it doesn't make sense or they go way overboard, you have to be open to the possibility that there's something in their offline life bugging them that also affects their attitude and behavior here. Behaviour is key. It's a dead giveaway despite what one preaches. Whether something is up offline or online, that shouldn't matter if one has realised that there isn't anyone here to begin with. That's what Jeff Foster was banging on about. He was witnessing many high ranked teachers not behaving according to what they teach. This is why I question peeps on forums who recite things that don't actual mirror their behaviour. Jeff isn't wrong, of course. But as Laughter pointed out, it's just that when you teach the ultimate truth and then have to correct yourself again and again over the course of several years, people might be wondering if there is a pattern and that what you are teaching now you may have to retract in the near future as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 12, 2024 12:26:08 GMT -5
What I like about the Abe take on health is that it is so simple (at least in theory). In essence, you don't have to actually know anything about how your body or cells work, you only have to know that feeling good is conducive to good health and will lead naturally to a healthy life style and feeling bad is not and lead to an unhealthy life style. I suppose it boils down to understanding the relationship of what you are that is of mind-body and spirit. Everything is related / connected, so if one aspect is out of balance then it effects other aspects, just like the planets within the universe. If one is out of whack that ripples across to other planets. This is the interconnectivity of all things within experience. When non dualists start the neti neti talk of renouncing the mind and the body then there is no understanding of anything just said. Abe used to say that if you only knew how much you wanted to be in these bodies, you wouldn't try to get out of it all the time.
If you use the mind as a tool of self-inquiry, you cannot go straight to the ultimate truth "There is only what you are". That will lead to a supersized spiritual ego that thinks it is God. That's why you have to start with neti-neti. So that you are not going to draw the wrong conclusion when you are introduced to the ultimate truth. That's why there's a certain step by step procedure in TAV which should not be altered (method of sublation).
|
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jun 12, 2024 13:46:43 GMT -5
Behaviour is key. It's a dead giveaway despite what one preaches. Whether something is up offline or online, that shouldn't matter if one has realised that there isn't anyone here to begin with. That's what Jeff Foster was banging on about. He was witnessing many high ranked teachers not behaving according to what they teach. This is why I question peeps on forums who recite things that don't actual mirror their behaviour. Jeff isn't wrong, of course. But as Laughter pointed out, it's just that when you teach the ultimate truth and then have to correct yourself again and again over the course of several years, people might be wondering if there is a pattern and that what you are teaching now you may have to retract in the near future as well. I dare say it depends on what one declares the ultimate truth to be lol. If it's the 'only what you are chestnut' then that is easily abided by when it comes down to behaviour traits post-realisation. It's all the add ons that create the issues regarding dream characters, non identity, non attachment, or there are no real individuals etc that puts the cats amongst the pigeons. It Kan't be lived because the bar has been set due to speculative conclusions made more than anything else. Like said, you don't shout at the shepherd if there are no other's or if one is supposedly in a bliss bunny state once realised. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jun 12, 2024 13:52:12 GMT -5
I suppose it boils down to understanding the relationship of what you are that is of mind-body and spirit. Everything is related / connected, so if one aspect is out of balance then it effects other aspects, just like the planets within the universe. If one is out of whack that ripples across to other planets. This is the interconnectivity of all things within experience. When non dualists start the neti neti talk of renouncing the mind and the body then there is no understanding of anything just said. Abe used to say that if you only knew how much you wanted to be in these bodies, you wouldn't try to get out of it all the time.
If you use the mind as a tool of self-inquiry, you cannot go straight to the ultimate truth "There is only what you are". That will lead to a supersized spiritual ego that thinks it is God. That's why you have to start with neti-neti. So that you are not going to draw the wrong conclusion when you are introduced to the ultimate truth. That's why there's a certain step by step procedure in TAV which should not be altered (method of sublation).
I never had to engage in neti neti at all, the calling within myself was enough so to speak due to sufferings had. I didn't have to renounce anything. In a way it was in hindsight integrating everything that took me deeper. Perhaps it's different courses for different horses as there is no 'one' way. What kinda puzzled me a bit regarding self enquiry where all you do is focus on I am is that there really isn't any integration, it's like a bypass. You're just blanking out everything else regarding oneself. If it works for some that great in the grand scheme of things but what is one bypassing by blanking everything else out? |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 13, 2024 7:02:57 GMT -5
When non dualists start the neti neti talk of renouncing the mind and the body then there is no understanding of anything just said. There is no renouncing of the body/mind. There is the recognition of what is eternal and what is temporary. The body/mind is like a space suit. It's worn to have experience in space and time. But when the space suit is removed who you really are remains. Non-duality would have anyone interested in such things to know experientially the difference between their true, eternal nature and all that is temporary. That is all really. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 13, 2024 7:28:21 GMT -5
In the first episode of his Netflix series Graham explains that he's not a credentialed scientist. He characterizes himself as a journalist, if I recall. Don't remember if he put it this way, but, he's just after the truth. You take a guy like this, there are certain advantages to his approach. For one, he's not constrained by the institutional repression I wrote about in an earlier message. To re-iterate, the practice of science bifrucates in to empiricists, who work in the field and the lab, and theorists, who synthesize a coherent narrative from the results. The narrative are supposed to serve as a benchmark for future scientific inquiry, but that has largely become corrupted to the point where counter-narrative empirical results are rejected and suppressed. So, Graham's career is built on the hostility from the establishment, rather than extinguished by it. Furthermore, Graham's approach is multi-discipline. His work overlaps with the fields of History, Archeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Geology and Climate Science. The theoretical narratives in these fields are often silo'd. This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, when you have multi-discipline results that all add up to the same conclusion, it is a major clue. Like, say, for instance, that the ice ages happened. But the silo's can have the opposite effect of ignoring the obvious, ignoring what's right in front of them. Graham's thesis is that there was at least one advanced civilization that existed during the last ice age, or, at least in the period of time when the ice first started to thaw, but then suddenly, the Earth plunged back into the depths of it. That temporal narrative is the current consensus, absent the existence of the advanced civilization. So, Graham is dismissed, in part, because of his interest in the flood myths that are common from ancient peoples the world over, and because he dares to contemplate Plato's stories about "Atlantis". Now, on one hand, there's no need not to take Graham with a grain of salt. He's just sptiballin' after all. On the other, it's patently absurd to dismiss ancient legends of large scale floods as myth. This is because of that silo effect: the current consensus is that coastlines during the last ice age are now miles out and underwater. Underwater archeology is in a nascent stage, and the sneers are likely to be on the "scientists" currently sneering at Hancock as the technology to do that kind of work gets better over time. You don't have to buy into Atlantis to question the current narratives about when and where the first civilizations emerged, and the physical evidence of a sudden and overwhelming flooding event are significant (as are the theories as to the mechanisms), like this, for instance. Interesting link, and great analysis of GH and the context of his situation. I first saw him sometime before 2010 on a Project Camelot interview. Camelot were doing excellent interviews with alternative people. Very....mind expanding. I guess JLY knows Kerry Cassidy, who was at the forefront of Camelot. It was often hard to tell who was truthful and sane, who was speaking their truth but was deluded, and who was lying for whatever reason. Hancock was eloquent, articulate and sane. Also did a great Ted talk on Ayahuasca. For whatever reason I haven't watched his whole Netflix series yet, I'm sure I'll get round to it. Always too many "Married At First Sight" seasons to watch 😆  .. been too busy with work to reply yet to reefs' latest, but .. lookey here at what's going mainstream ..  |
|
To be fair, his issue at the time was with how the forum was running, and many of us have had issues about 'forum running' over the years.
.. been too busy with work to reply yet to reefs' latest, but .. 