Please don't respond to this thread, but visit my "Cha, Cha, Changes and Preparations for same" Thread here at
http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1325618052
     if you feel like commenting on this particular thread.  I will be periodically "bumping up" this thread once in awhile to keep it publicly visible.   These threads are very loosely related to the "2012 and the coming energy to Earth" thread on this page, except in timing and scope of change.

  There has been plenty talk of Earth changes and the like at this site, but i've seen very little talk of practical and holistic preparation, which is why i started the thread which is linked above.  I welcome any and all with interest and/or insight into these subjects--I would love feedback, suggestions, other ideas etc.  The other thread is broken up into segments such as spiritual attunement, food, clothing, water, transportation.

What's not taught in the textbooks throughout most of mainstream academia is the awareness that many (or most) ancient and indigenousness cultures either past or present have of the cyclical nature of time and the world wide experience of collapses of civilizations. 

  To think that our civilization will be exempt from such collapses and transformations is perhaps wishful thinking, if you ask most higher level nonphysical helper types. 

  Such cycles have happened many times in the past and explains why humanity appears to be so dense and slow learning over such long periods of times and only has begun to think in an advanced, technological type way just in the last 150 yrs or so. 

  Yet the Vedas and other ancient texts describe things like flying vehicles, bombs, and other modern things most only associate with the last handful of generations.   

  Many ancient cultures or indigenous people's describe times of cataclysm and great material challenge, but many also speak of Golden ages wherein humanity was much more collectively positive, loving, and spiritually aware.  Many prophesy both for the future.

  I strongly suspect or am open to, based on both internal guidance and being led to some respectable outer sources (many connected strongly to The Monroe Institute in some way), that both are very strong potentials or probabilities within my lifetime.  I am one of the many that chose to incarnate at this time to help facilitate this process in a positive way, so that it does lead to a Golden Age of greater unity and positivity.

  Remember, the more of us who care about the larger human family in a PUL type way and about the Earth itself, who survive and thrive during these coming changes, the easier it will be to CO-CREATE with the Creative Consciousness that potential Golden Age of global human Love and unity attunement, which ever leads to greater individual and collective happiness 

  Collectively, we have a long way to go before this comes to full fruition, but there are a number of people, quite a high percentage on this site alone, who can help facilitate these positive changes and act as anchors of sanity, balance, helpfulness and positivity for others when chaos and selfishness start to rage around them like a dark tempest. 

   In short, every person capable and who has agreed to stay or to consider staying here, will be needed.  Not one of us is "least" in this tapestry, and we all are and will be bound by the strength of PUL type love.  Please don't think you can't help, that you don't have the strength or the gifts, please don't think so little of yourself.  You WILL have help from the nonphysical, from helpful E.T.'s, and from all who are creative in essence, when you truly will need it.  The very Co-Creator Gods will help you if you are seeking to help your fellow human and the Earth. 

  Thank you all for listening, and please come visit and participate in the thread I linked at the beginning. 

bump up the jam, bump it up, while the bass is pumping...

Wait...oops, sorry!...thought i was in a retro club there for a moment.  :D


:P

Justin,

Do you know what happened to KarmaLars' comment on this thread, asking you if you were a "nutcase" ?

I was looking forward to your answer.

A demonstration of unconditional love happened.

I was tempted, but knew that Justin would sit back and let it settle before making any comment.

crossbow wrote on Feb 4^th, 2012 at 12:53am:

Justin, Do you know what happened to KarmaLars' comment on this thread, asking you if you were a "nutcase" ? I was looking forward to your answer.

  I wasn't even aware that this happened. 

  Truth be told, judging by many of the mainstreams and typical societal standards, i probably am a bit of a "nutcase".  In any case, i really like various nuts a lot, so i would say i'm in good company. 

   I'd much prefer to be a nutcase than to be considered completely sane by the mainstream's and societies standards.  Sort of reminds me of a song i like a lot by Seal, called "Crazy". 

he he, yes Justin I think you're a bit of nutcase too. But I like you anyway. I think nearly all us humans are nutcases in our own way, at least a little bit. Like you point out, it is healthy for us to recognise in what areas we can be a little nutty, at least then we can laugh at our selves.   

I know you are capable of sticking up for yourself against a rough challenge, for I have seen you do so, and you have done so against me. And I admire that. I admire men, and women, who are prepared to stand up for themselves, and who do not turn to an authority and expect the authority to take over all their potentially unpleasant interpersonal dealings and protect them from anything that is a little uncomfortable, for that is contrary to what life is about. 

I assume it was Admin's work to delete KarmaLars' question/comment to you, for the entire post is removed, not just its content deleted.

I have noticed it is not unusual for challenging, crude or harsh posts to get deleted, and I notice some forum members don't mind drawing Admin's/Bruce Moen's attention to posts they think should be deleted. Naturally, I don't admire that, although I understand it. 



That reminds me, here is something I can be a little nutty about: 

I have observed that on biker forums, hunter's forums, boxer's forums any forums where the members don't portray themselves as society's good/caring/spiritual people and even on forums frequented by so-called racist types, sexist types, and criminal types, that the range of human discussion is capable of being far wider and freer than on forums where the "good people" meet.

On those non-spiritual/non-good people forums one may talk about anything across the full wide spectrum of human thought, from the finest to the crudest, from the politest to the rudest, and from the highest ideas of what is good and right and spiritual, to the crudest talk and of the meanest kind. On such forums one can freely challenge others, and in any fashion and by any means that words enable. One can speak any opinion from high to low, from left to right; can express any ideal, any push, any effort, in any direction. On such forums, posts do not get deleted, ideas and opinions are not banned or filtered out, but rather are thrashed out, and by reason, logic and fairness and by contrast and comparison, truth becomes visible and ultimately stands forth victorious. I like those forums, because I value truth above all else, and freedom of expression next to that, for freedom is the formula that leads to truth revealed.

But I notice that on the "spiritual", "caring", "good people's" forums, where those who like to think they are on the spiritual path come to meet and talk, that there is nearly always some degree of censorship of human input, either from the Administrator's own initiative, or by the Administrator's initiative at the membership's prompting.

As such, on such forums the range of human expression and discussion is restricted. Conversations are censored to fit into posting guidelines, and to be "on topic", "pleasant" and so-called "safe", and to fit other seemingly nice and cosey standards. 

To someone like myself, the restrictions on speech that plague the "good people's" forums makes them look like hypocrites. For I see quite clearly that truth emerges visible and recognisable not out of censorship but out of the smoke of the conflict that arises when the full spectrum of truth and falseness is enabled to mix together; and I recognise that freewill in its infinite width of expression is the agent of that conflict; and that love is for freewill, like a beacon light, and only freewill can come to know love and truth. So I don't think highly of those who think themselves the good people but who like to censor the speech of others.

I notice it is the same in physical life gatherings, that amongst the so-called community conscious types, the "socially aware" people, and the "spiritual" and the "caring" types, that ideas, opinions, even words are restricted to fit a narrow ideology, and non-compliance is not tolerated.

And yet in gatherings of those who do not claim to hold the moral high ground, there one can freely speak up and down, left and right, and to and fro in any direction, and in any words and terms.

Over the years through my work and other activities, I have mixed with miners, manual labourers, criminals, prisoners, so-called racists, sexists, white supremacists, shooters, hunters, the non-pc, the so-called rednecks and bogan types, and found that I and others can speak about anything, can put forward any opinion, and it might be vigorously disagreed with but I have never been banned from saying anything by such people.

And I have also mixed with psychologists, sociologists, academics, new-age spiritual caring types, meditators, community educators / workers / social workers, and found that all but a narrow portion of the full range of human ideas, opinions and speech is banned by such people, even many words are banned. Working in such fields, I have seen colleagues sacked or otherwise forced out of their jobs just because they have been found out to disagree with the compulsory narrow ideology or because they used a word they were not suppose to use. Being seen to comply with the narrow compulsory ideology is a survival requirement when working in such fields. And these are the fields where the supposed good people work, who say they care for others. Such people wear innocent caring expressions, but their expressions are false; they are not what they seem to be. These people use frequent buzzwords like diversity, tolerance, equality, to hide that their hearts are really the opposite of what they pretend to be.

The true opposition to good is not apparent evil, but apparent good. Anyone who aspires to true goodness should contemplate this.   

I too value debate and differences of opinion and don't have a great deal of time for political correctness as it can often patronise those whom it would protect. But i do believe that there is a difference between offering a contrary opinion and being offensive. The former would be something along the lines of  'I don't agree with you for reasons x,y and z' while the latter would be something like 'you are an idiot and people like you etc. etc.' ). I have seen boards where this goes on and it ends up by being a tit-for-tat slagging off fest where nothing of any importance gets said apart from spleen venting.

Hi

An aside:
"I assume it was Admin's work to delete KarmaLars' question/comment to you, for the entire post is removed, not just its content deleted."

That doesn't happen here, I think.  Only the poster has a delete button for a short while after posting. If Bruce moves it to non-related topics (at the bottom) he uses a bold faced title to explain where it went.

I agree that censorship in this world is growing, but so is freedom to speak foolishly, as seen on facebook, twitters, etc. Electronic Babel, a long way from how words were once held sacred -- oh wait, or was declaring them sacred a kind of censorship too?

Bets

Thanks for that clarification Bets.
Naturally I understand Bruce and anyone should be free to run their website however they wish to, but I am still pleased to hear that Bruce does not remove posts without stating where they went. My comments were aimed more at the wider social intolerance of so called non-pc subjects, ideas and speech.

Not being pc but preferring to think for myself and express myself honestly, I prefer the freedom to speak my mind and contest ideas and thoughts with others. Although I might dislike what another says and how they say it, I hope I would never ban or censor their words. I dislike fowl language and insults but in debate I endeavour to look through them at the issue being dealt with. I wouldn't ban a person from a public forum because of their repeated fowl language, though I would certainly suggest they modify it if it was hampering their better expression. A private forum of particular members, especially of a physical meeting, where certain formalities are required then yes I expect language and behaviour to fit with protocols and formalities, but not ideas, they should be free, no matter how disagreeable.

My personal preference would be for all posts here to remain, no matter what they said, but that is up to Bruce and the collective of forum users to decide. Perhaps one day I will start a non-pc spiritually orientated forum, only it probably wouldn't be recognised as spiritual by those unable to see through the taboo subjects, opinions and language that might arise. he he, if ever I get around to starting one.   ::) too much to do, too little time.

Crossbow,

I wrote a reply that disappeared and didn't delete it. Interesting to read about someone else having similar thoughts about PC. Different folks have shown me unparalleled honesty and brutal truth at best, snake pit and never ending ego-fights as a worst case scenario. There's a huge growth potential in honesty, though it may be unpleasant.

Foul language. The root "problem" is that some words carry power, or are allotted power. Light 'n love doesn't allow for power. Though I find this dog eat dog world tipped on the scale towards the dark polarity, the other way around would be equally crappity smacked up. Light polarity is like an iron fist in a velvet glove. Censor the "bad words", turn the other cheek, don't defend yourself, take it all in, keep it nice 'n shallow and so on.

What I do like about light 'n lovers, and all kinds of kind people is heart, warmth and good times. But fake smiles and lies to be nice is a waste of time. The plastic 'no matter what' part about love becomes evident when 'get a life' is all that it takes to remove the other cheek that was proposed to be available 24/7.

wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 3:29pm:

crossbow wrote on Feb 4th, 2012 at 12:53am: Justin, Do you know what happened to KarmaLars' comment on this thread, asking you if you were a "nutcase" ? I was looking forward to your answer.   I wasn't even aware that this happened.    Truth be told, judging by many of the mainstreams and typical societal standards, i probably am a bit of a "nutcase".  In any case, i really like various nuts a lot, so i would say i'm in good company.     I'd much prefer to be a nutcase than to be considered completely sane by the mainstream's and societies standards.  Sort of reminds me of a song i like a lot by Seal, called "Crazy".

No, I didn't delete my post! I'll put my money on the justin character wimpering off to Admin about it. Unless off course Admin steps in and says that they did it solely.

" I wasn't even aware that this happened." says the justin. Then you must not read replies to your own threads! 

May I suggest you start telling everybody you meet, especially people with children that they must prepare for the envitable, because the oracle justin says so.

Better still, go to your local hospital and visit the maternity ward, and tell the happy parents that they and their newborns are coming into a terrible period 2012-2016!

What happens 2016? ... We all get to go into the afterlife! Whoopee!



   



 

That's part of the reason why I would not talk publicly about occultly seen future events; except what can be seen clearly happening on Earth if one opens their eyes and looks around. I see no point in distracting people from their living; or making them unecessarily worried.

(I'm not referring to the climate change / global warming pseudo-science propaganda. I think it is wrong for school teachers to scare little children and make older youths disrespectful by lying to them that the previous generations have ruined their planet and the world is going to cook, seas rise, no drinking water, etc.)

Personally I think Justin is right to try to help people think about survival preparations.  Minor and major tragedies occur without warning all the time.  It only makes sense to plan for what you could do should you be confronted with such an event regardless of whether or not one may be facing a few days stranded without power because of a snow storm or the aftermath of a major earthquake.  Discussing how you would cope and making preparations for such events actually eases, rather than produces fear. 

Fear abounds when one is suddenly faced with a disastrous event and find themselves unprepared to help themselves.

KarmaLars,
"May I suggest you start telling everybody you meet, especially people with children that they must prepare for the envitable, because the oracle justin says so. Better still, go to your local hospital and visit the maternity ward, and tell the happy parents that they and their newborns are coming into a terrible period 2012-2016!"

This and other topics are written on a board you and others seek out or come by, and by one's own choice - to read and/or participate. What's the point of telling everybody everything?

"What happens 2016? ... We all get to go into the afterlife! Whoopee!"

Sooner or later every body will die, some before 2016, 2023 or whatever. Not necessarily because of a global event, but could be a personal one, seemingly out of the blue. Die while sleeping, while playing hide and seek with the kids, mowing the lawn, watching sports and drinking beer, while writing on this forum, eating salad, listening to the ocean surf, rolled over by the garbage truck, a knife in the back, kiss on the cheek, while laughing and the list goes on. Whoopee!

  Thank you Kathy for pointing that out.  Along the lines of what you said.  One of my sort of role models in primitive living and emergency preparation is a guy named Cody Lundin.  He is one of those somewhat rare people who walks the walk and talks the talk completely.

   He, like many others trained in his "field", often mention that dealing with emergencies, extreme situations, basic survival etc. is primarily a psychological and mental thing in many ways. 

  You can never be fully prepared for such things, but as Kathy said, some pre-preparation can help not only physically but also a lot psychologically.  Fear and panic are more harmful in these scenarios than even a lack of food and shelter oft times. 

  It is not my intent to create fear in others, but to help with some measure of psychological and physical preparation.  I believe this is one of the reasons why many reputable sources that many here at Afterlife site are familiar with, personally respect and are drawn to--people and sources like Bob Monroe, Bruce Moen, Rosiland McKnight, Edgar Cayce, etc have broached the issue of "Earth Change's" and/or civilization collapse.

   These were and are sources, i strongly intuit, that were largely in touch with more expanded and constructive levels of guidance and in a sense, perhaps it was more guidance speaking through them about these things rather than just their personality wants, desires, knowledge, etc. 

  I don't know the exact "year" that this will start in earnest as far as modern, convenient necessities ceasing, but more and more, i'm feeling sooner, and sooner rather than later.  I've only now, myself, started to really prepare in any kind of material way for these kind of scenarios, and that's with being aware for many years of such potentials and having been giving many messages in many various different ways. 

  And for me, it has nothing to do with the specific date of 12/21/12 and the Mayan calendar, though I do think we can generally relate Galactic-Solar-Earth cycles to it to some extent as outer "markers" of general time frames.  This important 'outer marker' Galactic Solar Earth alignment has been brewing since about 1980 and will be fully completed by 2016 or so.   

  Many of us here at the Afterlife site know that death is a false word and nothing to be afraid of, and so, if i'm going to publicly bring up something like massive civilization changes and collapses, it would be at a place like this where the majority can handle it and will not become overly fearful when someone does talk about such things. 

  It is also my intuition that many here at this site can help others during these times and so, such potential helper types need to be even more prepared before hand then the many we cannot reach or prepare before hand.

  Ultimately, i see a VERY positive future unfolding despite some initial challenges and suffering.  But friggin look at the world right now, look around and see and feel how much suffering is going on around you RIGHT NOW.  Much physical suffering yes, but what about the degree of emotional and spiritual suffering?   

The Earth changes ultimately mean an end to this hamster wheel of holistic suffering we are on as a collective.  Is that not something to look forward to?   Sometimes to grow and really change a lot, you first have to go through a crucible of fire, but when you come out of that fire, you are changed--better, stronger, happier, more at peace. 

  This is that individual, microcosm process, simply becoming the collective and macro, and it is so and will happen to help co-create a Unity among us suffering stubborn and willful humans who so disrespect each other and the very Earth we live upon, day in and day out. 

  Such a collective positive change COULD happen without extreme outer catalysts, since more and more are waking up and starting to care more about each other and the Earth in a more universal and unconditional way, except that our larger society is in a strangle hold by a .1 percent of population who REALLY LIKES the way things are now, and who greatly fear any change to their lifestyles of unbelievable greed, power lust, material control, and domination of the Earth and earthly forces.  These are the truly insane ones, and yet they are in the positions of most material power and influence in this world.

It is THESE which need to be taken out in order for this healing process to fully complete in reasonable time.  This is why there will be extreme outer catalysts--in order to break their strangle hold on our global society.  As technology advances and grows, so does their ability to influence and control the masses, for they have the majority money and influence the politics, laws, etc more than any common person or even group can.

  They cannot be taken out by force by us, even if we were willing to start a bloody revolution, and many of us aren't inclined because we are spiritually centered, because they have whole brain washed military's and super advanced technology at their beck and call.  They can know anything about anyone's life through their technology, if one is part of the grid at all.

  What can remove them from the equation are powerful outer catalysts beyond their control, such as the forces of nature. 

  The good news is that in the future, as this collective healing takes place, we finally will have learned from our past and our mistakes, and we will not allow such individuals and systems to arise in power and force again--at least not for a long, long time. 

  If such above beliefs and perceptions make me crazy and unbalanced, then i'm gladly insane, for i would and will do anything non violent to help that positive future unfold.  At whatever cost or so called sacrifice to self.  I say so called, because i do not view self as just me, but all people, all Creation i know is self, and so there is no real sacrifice involved.

When i was 4 years old, and asked what i wanted to be when i grew up, being so aware of all the suffering around me and the state of the world, it broke my little heart to feel and i told my parents that i wanted to be a "doctor" to everyone everywhere and that i would always be there for anyone, for i literally cared about each and every person on this Earth. 

  This hasn't changed since then, except for a short time, i forgot about my deepest ideal, intentions, and desires.  I tell you all this, so that you can understand where i'm coming from with this, and the passion that motivates me.

   

crossbow wrote on Feb 4^th, 2012 at 12:53am:

Justin, Do you know what happened to KarmaLars' comment on this thread, asking you if you were a "nutcase" ? I was looking forward to your answer.

I reported that comment.  I'm assuming Volu's following comment was removed as well.

eric wrote on Feb 7^th, 2012 at 5:19pm:

crossbow wrote on Feb 4th, 2012 at 12:53am: Justin, Do you know what happened to KarmaLars' comment on this thread, asking you if you were a "nutcase" ? I was looking forward to your answer. I reported that comment.  I'm assuming Volu's following comment was removed as well.

Ahh...Eric the half a bee.

Eric,
I notice you don't justify yourself or explain your position; you just state your decision taken. So you are comfortable with posters saying the world as we know it is coming to a violent and bloody end, that world wide destruction, death and suffering is coming soon, and dedicating threads and many posts to putting out that message. (which is fair enough) But if someone else questions those posts, if someone suggests that such posters who forecast such world wide destruction are going on like "nutcases", and points out that there have been many in the past who forecast the end of the world in 2000, 1986, 1000, etc, then you think such criticisms should be deleted, that such counter opinions disallowed. No debate, no counter argument - just delete the post; ban the concept.

On your own Eric, you are not much; unfortunately there are millions like you. And in your millions, each doing your little part, you are a problem - the greatest problem the free world has. You are like termites nibbling away at freedom's house. Collectively you seek to ban every activity, opinion, idea, even word, that you don't personally like; you destroy debate, ban expression of thought, stifle freedom and subsequently stifle human growth. 


Some thoughts others might consider:
Human virtue cannot be coerced out of an individual.
Intelligence and virtue are not imparted to people by restricting their expression; rather, intelligence and virtue are enabled to emerge by freedom of expression.
Suppressing people's speech, debate, opinion, expression, improves no one.

Only the known criminal needs to be restricted, and only in actions. Words are only people's thoughts dressed in sound and letters, so what, no one can be hurt by reading words upon a forum site. The text on the computer screen is inanimate, it has no pulse, it has no teeth or claws, it cannot hurt. There is no need to restrict any one's opinion.


Bruce and others,
Human intelligence and virtue can overcome all counter argument, and do not need to restrict their opposition's speech.

Only the doubtful need to restrict the opinions and speech of others.

Let all players play upon the field, let all contestants contest in the arena. Let falseness, rudeness, foulness, hatefulness, contest with truth, courtesy, and virtue. Let wrongness battle rightness, goodness battle badness, truth battle falseness, in open unrestricted battle. And see who is last standing. I have faith it will be truth; I know it will be truth.

Personally, I have no fear of pitting truth against any foe, no matter how foul. And truth does not need to censor or handicap its opponents. But falseness always seeks to.

I have just re-read:
1. "Revised posting guidelines and banning policy"
2. "Who's responsible for forum content?"

Most of the posting guidelines are vague and subjective and can be applied an any direction according to ones judgement. What is considered mocking, bullying, abusive, racist, offensive, proselytizing, demeaning, etc, are registered differently for everyone. And some people don't demand other's speech be banned when they read something that offends their sensibilities.

Personally I find a lot on this website to be offensive to me, but I let most of it go because I believe people have a right to offend - as long as they don't mind others offending back. I have had a shot back here and there, but generally I let things go. For instance, being a Christian who appreciates the work of the Church, and being proud of my Western heritage, I find the frequent comments on this forum that put down organised Christianity/religion and Western culture, while elevating what I might term Moenism and Monroeism, and complimenting Eastern wisdom, is a bit tiresome and even offensive. But I put up with my religion, race and culture being frequently backhanded because I believe others have a right to do that, and I should be strong enough to take it. I should also be able and free to return the counter argument if I so choose, and dish out a little offence. Offence is part of life; I accept that; so should we all. I have been likened to the Norwegian killer/terrorist Andre Brevik for my defence of Christian living. That's not pleasant, but life's not pleasant, so why should I expect a public internet forum to be pleasant. Unpleasantness is part of life. I can take it, so can anyone who only needs to realise they can take it.   

Let's not be weak and easily offended; and when we are offended, let's not call for other people's speech to be restricted. Lets only call for their speech and our speech to be free.

And let's not give way to the weak and the easily offended, or we will lose everything we have. For the weak and the easily offended - and those who pretend and play to be - are the most restrictive and oppressive people of all, especially towards those who try not to offend them, because their weakness is in their comparison to others, and their offendedness is in their own natures, therefore piece by piece they will take take take away all aptitude in those who try to appease them, until there is no comparison. 

Beyond common courtesies, appeasing the weak and the easily offended by restricting ourselves from offending them, is not an advancement of our society; it is our degradation, our backsliding. We should not limp before the lame to make them feel better with themselves, but we should stand tall and walk right, while giving them practical assistance as required, so they might stand tall and walk as right as they are able. 

Crossbow-

I don't like censorship either. Free speech is important, one of the most precious gifts that living in a true democracy brings. The gist of what you seem to be saying is that in a free market of ideas the truth will prevail and i'm optimistic enough (or naive) enough !) to believe that. What I don't understand is why criticism has to get personal though.

For example you wrote ' (I'm not referring to the climate change / global warming pseudo-science propaganda. I think it is wrong for school teachers to scare little children and make older youths disrespectful by lying to them that the previous generations have ruined their planet and the world is going to cook, seas rise, no drinking water, etc.)' . If I was being offensive I would call you a right-wing nut etc. etc. but all I need to do is to point out that nearly every climate scientist in the world (i.e. the ones who actually do the study) now believes that human acivities have and are causing global climate change. Basically its a matter of scientific debate.

The danger with being offensive is that the focus moves from the topic matter in hand onto spiralling, mutual name-calling with the original subject forgotten about. The antidote to this happening, I think, is to keep it specific.I agree with you on censorship in general though.

D

What is a half-a-bee? I guess name calling is okay, along with condescension and abuse.  But hey, anything for free speech.

Crossbow,
"But if someone else questions those posts, if someone suggests that such posters who forecast such world wide destruction are going on like "nutcases", and points out that there have been many in the past who forecast the end of the world in 2000, 1986, 1000, etc, then you think such criticisms should be deleted, that such counter opinions disallowed. No debate, no counter argument - just delete the post; ban the concept."

I've read the forecasts pointed out before, but the removed post stated nutcase because he felt threatened about not being able to watch sports. I don't like having any of my posts removed, but also not dumb enough to pretend not to know my rules aren't the bees knees here. I willingly participate knowing the rules of this house/forum. I could end up being thrown flat out on my digital ass, teeth scraping the digital pavement, and being offended about that would be a waste of time, like watching a body running with a stick to jump high into the air to the crowd's amazement.

"For instance, being a Christian who appreciates the work of the Church, and being proud of my Western heritage, I find the frequent comments on this forum that put down organised Christianity/religion and Western culture, while elevating what I might term Moenism and Monroeism, and complimenting Eastern wisdom, is a bit tiresome and even offensive."

Religions, moen and monroe are stepping stones. I do like monroe better, that's how it works for me. I don't trust religions to say their followers are the real builders of their heavens and thought-form lords, by the energy they pour out into the astral. It's not a right to believe in a religion, but it certainly can be right for you or anyone else.

Steve Hughes on being offended:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9HRLvfbauA

Bardo,
"What is a half-a-bee? I guess name calling is okay, along with condescension and abuse.  But hey, anything for free speech."

Half a bee, missing the part that stings? Guilt is also like butterfly once you know what purpose it sometimes serve. Is your use of guilt upascending?

crossbow wrote on Feb 8^th, 2012 at 2:35am:

Ahh...Eric the half a bee. Eric, I notice you don't justify yourself or explain your position; you just state your decision taken.

I felt that the post in question violated the forum guidelines.  Specifically, the post in question simply insulted another poster without offering any grounds for intelligent discussion or debate. 


Quote:

So you are comfortable with posters saying the world as we know it is coming to a violent and bloody end, that world wide destruction, death and suffering is coming soon, and dedicating threads and many posts to putting out that message. (which is fair enough) But if someone else questions those posts, if someone suggests that such posters who forecast such world wide destruction are going on like "nutcases", and points out that there have been many in the past who forecast the end of the world in 2000, 1986, 1000, etc, then you think such criticisms should be deleted, that such counter opinions disallowed. No debate, no counter argument - just delete the post; ban the concept.

I'm comfortable with people saying just about anything as long as it is in a civil manner that encourages discussion, debate, and overall learning.

I think "Earth Changes" and "2012" are all a bunch of nonsense, but I'm not going to go around calling someone who disagrees a nutcase.  Doing so would not encourage free discussion.


Quote:

On your own Eric, you are not much; unfortunately there are millions like you. And in your millions, each doing your little part, you are a problem - the greatest problem the free world has. You are like termites nibbling away at freedom's house. Collectively you seek to ban every activity, opinion, idea, even word, that you don't personally like; you destroy debate, ban expression of thought, stifle freedom and subsequently stifle human growth.

...Er... well, I really don't know if I can take any of this seriously.  In case you were being serious, I certainly don't aim to promote censorship and stifle freedom.  I was only reporting a post that indicated an internet troll.  In case you aren't aware, an internet troll makes useless, negative posts that bring about unnecessary drama. 

To top all of this off, the poster requested that this be a no-reply thread.  Seeing replies to a no-reply thread is adorable, but it is unreasonable to expect the original poster to pay attention to a thread that he didn't expect to generate discussion.

eric,

There's always room for growth, even when no posting is requested and yet the thread comes alive, bumping up the jam in a different way than justin may have foreseen.

Insults and manners not marinated in estrogen - it's a brilliant opportunity to demonstrate that words and beautiful visions can go hand in hand with action. Love this and love that and so on. A bunch of nonsense and nutcase aren't limitations to free discussions. The limitation is that one has to speak.. in a certain manner. Velvet glove, iron fist. Is love too meek to deal with trolls, or the ones that are labeled trolls? Love's too precious? Not worthy of love? Silence and looking the other way is love?

If society was governed by Erics, the word nutcase would be banned and those who use it would be silenced. Imagine how many other words, phrases and manners of speech would be banned with it - supposedly to promote constructive conversation and protect people from being insulted. As if the poor delicate dears need to be cosily oppressed for their own good.  :-X  


If society was governed by Crossbows, everyone could speak as creatively as they pleased; no one would be silenced. Manners and courtesies would be taught but not enforced.  :)  


Heisenberg69,
The issue, according to the green lobby is that the world's temperature is rising to dangerous levels due to too much human produced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the polar icecaps are melting causing the seas to rise which will flood the lands and the planet is going to die. That is what is being indoctrinated into school children and adults. 

People on this site are frequently saying they don't accept belief systems, but only accept individual experience and first hand truth. Yet you are saying that you are running with the crowd, believing something because others believe it, who no doubt just like you, believe it because others believe it. And people think they are using their intellects to do that, think they are dealing with facts - no that is just belief, with no thinking involved. The most vicious parasitic belief of all, which destroys the potential of its host, is the host's mistaken belief that it has no beliefs, for that is belief and denial combined. The only protection from it is to be able to differentiate between belief and known fact. Most people don't have a clue how to do this. Instead they think that a fact is a wide spread belief. Most people in the religion of global warming treat scientists like fundamentalist religous people treat their priests and imams. They just believe what they say and do as they're told.   :D    

Perhaps you might start a thread in the Off Topic section titled The Global Warming Debate. Then amongst yourselves you might be able to separate facts from belief. 

Crossbow-

'The issue, according to the green lobby is that the world's temperature is rising to dangerous levels due to too much human produced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the polar icecaps are melting causing the seas to rise which will flood the lands and the planet is going to die. That is what is being indoctrinated into school children and adults. 

People on this site are frequently saying they don't accept belief systems, but only accept individual experience and first hand truth. Yet you are saying that you are running with the crowd, believing something because others believe it, who no doubt just like you, believe it because others believe it. And people think they are using their intellects to do that, think they are dealing with facts - no that is just belief, with no thinking involved. The most vicious parasitic belief of all, which destroys the potential of its host, is the host's mistaken belief that it has no beliefs, for that is belief and denial combined. The only protection from it is to be able to differentiate between belief and known fact. Most people don't have a clue how to do this. Instead they think that a fact is a wide spread belief. Most people in the religion of global warming treat scientists like fundamentalist religous people treat their priests and imams. They just believe what they say and do as they're told  Perhaps you might start a thread in the Off Topic section titled The Global Warming Debate. Then amongst yourselves you might be able to separate facts from belief

You are not discriminating between beliefs and evidence-based thinking. Climate science is based on evidence such as carbon-dioxide levels in ancient ice-cores , receding glaciers and global temperature recordings.That is not belief, that is hard evidence.I just don't think rejecting evidence because we don't want something to be true is good practice. Its a bit like an airplane pilot who ignores his altimeter reading because he does'nt like the thought of crashing into the mountains !    Ultimately if the evidence for global warming is weak the hypothesis will be rejected but that should'nt be because we don't like the idea of climate change. As it happens the vast majority of climate scientists now accept the evidence is real.

This board is'nt about climate change but I used it as an example of how to disagree with someone without denigrating them.

D

crossbow wrote on Feb 9^th, 2012 at 6:50pm:

If society was governed by Erics, the word nutcase would be banned and those who use it would be silenced. Imagine how many other words, phrases and manners of speech would be banned with it - supposedly to promote constructive conversation and protect people from being insulted. As if the poor delicate dears need to be cosily oppressed for their own good.  :-X

 

I think you're inflating things beyond proportion just a little bit.  Censorship and freedom are very interesting and all and I'm sure it's an important issue in communist countries, but this is an internet forum.  Bruce has put certain rules in place.  I reported the post in question because I felt it violated those rules.  Bruce must have agreed since he removed the post in question, as well as another post that I didn't report.

I guess that's the post puzzling thing about all this racket-- I didn't remove the post.  Bruce did, and this is his forum.  You should bring your... uh... censorship concerns to him. 

I can't help but wonder if those upset by this incident are freedom fighters in a foreign land, battling an oppressive regime and stopping by the Afterlife Knowledge conversation board in between ambushes.  Removal of the "nutcase" post, with all its gems of wisdom and subtle intelligence, surely hit a few nerves.

Eric said: "I guess that's the post puzzling thing about all this racket-- I didn't remove the post.  Bruce did, and this is his forum.  You should bring your... uh... censorship concerns to him."

Bruce isn't in front of me. And on this particular issue I consider you are and will continue to be more influential than he.   



Heisenberg69 said: "You are not discriminating between beliefs and evidence-based thinking. ... "

Really? You think I'm not discriminating between two such distinct concepts?

If you are so sure of your facts and evidence, present it. Put it on a thread. In point form. The solid facts and verifiable evidence, point by point, that demonstrate that human produced carbon dioxide is causing the Earth's atmosphere to heat up, melting the icecaps, causing seas to rise, and threating life on the planet. Don't put up more hearsay, don't just repeat the broad vague assurances that catastrophic man-made carbon caused climate change is happening because the "scientists" say so. Give us the simple solid facts that demonstrate it. Or do you just share an emotional belief system with other carbon haters?

Which are you Heisenberg, an "evidence-based thinker" or an emotionally-based believer?

crossbow wrote on Feb 11^th, 2012 at 11:59pm:

Bruce isn't in front of me. And on this particular issue I consider you are and will continue to be more influential than he.

Listen, this has been fun and all.  "Termite nibbling away at freedom"?  I've got to find a bumper sticker like that and put it on my car.  That's hilarious. 

And like I said, I understand why you'd be upset.  The removed post, with it's Shakespearian poetry and mastery of the English language ("Get a life" was my favorite), was truly a work of art.  To see it go is heart-rending for everyone involved.

But as fun as it's been, I think I'm going to wash my hands of this thread.  I used to stay involved in stuff like this, but then I turned 12, ya know?  Good luck with the whole freedom thing.

eric,
Fiddle de dum, fiddle de dee, calling for motherator when you're an adult makes one half a bee. Banning/removing a collection of words is freedom, for you. Half a freedom, half not be.

In terms of freedom being important you've already washed your hands. But good luck to you too.

  I have not reported any posts/comments, nor will i, but i respectfully ask those in or inclined to pissing contests to take it elsewhere--especially since i did ask in the beginning to please not respond to this thread to begin with. 

I believe in free speech, but if somebody came into my house and started treating people rudely I'd throw him out.

Abusive behavior does not have to be allowed in order for free speech to exist.

When I disagree with a friend about something I don't find it necessary to treat he or she in a disrespectful way.

People who are abusive towards others are "not" more genuine than those who treat others with respect.

he he yeah funny Eric. We saw you wash your hands immediately.

By the way, I have the copyright on the termite saying - its in my book. If you copy it I'll find you and put you in painful debt. And I'm a man who'll do that just for the fun of the game - my fun of course, not yours. 


Ok, back to the subject of Cycles of change & civilization altering processes.

Warmist like Heisenberg like to say they know atmospheric CO2 causes the temperature to rise because the Vostok ice cores prove it does. They say this to children and adults as if its a fact.

The ice cores from Vostok at the south pole show the repeated and regular rise and fall of atmospheric temp and carbon dioxide over hundreds of thousands of years, through successive cycles of ice ages, and demonstrating there is a correlation of some sort between atmospheric CO2 and temperature. 

But throughout all the data’s ups and downs over hundreds of thousands of years, the CO2 increase never precedes the temperature increase. In fact the CO2 increase lags about 800 years behind each temperature increase. The belief orientated warmists don’t mention that when they are telling people to believe in their "science" – I think that’s called deceiving by omission.

To claim a cause that comes 800 years after the result, and to try to hide it by omission, is not science.   

When pushed on this matter they will then say something like, “Well…um…actually…yes..um…er…well...yes…um…ok..well…um CO2 might not cause each rise in temperature initially…because um something else might um er mumble  cause it… but then we know um er think um believe that 800 years after temp begins to rise that CO2 then rises and does definitely um might er could then become a driving factor um mumble er um yes well um no CO2  is not the initiating factor but doh. Why did you mention the 800 year lag? Security! Security! Kick that man out"

As an example of so called indisputable warmsit scientific logic see here: 
(and notice how a couple of "coulds" and a "might" equals definitely)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

I could go on point by point through the (yawn) fraudulent hockey stick graph, the fraudulent hiding of the medieval warming period and the little ice age, the false data (another yawn), skuldugerous email leaks, and my particular favourite - the false logic. 
But hey I don't have time just now. Maybe another day.

Heisenberg, no need to feel pressured by me to put up your case unless you want to; its all through the media and education system anyway, so we are all familiar with it (bombarded with it). 

recoverer wrote on Feb 12^th, 2012 at 9:43pm:

I believe in free speech, but if somebody came into my house and started treating people rudely I'd throw him out. Abusive behavior does not have to be allowed in order for free speech to exist. When I disagree with a friend about something I don't find it necessary to treat he or she in a disrespectful way. People who are abusive towards others are "not" more genuine than those who treat others with respect.

So you would have thrown Eric out of your house for being so rude and disrespectful as to disallow KarmaLars to speak. Personally I would not be so mean because I don't believe in violence over such an issue. Instead I would expect people to let each other speak and not cry "abuse, rudeness, I'm offended" over every little uncomfortable thing someone said against them and expecting others should not say anything that offends them. (That's just oppression by yin instead of yang.)

But if being thrown out is the treatment you prefer Recoverer, then when you come to my house I will oblige you as you prefer and throw you out and down the steps each time you say something that is rude or disrespectful. I'll especially throw you out if you go feigning offence over someone elses comments and use that feigned offence to claim the moral high ground and silence others. I'll throw you down the steps especially hard for that.

“If you are so sure of your facts and evidence, present it. Put it on a thread. In point form. The solid facts and verifiable evidence, point by point, that demonstrate that human produced carbon dioxide is causing the Earth's atmosphere to heat up, melting the icecaps, causing seas to rise, and threating life on the planet. Don't put up more hearsay, don't just repeat the broad vague assurances that catastrophic man-made carbon caused climate change is happening because the "scientists" say so. Give us the simple solid facts that demonstrate it. Or do you just share an emotional belief system with other carbon haters?”

You are of course right to question whether human global climate change is just yet another belief system. An afterlife conversation board is not really the place for an in depth climate debate- it would quickly be considered off-topic. But in short: The UK National Research Council challenged climate change sceptics to an online public debate in December 2006. A panel of climate change experts answered questions about the science of climate change and discussed a range of scientific theories that try to explain the recent global warming. The challenge ran for six weeks and had 365 postings. Some of the objections you raise and many others are addressed. For those who are interested a summary of the question and responses are here: http://www.nerc.ac.uk/about/consult/debate/climatechange/summary.asp#CO2. I will reiterate that the vast majority of climate scientists now believe that human activities are changing the climate.

However, my central point is much wider than a debate about global warming and has more relevence to this board. In earlier posts I have argued, for example, that the Scole Experiments should be taken seriously and so should some mediums. I will use a legal analogy: even though we know that jurors have pre-existing beliefs/prejudices when they sit on a case they are told just to focus on the evidence presented in court. It seems to me that when it comes to emotional topics such as climate change or afterlife evidence that evidentially-based thinking is thrown out the window and other factors come in. I got a sense of this from your post when you said:” I think it is wrong for school teachers to scare little children and make older youths disrespectful by lying to them that the previous generations have ruined their planet and the world is going to cook, seas rise, no drinking water, etc.)”. Notice here it is the not the evidence you are are talking about but the inconvenience or not of global warming ! I see this with presented afterlife evidence where it is not the quality of the evidence that is debated but vague notions such as ‘that sort of thing does’nt happen’ or ‘that can’t happen because there is no theoretical basis for it’. My simple contention is that just as in a court case, prior expectations, beliefs, prejudices,hopes,fears  should be temporarily laid to one side when examining the existence or not of a phenomenon.

Thanks for the link. I'll have a browse.

  I suspect that in most cases, climate scientists don't have the benefit of clearer and more direct communication with expanded guidance, and tend to focus on the more obvious, in front of their faces data and concepts.

   With that said, i do understand and believe that human pollution and effect is affecting global climate change, but i'm also aware that there are other factors at work besides these. 

    What's interesting is that within the last decade or so, there's been more research and findings on under water ocean volcanic and venting type processes going on.  More over, more and more of these seem to be "appearing" rather than having always been there and we just missed them. 

   If there is an internal change going on in the Earth, and Cayce's guidance clearly, clearly predicted Global Climate change some 80 years ago, and in reference to a specific time range (which was very accurate) in relation to an internal Earth change, then it would make sense that much of the heating of the Earth is happening via these underwater volcanic and crustal vents. 

   Climatologists tend to ignore data like this, and focus more on obvious and better well known data like various gaseous emissions.  The problem with science in general is that of one of over training in just one area-e.g. too much narrow focus. 

    Also, i've mentioned this before, but back in 98, i read a very interesting National Geographic article, which was about two scientific researchers noting independently in their research that in the year of 1998 the Earth was starting to bulge more at the equatorial region.  From what i remember of the article, there wasn't a clear understanding of WHY this was happening, but whatever it was, it is massive in meaning and innuendo. 

   This specific year of 1998 is perhaps the most mentioned date in the Cayce readings as regards the multi-leveled "Earth Changes", of which the physical aspect started in 1936 with an upheaval deep within (presumably within the core) of the Earth. 

  1998 was cited as the true and earnest beginning of the changes, and in reference to the Aquarius Age starting and the Earth changes really picking up, they said something like *In 1998 we will begin to better understand what these changes mean*   I can find the specific quote for those interested. 

Hey, but Cayce's work is so passe eh?  LOL  ;D

  Oddly enough, according to Galactic Cycle researchers and astronomy buffs like John Major Jenkins, 1998 was also the exact, specific year of the some 26, 000 year cycle of Winter Solstic Sun-Earth alignment to the Galactic Core.   Yes, the exact, specific year of THE alignment within a rough 36 year period of alignment which started in 1980 and technically goes on till 2016.  Notice 1998 is exactly mid way inbetween these.

Oh, the plot thickens, indeed it becomes like porridge since when Cayce's guidance talked about this year, we scientifically virtually knew NOTHING about the Galactic Core, let alone about this alignment and cycle. 

   So, i suspect that Global Climate change is a much more complex, deep, and relative subject and issue than many would give it credit for.   Whether the "warmists" or the non warmists.   

   Indeed, i've received various messages relating to Cayce's info in regards to massive internal Earth changes eventually going from being gradually unfolding to in our faces and quite "Earth changing". 

  Not too surprisingly, this info is mirrored in completely unrelated sources. 

In Bob Monroe's account of future humans circa some 3500 A.D. or so, he saw that his beloved Central VA near the Mountains area was now coast line.   Oh honey, that won't happen just through typical, pollution/warmist "global warming".  Ain't enough ice at the poles to do that. 

  Rosiland McKnight in her guidance sessions with Bob Monroe at his lab, saw the future probabilities and it appeared that the North and South Poles had shifted. 

  If these shift about 180 degrees relatively quickly, it would explain why there is no past evidence in the ice cores of such crustal shifts, since the ice would remain more or less intact, because they would still be at the poles--just opposite ones.  :o


  Your crazy prophet who seeks no profit, who speaks of both crisis and hope, come again, and again, and again  (yet, no matter in what Age or cycle, so few actually listen).

:P

 
 

Justin,
"I have not reported any posts/comments, nor will i, but i respectfully ask those in or inclined to pissing contests to take it elsewhere--especially since i did ask in the beginning to please not respond to this thread to begin with."

I observe that you send out mixed signals when you jump aboard with a later post. Pissing contest is a yin a tactic to rule out there is gold to be found in the mines of yang, while there really is room for both. Whipped males are as common today as saloons were in the wild west. Yin says 'equality', yang says 'ok, but so far equality is a code word for yin, yin and more yin'.

"Your crazy prophet who seeks no profit, who speaks of both crisis and hope, come again, and again, and again  (yet, no matter in what Age or cycle, so few actually listen)."

Can't say that I find you crazy, nor do I agree with the plutonian/hidden notion lurking that the 'growing 2012 craze' will carve out the collective events more than the growing number of people adhering to meekness will change nor inherit the world. The bigger story arc unfolds how it unfolds regardless. Many people have reported there are changes on the way, some by guidance, some by communicating with beings outside this system, others adopting others' ideas and so on. What those possible changes are remain unknown for now. Others could very well think it's ape, barmy, bats in the belfry, batty, berserk, bonkers, cracked, crazed, cuckoo, daft, delirious, demented, deranged, dingy, dippy, erratic, flaky, flipped, flipped out, freaked out, fruity, idiotic, insane, kooky, lunatic, mad, mad as a march hare, mad as a hatter, maniacal, mental, moonstruck, nuts, nutty, nutty as fruitcake, of unsound mind, out of one's mind, out of one's tree, out to lunch, potty, psycho, round the bend, got a screw loose, screwy, silly, unbalanced, unglued, unhinged, unzipped, and/or wacky.

I don't think it's wacky. Like the physical body, this system wasn't designed to last forever and ever. That's wacky in my book and clinging to the physical like the physical is the alpha/omega. If one's aware of possible changes coming, preparation does make sense if it fits the individual to do so. No preparations are just as valid. From what I've read you've got a firm theoretical grip and knowledge about food and clothes in a possible scenario. I'm ok with salty water caressing the lungs, and that's my theoretical standpoint as of now, but not written in stone.

Volu wrote
Quote:

I observe that you send out mixed signals when you jump aboard with a later post. Pissing contest is a yin a tactic to rule out there is gold to be found in the mines of yang, while there really is room for both. Whipped males are as common today as saloons were in the wild west. Yin says 'equality', yang says 'ok, but so far equality is a code word for yin, yin and more yin'.

  Perhaps the first part is true some, but you also seem to misunderstand what i was saying.  I don't mind debate on Climate Change--in a way it's on topic to the meaning and purpose of this Thread. 

  What i would like to leave at the door are the personal insults and machismo that have been going along with otherwise interesting, and sometime on topic debate.  This is what i would call the "pissing" contest, or maybe it should be called, "mine is bigger than yours".  Dunno, i'll let you all decide.

  Re: my original request, which i rebrought up not long ago, well it seemed like a lost cause by the point i decided to post again, and so i said "screw it".   

  Volu wrote, regarding the Earth Changes taking his body out,
Quote:

I'm ok with salty water caressing the lungs, and that's my theoretical standpoint as of now, but not written in stone.

  Indeed, and it feels like you want that to happen, and from tuning into you, it feels like it is because you are in a lot of emotional pain here though that pain is deep and protected by layers of numbness.

  I wish you would see that holding onto that pain, that anger, that scarring that others have given you and to a lesser extent you have created for yourself as well is a waste of time.  I wish you would see the benefit in full forgiveness, and letting go of all that and opening up more fully to that consciousness that Bruce labels PUL, and Monroe perceived as "White" energy, for if you let it wash over you, it would take away all that pain, all that hurt and anger, all those defenses and numbness.

  and it would leave you behind joyful and at peace. 

From one Capricorn born, to another, and one who also spent years just waiting and wanting to leave.  The Goat path up the mountain is hard for sure, but not insurmountable.  The goal at the end is not intellectual knowledge and info about the nonphysical, but a state of being, about real and deep happiness which nothing outside of self can affect.

  Nor is it about "Light" vs so called "dark" polarities.  These both are illusions.  There is only original expanded Consciousness, and relative, later formed states of less expanded and suffering states of being and consciousness and you are scared of the former because it requires surrender, it requires letting go of all you have known and held on to, it requires self change and effort towards a different way, and so you lash out at the "Light" from your relatively less expanded and suffering state. 
   

Crossbow:

I was hoping it wouldn't be necessary to explain myself with great detail, but perhaps it is.  By "throw out" I wasn't speaking literally. If a person had an occasional off moment I wouldn't have him (or her) leave my house. But if he was disrepectful with others on a regular basis I wouldn't want to hang out with him and wouldn't let him hang out in my house.

It isn't a matter of being thin skinned. It is a matter of loving and respecting myself and others enough to not allow another to treat myself and others in an inappropriate way.

I didn't see Karma Lars comment. Perhaps he was being a troll. If so, I believe it is okay for Eric to not like trollism. Why should a person who has nothing in mind but to create problems be tolerated? I don't believe that people who allow others to act in such a way are tolerant. Rather, they allow others to walk all over themselves. Allowing a person to have freedom of speech and allowing a person to be disrespectful towards others is not the same thing. People "DO NOT" have the right to be disrespectful towards others.

On another thread you mentioned how rude some people are on some forums. Just because people who visit those forums live according to the lowest common denominator that doesn't mean that people who visit this forum have to do the same.

Just because some people use f-bombs with no controll that doesn't mean that all people have to continously say f-that, f-that, f-that...


crossbow wrote on Feb 12^th, 2012 at 11:52pm:

recoverer wrote on Feb 12th, 2012 at 9:43pm: I believe in free speech, but if somebody came into my house and started treating people rudely I'd throw him out. Abusive behavior does not have to be allowed in order for free speech to exist. When I disagree with a friend about something I don't find it necessary to treat he or she in a disrespectful way. People who are abusive towards others are "not" more genuine than those who treat others with respect. So you would have thrown Eric out of your house for being so rude and disrespectful as to disallow KarmaLars to speak. Personally I would not be so mean because I don't believe in violence over such an issue. Instead I would expect people to let each other speak and not cry "abuse, rudeness, I'm offended" over every little uncomfortable thing someone said against them and expecting others should not say anything that offends them. (That's just oppression by yin instead of yang.) But if being thrown out is the treatment you prefer Recoverer, then when you come to my house I will oblige you as you prefer and throw you out and down the steps each time you say something that is rude or disrespectful. I'll especially throw you out if you go feigning offence over someone elses comments and use that feigned offence to claim the moral high ground and silence others. I'll throw you down the steps especially hard for that.

Justin,
"Re: my original request, which i rebrought up not long ago, well it seemed like a lost cause by the point i decided to post again, and so i said "screw it"."

If there was a certain energy lingering here, becoming silent, it wouldn't mean approval but a chance to change the (gasp) rude word into something more blurry. Screw that. So, allrighty then.

"What i would like to leave at the door are the personal insults and machismo that have been going along with otherwise interesting, and sometime on topic debate.  This is what i would call the "pissing" contest, or maybe it should be called, "mine is bigger than yours".  Dunno, i'll let you all decide."

Why go on about PUL and the essential unconditional bit if wanting to leave male energy and intellectual movement not approved by femininity at the door? Even a slight bit of male bonding will unravel the mysteries of what queen winter deems as insults and rudeness. It's not about size of the toe, the earlobe, or the knuckly part on the ankle for that matter.

"Indeed, and it feels like you want that to happen, and from tuning into you, it feels like it is because you are in a lot of emotional pain here though that pain is deep and protected by layers of numbness."

Your tuning into me is really tuning into your - emotional understanding of my words and concepts. Anticipating life without a body becomes emotional pain. Power becomes anger. Not succumbing to yin becomes not letting go. Because you see one side doesn't mean others don't exist or are expressed on a regular basis, like softness, joy and so on. In this forum, with the dominant force being yin, this particular voice and volu..me is the more interesting one.

"The goal at the end is not intellectual knowledge and info about the nonphysical, but a state of being, about real and deep happiness which nothing outside of self can affect."

Lofty since everybody hurts sometimes, when happiness is out on a lunch break. Keeping it real. Besides wonderful states of being, intellectual knowledge is also part of the gift unwrapped while here, otherwise 'lesser sources' would be all that and then some. The goal at the end of the rainbow is like the coming of different possible changes, we'll get to see.

"Nor is it about "Light" vs so called "dark" polarities. These both are illusions."

And yet you write 'lacking in Light' in another thread. Anyways, they're very much alive in every aspect of life on earth, in areas of the astral too. Easier to recognize once noticing some traits of the extremes. Light in the most extreme form wants nothing but to give. Dark in the most extreme form wants nothing but to take. Both want restrictions in order to limit and filter out the opposing polarity. On their own they are imbalanced. Both extremes fear losing their dominant position to the dynamic and confusing middle ground. Like the dude said to the people of amerika - either you're with us, or you're against us, leaving out the spectrum in between.

"It requires self change and effort towards a different way, and so you lash out at the "Light" from your relatively less expanded and suffering state."

Self change, effort, ever towards conforming to yin that is. A quality that light 'n bright is supposed to be void of is arrogance. The irony is, making yin the elusive exclusive, is a less expanded option. Worth noting is also who are prone to suffering and victimhood.

I don’t accept all this crying out against abusive words and rudeness.

No one is so weak as to be offended by a few words or sentences on a web forum. Especially by what's been said above.

Its all about image and positioning, and power and control; an act for some to gain what they think is the moral high ground above others. 


   

Crossbow:

What if a person intentionally said mean things to others? Would that be okay?


crossbow wrote on Feb 15^th, 2012 at 12:49am:

I don’t accept all this crying out against abusive words and rudeness. No one is so weak as to be offended by a few words or sentences on a web forum. Especially by what's been said above. Its all about image and positioning, and power and control; an act for some to gain what they think is the moral high ground above others.

Why would someone bother to say mean things on this forum? Its not really the point.  Neither is verbal gymnastics. I agree with you Crossbow that those who are intentionally provocative, with no larger intention in sight, are to some degree positioning themselves, and seeking moral ascendancy on this board.

recoverer wrote on Feb 15^th, 2012 at 4:06pm:

Crossbow: What if a person intentionally said mean things to others? Would that be okay? crossbow wrote on Feb 15th, 2012 at 12:49am: I don’t accept all this crying out against abusive words and rudeness. No one is so weak as to be offended by a few words or sentences on a web forum. Especially by what's been said above. Its all about image and positioning, and power and control; an act for some to gain what they think is the moral high ground above others.

Certainly. Being offended is part of life. Trying to eradicate offence is oppression of life.

Besides, people are seldom as offended as they portray themselves to be. Pretending to be offended is the commonest con on this planet.

1. Thugs pretend to be offended just before they bash someone.
2. War hungry nations pretend to be offended as an excuse to attack another nation.
3. People pretend to be offended as an excuse just to vent their own anger and irritability.
4. And many pretend to be offended to claim what they think is the moral high ground, and expect others to restrict their speech and opinions so as “not to offend”.

Point 4 is just bullying and oppression by yin instead of yang. The end result is the same - loss of others freedom of speech and expression - it is just a softer more deceptive method of doing it than the other methods. All methods guise themselves as righteous, in some way try to justify themselves, but they all oppress others. People are best known not by how they present or portray themselves, but by the effects of the end results of their wills upon other's lives. If oppression (restriction of speech & expression) is the result, then they are oppressors, regardless of whether they do it by yin or yang, by soft or hard methods. 

Oppressing others by pretending to be offended only works against decent people, because decent people try not to offend others. As it is a method used on the decent, then those who use it must be the indecent.   





(Personally, I don't mind offending others, and I don't mind others offending me, and I don't mind conflict, although great conflicts, both internal or external, are unpleasant of course. Life is conflict, in both its essence and its manifest. I realise and accept that. Giving and taking offence is part of life, part of finding self and truth. I accept it and play the game, with all its bumps and bruises.)


Bardo, are you referring to me?

   

Crossbow,

When people here are offended, the peer reviewer removes the comments sometimes.  However MANY times, the nice "yin" people just leave.  Many have gone to another forum that suits them better.  There were many posters on here who got fed up of reading insulting remarks or being labeled a "new ager" or "crazy". 

Yes, freedom of speech is important, and the meek shouldn't suppress the loud in a utopian forum.  However, as someone who has not shied away from conflict here, I can tell you, there is always a way to express your opinion without insulting someone.

When true insults fly - aimed at demeaning someone, or discrediting them personally - then that person is out of line.   Pure and simple.  You can pontificate about free speech, but there is truly a line, where, if you cross it, you do so to create harm (aside from making a point).

If I disagree about global changes, coming catatrophes, (etc.) I can easily say that I do without having to imply that someone is "crazy." 

Free speech doesn't give anyone the right to throw out any insults or snide remarks they want in the name of that freedom. 

I have seen friends of mine here stop posting or move to another forum that is private (by invitation only) where this does not go on.  They have said over and over they did it to avoid this crap.


Matthew

I am not saying that people should swear, curse, or insult others; or that anyone does not have the ability to speak without insulting. That is quite clear. 

My point is:

1.  "Being offended" gets used for skulduggerous purposes like silencing and oppressing others (and their thoughts, viewpoints, opinions, knowledge), and for false moral elevation, much more often than it is genuine.  Even if it is genuine "being offended", people should learn to deal with it responsibly within themselves far more adequately than they currently do. 

2.  Those who silence people do more harm to individuals and society than those who call people names.



There is so much truth and happenings going on in this world, and in our society, and other societies, and throughout the astral planes, and in the greater spheres of reality beyond the astral planes, that cannot be spoken about due to people's obsession with "being offended" and having to silence/delete/block and needing to morally elevate themselves.

So much can only be hinted at or alluded to in the hope that it will get past the falsely morally elite to reach those who might benefit from it.

Believe it or not, this forum's spectrum of right and wrong does not run in line with the truest and most vertical spectrum of right and wrong - it is just one of many thousands of short and narrow spectrums of right and wrong, all of which assume themselves to be correct, and which run at varing degrees diagonally and contrary to the truest and most vertical.   

I think that's about all I'll say.

Greetings Justin.

   I for one appreciate all of your preparedness recommendations both from this Topic and the one you linked in at the beginning called "Cha Cha Changes & Preparations for same". I'm saving it along with other information I have from other sources. Whether something catastrophic will happen from Earth changes or some other reason, it certainly can't helped being prepared just in case.

   Before my post, I read everything else posted. After wading through 4 pages and 46 posts, I found about 8 to be relevant to the topic and about 38 related to bickering. Though I find the whole ordeal rather humorous, I can relate to you Justin as being quite unhappy over the matter, especially since you asked for no comments to begin with.

   Once again, I appreciate your topics Justin and look forward to reading more.

Ralph

Perhaps we should all just Lighten up  ;D

Ralph Buskey wrote on Feb 16^th, 2012 at 11:04pm:

I found about 8 to be relevant to the topic and about 38 related to bickering Ralph

I agree. Such an interesting thread tainted by another interesting posts but no relevant to the thread...

Maybe such posts should continue in a new (or branched thread) or taken elsewhere?

I'd hate (and I'm sure others too) to start reading a thread with a specific topic and then it leads to something else which is not relevant to what the OP had in mind of discussing...

Note: see this post is tainting this thread too....

Cheers

Ralph,
"Before my post, I read everything else posted. After wading through 4 pages and 46 posts, I found about 8 to be relevant to the topic and about 38 related to bickering. Though I find the whole ordeal rather humorous, I can relate to you Justin as being quite unhappy over the matter, especially since you asked for no comments to begin with."

Topics do divert, and even the OP said screw it. Connecting the dots further, being quite unhappy in the light of that is sad in an entirely different way. Wading through is as valid as skimming through, but the latter has a purpose of getting there whilst the first option is begging for status quo, with the hardship of reading through posts as the reason to reach that end.

Dude,
"Perhaps we should all just Lighten up? ;D"

How many afterlife knowledge posters does it take to change a light bulb? None, too busy commenting the change of path in the topic about changes.

Wonderer,
"I'd hate (and I'm sure others too) to start reading a thread with a specific topic and then it leads to something else which is not relevant to what the OP had in mind of discussing..."

It leads to something else, which is a discussion of freedom of speech, banning and censorship. It does tie in with speaking about changes, or any other topic on this board. Highly relevant in that regard.

So anyways, to both hold and keep the line;

Earth changes, will it be accompanied by cha-cha dancing and the odd bit of stuttering?

   Hi Ralph,

  Thank you for expressing appreciation.  As regards the other things you said, well i'm not really that unhappy about it all.  I know that none of us here are free from error and are completely attuned to PUL.  We all will and do make mistakes, and that's OK. 

  And this world is based on friction, contrast, and challenge, and it's how we tend to grow the most.   One of the reasons why we come here, is for the "drama" of it all. 

  Apparently most of us secretly like drama, since this thread has more hits than most. 

  But spiritually speaking again, a little arguing, disrespect, and pee pee waving doesn't rain on my parade (unless of course i get inadvertently splashed when the pee pees wave in my direction!). 

  I think that for people who can't take that and run away from it, need to get much more serious about their spiritual growth and attunement to PUL and practice what they preach. 

For Love is patient, it is tolerant, and it accepts that which is different than self or what self would like.  In short, it may not agree with the arguing, etc., but unless it's very extreme (completely chaotic, ill intentioned, and disruptive) it will not "ban" immature behavior and the ones acting that way. 

 

  Relating to the last thing i said...  Thomas Campbell is one of those outer sources that i have found more beneficial than not--not to say that i think he is a He/She type yet and is free from mistakes or errors of perception, but i've often sensed he is a pretty wise and perceptive man who generally sees pretty clearly in many areas.

  Anyways, in his massive trilogy called "My Big TOE" and on his forum, he talks a little about this "Big Cheese" character, whom he clearly perceives as essentially more "male" or Yang in nature. 

  This Consciousness is a very expanded and mature one (meaning, very strongly and deeply attuned to Love), and seems to have been sort of "put in charge" of managing our Larger Consciousness system, though more in the spiritual and nonphysical sense than the physical. 

  Anyway, this Consciousness is also very powerful and even has the authority to even recycle other individual consciousnesses who are so lacking in Love and so chaotic, disruptive, and consistently ill intentioned. 

But he stresses that such extreme actions have been quite rare, and only done when absolutely necessary.   

   Otherwise, freewill is quite respected, and really the less mature a consciousness is, the more we should have the more patience and understanding towards--especially if they are being sincere and honest.   

  So there is a balance to maintain .  No one here to my mind crosses that extreme line as talked about with the Big Cheese. 

Wonderer wrote on Feb 17^th, 2012 at 6:19am:

Ralph Buskey wrote on Feb 16th, 2012 at 11:04pm: I found about 8 to be relevant to the topic and about 38 related to bickering Ralph I agree. Such an interesting thread tainted by another interesting posts but no relevant to the thread... Maybe such posts should continue in a new (or branched thread) or taken elsewhere? I'd hate (and I'm sure others too) to start reading a thread with a specific topic and then it leads to something else which is not relevant to what the OP had in mind of discussing... Note: see this post is tainting this thread too.... Cheers

Just quoting for the observation of it.   ;)