BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 10:52 PM

Okay...

I wonder who shycat is...

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 10:17 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Is there a god or not?
From: GUEST,shycat
Date: 11 Sep 04 - 11:02 AM

That's who to thank for the post, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 10:02 PM

That's it. Thank God. I don't know who you are, Guest, but I thank you for that contribution. I devoutly wish to make the same conscious crossing that you have so eloquently described. I know it's possible, because I know people who can do it on a regular basis, and I have observe how it has changed them radically for the better. They are a blessing to themselves and all others whom they touch upon. Thanks again.

- Little Hawk

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 09:25 PM

Bill, this is what can happen if you learn how to have a moment of complete mental silence..

Meditating, eyes closed, my mind has become so still that my sense of
observing self withdraws to a point of non- presence.

Suddenly I am in the night sky, space.

A huge ball shoots away from me, becoming smaller, until it becomes a
small dot in the universe and disappears in space. I have just zoomed from my planet towards a huge light, shooting through the universe.

A hole in time, a pause.

I fly through the night sky, emerging from the closest star, the sun.
From a huge mass of burning light that is conscious, explosive, vibrant.

I zoom through the universe, towards my body which is now collapsed on
the floor. Returning, I see myself in a totally detached way, my
personality traits, faults and strengths, as if observing a genetic program.

I observe that I will enter that body, that genetic pattern, that I'm going to be that again, then I plunge straight back into that body and personality.

Now I am lying stretched out on the floor.

My body feels saturated in light and is so conscious, and I am so drunk with ecstasy, that I cannot move.

My mind is not limited to a point within my skull. My whole body is
conscious and my mind is perceiving from my whole body. My body is made up of a sea of atoms/cells, each cell is glowing with golden light.

Each cell is its own conscious entity. Each cell of my body is consciously perceiving. My mind is dwelling in my body, a sea of billions of little minds.

My three month old daughter is placed in my arms. I hold her, and she
too becomes saturated in the golden cocoon of awareness.

Some time later, my muscles are so relaxed that they don't function
properly. I have to be helped to sit up and walk because I can't
co-ordinate myself properly.

February 1982.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 09:12 PM

*nod* we don't have to agree on the nature of reality to share the fervent wish for that Peace, Little Hawk.

I would prefer to call the folks who can achieve that 'inner calm' "adept" rather than "enlightened", but that is just a personal prejudice...

take care..........

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 08:45 PM

Yeah, I may have been including past lives, Bill...but no...I think even in this life. I don't mean I've had a conversation with them all, but I've observed them, and here's what I observe: most people have no idea how to silence the mind, and they are continually at its mercy. Under its constant harassment, they do all manner of weird stuff to deal with the pressure. They talk endlessly (and say little), they socialize (and know not why), they keep "busy" (because they are terrified of stopping and confronting the silence that is the alternative to being busy), they get frantic at traffic lights and minor delays (instead of being at peace and enjoying the moment), they gossip, they party and get drunk, they get high on drugs, they fight needless wars, they engage in crime, they obsess about politics and religion, they get addicted to all manner of weird behaviours, they buy things they don't need, they fidget and twitch, they are all clearly in an ongoing state of anxiety and unmet need.

All of that ceases for the enlightened. The enlightened are always peaceful inside, always in a state of joy and completion, always inspired, and far more capable of taking any needful action than most "normal" people. Normal people, meaning the norm in society, are like a 100 watt bulb that's only turning out about 15 or 20 watts...if that.

I say that (about the enlightened) because I have seen it demonstrated. I have certainly not yet achieved it. I wish I would, but it takes a lot of discipline (in most cases), and I'm somewhat lazy and easily distracted (observe me chattering on this forum).

You can call enlightenment "biofeedback" if you like, but I find that word very inadequate for what I've seen. Very.

I do know a good book you could read about it. I doubt you'd believe it could work for you, but you might find it quite intriguing.

You know, I'm like a frog who saw a prince...and is dreaming of the day when he can become one too. I wish that everyone could. We would have peace on Earth and no one would lack for anything. Peace on Earth, Bill. And nothing less.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 07:57 PM

I don't know where to start, Little Hawk, as we obviously have different rules for approaching the discussion.
but, I will note...I didn't say "random firing" I would guess that there is some random firing, but most 'firing' builds on what has gone before, just as we refer to past posts here to make the present ones.

But other ideas you espouse...i.e.," become completely mentally silent within ourselves and go within" I don't even know what that might mean, as in all my many years I have never seen any way to 'turn off' all inner processes. "Within" is a word we'd have to clarify.
   I have to agree I couldn't win the bet you suggest....I coulnt do that. I **KNOW** that discipline and meditation has enabled some to achieve amazing control over both body and mind and allowed them to have a 'stability' that far surpasses what I can do.....but I suspect that this is simply an advanced demonstration of the phenomenon called "bio-feedback". Nothing to be ignored, but hardly mysterious if one decides to become adept.

ummm...I was just scrolling up, trying to figger out what else to comment on, and one thing hit me between the eyes..(metaphor!!!)
"...I've met a few million people by now." My math tells me that this MUST mean you are adding in previous lives. Is that fair? *grin* I'm not sure the Pope could claim 'a few million'....

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 06:03 PM

Masturbation's okay, as long as you don't overdo it. (More of a problem for men than women, that, because it tires their system out more.) Accordingly, I somewhat recommend it, depending when and how much and in compensation for what perceived lack...

God most definitely does not play dice with the Universe, but some people do.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: freda underhill
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 05:45 PM

and speaking of mental mastrurbation, masturbation didnt always have such a bad rap.

In Egyptian mythology, Ra stands on the primordial hill, shaped like a pyramid, and masturbates. And from his semen is created all life.

Maybe the Egyptians were right, who knows. It's as good a theory as any.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: freda underhill
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 05:42 PM

apparently Einstein's theory of relativity disproved the existence of aether, and the aetheric body. but what would he know? (forgive me, physicist, for i HAVE SINNED..)

but then in his later years, Einstein also rejected quantum mechanics, even tho he was one of the originators of the quantum theory, partly because quantum theory is too messy... does God play dice with the universe?

(excerpt from link) "The rules of quantum mechanics forbid you from saying in any individual case what will happen. So quantum theory is basically a statistical theory, like roulette or dice. You can only give the odds. Although quite precise and mathematical from the statistical point of view, you generally cannot say in any particular case what the outcome is going to be. Einstein hated that idea. He hated the notion that the future was intrinsically indeterminate..."

which begs the question, did Einstein reject quantum mechanics because he was a control freak?

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:55 PM

I don't say there there are only 2 forms of existence, Bill...

But it's a start, if one wishes to have a discussion.

You are quite correct that all the various perceivable forms of existence are "merely referred to differently in different contexts for convenience". Right! That is the point behind the spiritual concepts I am studying, so I am in agreement with your physicists. Matter IS energy. All high spiritual teachings that I know of state that all of Reality is a single Unity (which CAN be called "God", but doesn't have to be. The Taoists call it "Tao" which means The Way. It's not personalized in their system. Some call it Pure Being. Some call it by other names. The name doesn't matter.)

You clearly ARE thinking, and with meaning, because you responded to my post. I don't think that was a result of random firing of whatever in your brain...and neither do you. An idiot might think that, in order just to cling loyally to his already established argumentative position. Obviously, your response has meaning, and you will perceive meaning in my response to your response.

It all has meaning, Bill. Everything has meaning. If you can't see it, that doesn't mean it's not there. It just means you aren't seeing it, because your form of awareness doesn't allow you to see it. (and I'm NOT talking about physical eyesight when I say that)

Language is the problem. Jibber-jabber is the problem. The monkey won't stop chattering!

If you and I could just SHUT UP for 24 hours and become completely mentally silent within ourselves and go within, we would never have to talk about this again. I guarantee it.

But I bet you can't do that. I know I haven't been able to yet. Not even close. I have succeeded in becoming mentally silent for maybe...a few minutes...and THAT wasn't easy, either. (I mean...you have to do it WHILE remaining awake and conscious. Try it. I dare you.) I betcha can't! ;-) Most people can't. I've met only a tiny handful who can, and I've met a few million people by now.

That's why enlightenment is so rare, and that's why people don't get it when I talk about this stuff. They can't stop thinking and mentally jabbering at themselves and others, not for a second. That's what holds them in pride, fear, and ignorance...quite regardless of their university degrees and academic standing.

It's virtually unknown. If I ever achieve it, Bill, I will not waste my time debating with you or anyone else on this forum anymore. Why would I? Would it matter? I will have far more worthwhile things to do. How do I know that? I've seen others who have done it. Their lives are totally productive and totally remarkable all the time. They are no longer mentally masturbating for every waking minute of their lives in order to appease the jabbering monkey of their tiny, little, fearful, blathering mortal mind.

I kid you not. I've seen it.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:54 PM

So Amos, the brain is evolving smaller in up to 70% of the population so far?

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: LilyFestre
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:47 PM

While I have nothing worthwhile to add to this thread, let me just say that it makes for some interesting reading. There's nothing like a good cold mug of milk, a caramel apple and excessive posting about whether GW is the anti-Christ or not, the concept of what exists and what doesn't, personal jabs, etc.to help the afternoon go by. Yep...definately better with the cold mug of milk and caramel apple though.....

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:34 PM

Holographic, hologram... so you can see the source of my confusion.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:31 PM

Little Hawk...you might remember me once posting a story about Will James and the squirrel on the tree and the men trying to see the squirrel...and debating whether they were going 'around' the squirrel.

They simply had to agree on what they meant by 'around'....

I can agree that thoughts exist, but that doesn't solve the problem...or win the argument for either side. I can claim that 'thought' has no meaning OR existence apart from a brain/mind (another embedded debate) having the thought. What we should agree on is that 'thought' has meaning, and that we seem to all have the same basic kinds of stuff happening when we are conscious. We might get that far..

Then, we'd have to have some sort of agreement about whether thoughts are MERELY combinations of synapses firing in complex patterns, or whether 'something' other than physio-chemical firing in the brain "makes" thoughts...and there we seem to part company.*grin*

I contened it ain't obvious that any such thing happens, while you (and a few others) treat it as a given, and explain things with that as a pre-supposition. At that point, if no one surrenders, we just have to shrug and sing a song!

    You state that there are **2** forms of existence....not everyone agrees! Matter and energy are NOT considered separable by most physicists...they are merely referred to differently in different contexts for convenience. You toss in "2)...or certain other forms of awareness" as if it were a universally accepted notion...."it ain't necessarily so"


Does my verbiage confuse me? Well, no...not if I spend a lot of time trying to carefully explicate what I mean and avoid vague and imprecise use of the language...(not an easy task in English, where we can't even pin down 'folk' *grin*)

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:29 PM

The reference derives originally, i believe, from the work of Karl Pribram, who was investigating the peculiar holographic properties of information in the mind and remarked, at some point, "Maybe the world is a hologram.

The theory that implies this seeks to understand the interactions between awareness, quantum level phenomena, and space itself. Ancient mystics implied the same set of phenomena when they described the Akashic Records, a repository available to spiritual awareness of all the deeds and words that have occurred in time.

From Wikipedia: "Akasha is a Sanskrit word meaning "sky", "space" or "aether". The Akashic Records are therefore said to be a collection of wisdom that is stored in the aether. The concept is common in some New Age religious groups. The Akashic Records are said to have existed since the beginning of the planet. Just as we have various specialty libraries (e.g., medical, law), there are said to exist various Akashic Records (e.g., human, animal, plant, mineral, etc). Most writings refer to the Akashic Records in
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akashic_Record"

The holographic nature of thought is a conclusion one is drawn to when studying some of the less mainstream studies about awareness and the brain/body boundaries. Although many of these investigations support a theory that consciousness is non-local, not bounded by the physical apparent limits of the body hosting the operator, the vast majority of these issues get dismissed out of hand by those who reject any form of non-material phenomenology.

Such individuals often find themselves greatly surprised during their next lifetime transition, if they are conscious enough to notice it. Others sleep through the event and only wake up in the vicinity of kindergarten.

A

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:27 PM

Amos, I know a book you ought to read: "The Power of Now" by Eckhard Tolle. It's in an inexpensive paperback. Get it and read it. You will enjoy it.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:21 PM

But note the interesting intersection at "holographic" and "holography":

Definitions of holographic on the Web:

The condition upon which the information for creating a whole system is stored in each of its parts.
www.levity.com/mavericks/glossary.htm

A document or inscription written in the hand of the person who signed it.
www.kruegerbooks.com/books/services/terms.htm

of or relating to holography or holograms
written entirely in one's own hand; "holographic document"
written wholly in the handwriting of the signer; "a holographic will"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Holography (from the Greek, ¼ëïò-holos whole + ãñáöÞ-graphe writing) is the science of producing holograms, an advanced form of photography that allows an image to be recorded in three dimensions. The technique of holography can also be used to optically store and retrieve information. Holograms are common in science-fiction, most notably Star Trek.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:20 PM

Read "The Holographic Universe" for some interesting commentary on the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:18 PM

Definitions of hologram on the Web:

A unique photographic printing that provides a three-dimensional effect on a flat surface. Holograms cannot be easily copied and are used for security and aesthetic purposes on cards.
www.duracard.com/glossary.htm

Unlike photography which records an image as seen from a single viewpoint, a hologram is a record of an image as seen from many viewpoints.
web.mit.edu/museum/lightforest/glossary.html

A laser-generated image with three-dimensional properties, increasingly used to deter counterfeiting of currency, credit cards, and identification.
www.hometravelagency.com/dictionary/ltrh.html

Definitions of holograph on the Web:

A term indicating the handwriting of the author.
www.ballandcross.com/index.php

A document handwritten by the person purported to have written it.
www.trussel.com/books/glossary.htm

A manuscript in the handwriting of its author. [See also AUTOGRAPH]
www.slais.ubc.ca/people/students/student-projects/M_Chesko/L513/definitions.htm

Document in the author's own handwriting.
www.geocities.com/Axiom43/literary.html

Written entirely by the hand of the author
www.booksellerworld.com/glossary-bookterms.htm

manuscript: handwritten book or document
hologram: the intermediate photograph (or photographic record) that contains information for reproducing a three-dimensional image by holography
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

A holograph is a document written entirely in the handwriting of the person whose signature it bears. The laws of various U.S. states differ as to the validity of holographic last wills.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holograph

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:12 PM

Ok. Bill, the kind of holo-thingie I'm talking about is the thing made using a laser that contains all of the elements of the image (or whatever) in all of the parts/places that make up the holo-thingie.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 03:05 PM

A great argument for Bushlessness indeed, D. thanks.

In scientific circles, finally a reasonable explaantion: evolution. From Newsday:

Is brain still developing?
Discovery of two gene variations have some scientists saying that human think tank will continue to evolve

BY JAMIE TALAN
STAFF WRITER

September 8, 2005, 8:45 PM EDT


Scientists have discovered a gene variation, perhaps involved in brain size, that showed up only 6,000 years ago -- a mere blink of the eye in evolutionary time.

...
Analyzing DNA samples from individuals throughout the world, they identified two genetic varieties that are unique to humans. One called abnormal spindle-like microcephaly, or ASPM, first appeared 6,000 years and is now found in 30 percent of the population. The other, called microcephalin, evolved about 37,000 years ago and has spread to more than 70 percent of the population.

...
While the first modern humans date back 200,000 years ago, our closest human ancestors, ones with shared human behavior, probably evolved around 40,000 years ago, Harpending said.

People with damage to either of these two genes -- microencephalin and ASPM -- have smaller brains, equal in size to chimp brains. They also suffer from impaired cognitive abilities and have severe language problems. (emphasis added).

"We tend to think that we have reached the pinnacle of evolution," Lahn said. "Given these findings, we can say that the human brain is still changing -- and rather rapidly.

"Our brain will continue to change. In 10,000 years, the biological processes may be very different than they are today."

---

All he needs is a transplant of the microencephalin gene. Nothing a little stem cell work couldn't handle....oh...well...oops...never mind! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 02:59 PM

LOL! Now there's a subversive form of protest if ever I've seen one.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: *daylia*
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 02:51 PM

I think you are giving him too much credit with that powerful little word "the"...

I think so too, Amos. George the 'Panti-Christ' is more appropriate.

See? Now, before you get up be sure to wipe all that steam off your spectacles ...

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 02:28 PM

Oh, and Wolfgang...

Jesus was in a very small minority. So too Buddha. So too Gandhi. So too Lao-Tse and Beethoven and Mozart and Michelangelo and Copernicus.

It's not necessarily a bad thing.

Beer-drinking idiots who raise hell at soccer games, for example, are not in such a small minority among their peers. Does that make them "right"?

LOL!

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 02:25 PM

Does your verbiage confuse you as much as it does me, Bill? ;-)

I wonder.

Do thoughts exist, Bill? Do they? Are you having any now, as you read this? If you do, they exist. Your thoughts. Not physically, no...but they exists. You wouldn't be aware of them if they didn't.

Things don't HAVE to be physical to exist...they only have to be physical to exist physically. Doh!

I'll give you a clue, Bill...something can exist in at least one of 2 ways (maybe more than that), and this is what they are:

1. as a physical phenomenon, observable through physical senses
2. as an energy phemomenon, observable through physical senses or certain other forms of awareness

Thought is a form of organized energy. It exists. That's how you think. Some thoughts, of course, are better organized than others. ;-) If you don't think, you will NOT react to this post in any way, NOR will you react to any other post in future, and I will NOT hear from you again on this forum. ;-) You will cease to be.

Wolfgang - You are absolutely right regarding the words "holograph" and "hologram". That bothered me too. What Carol is referring to is a hologram.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 10:07 AM

"... nor do I need to to grasp such a concept as I have alluded to above."

hey! we DO agree on something! ;>) And you're not alone.People everywhere are alluding to concepts which they don't grasp!

"...numb between your synapses when you hear a "religious word" being used in a discussion.." , au contraire, mais ami! My synapses experience a heightened level of activity when certain words are used in certain contexts!

"... think metaphorically, for heaven's sake." Ah, now THERE'S the crux! I understand metaphors, and will resort to them at times to evoke a feeling or enhance a concept, but golly gee!, I make a special effort at not mistaking the metaphor for some sort of reality.

If I were to use the " "all concepts (are) everywhere at once" theory.", I would submit that it only makes sense to treat it as the philosophical notion of 'potential'...that is, that any individual concept could be constructed, contemplated and, perhaps, explicated at any time by any person capable of the process. (some, obviously, are not). But this admission is almost trivial....it evokes in me a big "So?" Yes, I can formulate lots of 'concepts' and metaphors, but the phrase " being everywhere at once", if not used very carefully, imparts a dangerous force to 'being', and some folks get images of little 'concepts' floating and swirling about, like dust motes in a light beam.
   It's a bit like asking "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" or saying "My karma ran over my dogma." We have formulated correct sentences with vague,imprecise components and still we imagine we are communicating. nicht wahr!
It's a durn can of worms, that's what it is! ...to toss out a metaphor..(or, as my Daddy used to say, "It's a snare and a delusion!")

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 09:49 AM

I think he is using the wrong mechanism in his estimation of probability. What he is leaving out is the aspect of inheritance. It is highly probably that mineral crystals, for example, exist in millions and millions of planets. They are highly organized, in a simple way, and some theoreticians argue that this organizing of molecules was the mechanism that preceded amino acids. But in any case, when you add in the mechanism that a good random event produces an inheritable change, the odds against life forming is greatly reduced, in contrast witht he odds if every event in the chain is wholly random based only on the number of particles. ANd there are mechanisms which produce the perpetuation of a change in an inheritance-like frashion even in non-living systems.

A

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: freda underhill
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 07:34 AM

thanks, ft - it is from a series of interviews between Phillip Adams (atheist and skeptic) and Paul Davies (physicist) on the abc website . Paul Davies is such a good communicator, he is one of the rare scientists who can explain science for ordinary people. that link I provided has links at the bottom of the page to more interviews with him, and they're all fascinating.

Look at these comments from another one of the interviews, are we alone?

Phillip: ...we're dealing with such immense numbers of suns and, presumably, of planets, that life forms may be as bountiful in the cosmos as they are on Earth. After all, in the observable universe there are 1020 — 100 billion billion — suns.

Paul: That's a lot, isn't it, a big number. Unfortunately not so big that if life formed as a result of an accidental shuffling of molecules — that is, if life is a chemical fluke — then it would be bound to occur twice.

Phillip: But what if you add to those 100 billion billion suns the number of possible planets? You are then dealing with an even greater number.

Paul: It's just another factor of ten or so. People are very bad at large number estimates. They think that a million is awfully big, and a billion just a bit bigger, and so on. Although 100 billion billion sounds like an enormous number, it is still absolutely tiny compared to the odds against forming life by random shuffling. It is undeniably true that the universe is vast: there are a huge number of stars and probably planets too. Nevertheless the odds against shuffling, say, amino acids into proteins, which we were talking about previously, are enormous — like one followed by 130 zeros as opposed to your puny number here of one followed by twenty zeros! A hundred billion billion doesn't begin to scratch the surface of the improbability of forming life, if it formed purely by accident. So if life is merely a chemical fluke, we are alone. The only possibility of us not being alone is if there is something other than just a random shuffling process involved.

Phillip: There are conflicting human emotions at work here. On the one hand, it is a very bleak thought, to suppose that we are alone in the universe. Many of us would like the company of user-friendly species from other galaxies. On the other hand, we have always been very arrogant; we rather like to think that we are at the centre of things.

Paul: In some cultures, yes. But not all. The same argument was raging even in ancient Greece over 2000 years ago. The Greek atomists believed that we are not unique. They reasoned that the universe is nothing but indestructible particles moving in the void. This led them to conclude that extraterrestrial beings exist because if atoms can come together in certain combinations to form living things here on Earth, then they might do so on other worlds, too.

.. the interview goes on to discuss the possibility of life on Mars, wormholes, and other strange things..

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 07:17 AM

Freda - that bit of brilliance was even more relevant than some of the other entries in this thread....

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 07:08 AM

pedant's corner:

If you think of reality as being like a holograph, as some do, then yes... all concepts are everwhere at once.

Though some dictionaries wrongly state that 'holograph' is a synonym for 'hologram' the difference is the basically the same as the one between 'telegram' and 'telegraph' and nearly all of those who promote this theory of reality make sure they use the correct word 'hologram'.

Google for "reality is a hologram" and then for "reality is a holograph", Carol, and you'll find that you are in an even smaller minority than you thought.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: *Laura*
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 06:54 AM

Don't let Bush see this thread - we don't want to inflate his head any further. Who knows what he'd try next!?
xLx

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: freda underhill
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 05:29 AM

meanwhile, back at the universe and multiple realities..

Here are excerpts from an interview with Paul Davies. From what he says, it seems that according to the rules of quantum physics, there are two possible worlds: one with a left-moving electron, the other with a right-moving electron, and both of these worlds somehow co-exist in a hybrid reality.

repeat: and both of these worlds somehow co-exist in a hybrid reality.

after boggling on this one, read on to see why quantum physicists believe there are multiple dimensions..very similar, but with some differences. in fact, somewhere in another dimension, friida unterhill might be recording this in a website,, but with slight differences (she is wearing a different pair of fluffy lavender bedsocks, for example). read on ....

Paul: Oh, I think I understand what is happening. At least, it is not a problem for me to imagine two worlds with two different things going on, projected on top of each other to form a hybrid, or overlapping reality. It is like taking two movies and projecting them onto the same screen although this simplifies things a bit because a quantum superposition entails an interference of images, not just an overlap.

Phillip: Is it limited to two?

Paul: No, it's not.

Phillip: Does the theory not allow for an infinity of possibilities?

Paul: Absolutely right, it does indeed. In the more general situation there are infinite possible outcomes of a scattering event or some other atomic process, and we must imagine an infinite number of alternative realities — or contenders for reality — superimposed upon each other; a superimposed reality. In this amalgam of possible worlds, each individual contender is a sort of ghostly half-reality — it is less than real, in the sense that true reality comes only when we look and see what is actually happening. Only when an observation is made can we be sure as to which of these outcomes has actually taken place. So I would refer to these contending realities, these alternative universes, as merely potential worlds, not actually existing worlds.

Phillip: So each is not as good as the other, they don't have the same status?

Paul: No, each has the same status. But it is only when you actually make an observation (or at least, when some observation-like physical process takes place) that you concretise one of those abstract or ghostly possibilities.

Now I have to say right here that many of my colleagues profoundly disagree with that. They believe that these alternative worlds are equally real, and that they exist as parallel universes. So if you fire an electron at a target and it may go to the left or it may go to the right, the universe effectively splits into two, one universe with a left moving-electron and one with a right-moving electron. (Alternatively, two identical parallel copies of the universe differentiate at that point.)

Phillip: Given that there are an infinite number of observations one could make, this means that there are infinite infinities of alternatives, options.

Paul: Exactly. We might call it a 'multiverse', or an infinite number of parallel universes, or parallel realities. This way of looking at quantum mechanics is called the 'many-worlds interpretation'. It is very popular. Incidentally, it also helps one to understand why a quantum computer would be so powerful. In effect it would be able to compute in all these parallel worlds at once, and combine the results to get the output.

..Paul: That's right, but the question is, are all these possibilities really there? Are they co-existing in parallel? Or is there only one reality, one universe, and if so, how does it get selected from the myriad realities on offer?

Phillip: Parallel universes — a mind-boggling notion. Are you suggesting that there are universes in which Tony Blair lost the last British general election?

Paul: That's right, yes. According to the theory — if you subscribe to this particular many-universes interpretation (which many of my senior colleagues do, I might say) — these contending realities are really there. In other words, quantum physics tells us that there isn't one universe — there is an infinity of them. All of the different possibilities, all of the things that are possible at the atomic level and above, are really happening somewhere. Not over here or over there in our space and time, but in some parallel reality.

..Phillip: But I've got a terrible feeling that another interview is being conducted in an identical room where you're taking a completely different position.

Paul: Yes, that is exactly right according to the many-universes view. Not only are there all these different realities, but many of them are inhabited by beings who are almost carbon copies of ourselves. So there will indeed be another universe somewhere with a Paul Davies and Phillip Adams having a slightly different — even infinitesimally different — conversation!

Phillip: This raises the issue of the way the human mind is entangled in the ultimate reality of the cosmos, because you are now dealing with our perceptions of it.

Paul: Indeed. That's actually the whole point. The really disturbing thing about quantum physics is that it does seem in some way to involve the observer. It entangles the observer and the observed in a very intimate way. You see, in the old-fashioned classical physics, the observer was just there for the ride. In Newton's scheme, for example, there certainly could be observers, but they didn't really matter very much. Now it has to be conceded that in any physical theory observers disturb the system they are observing. Suppose you want to measure the temperature of, say, a glass of water. You put a thermometer into the water; the very act of doing this will change the temperature of the water you are trying to measure. Never mind, you can compensate for that. In principle, you can take the disturbance completely into account and, by compensating for it, you can make the measurement as accurately as you like.

But when it comes to quantum physics the situation is dramatically different. The act of measurement will disturb the system that you are trying to measure in a way that can never be taken into account with any certainty. In other words, quantum phenomena enfold or entangle the observer with the observed in a manner that simply can't be untangled. This entanglement seems to bring something like 'mind', something like 'observer', into nature in a very intimate way. Now that is anathema to most scientists, who struggle to keep mind and subjectivity out. The retreat into the many-universes interpretation is really one way of trying to evade introducing the observer at all, because you don't have to say that a cat is good enough or a human being is good enough to effect the actualisation of reality, or that something strange and mystical happens when an observation is made. You simply declare that all the possible quantum alternatives are acted out in their own universes in their own way. They are all parallel realities, and everything that can happen, does happen. So it neatly evades having to introduce the observer in a crucial way.

......

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Sep 05 - 01:02 AM

Wow! What an epiphany. Yes, if there is really a specific Anti-Christ, then Clinton Hammond IS IT!!!!! (And he has volunteered proudly too. Well done, Clinton!)

Aside from that, Bill, a big resounding YES to the "all concepts (are) everywhere at once" theory. Well, of course they are. But which ones do you choose to focus on, actualize, and put into effect in your life? That is the pertinent question. And that's really all there is to it.

To say that "the Christ is within everyone" is accurate, "the Christ" being symbolic of our highest nature and potential. To say that "the devil" or "the anti-Christ" is within everyone is likewise accurate, those being symbolic of the lowest nature and most destructive potential.

It's entirely up to you, me, and everyone else which aspects of our positive and negative potentialities we choose to bring forth at any given time, and that is what has driven every morality play in history! That choice.

That is so dead simple. Please don't tell me that you can't grasp it, Bill, please! ;-) There's nothing mysterious about it whatsoever. I can't help it that you go numb between your synapses when you hear a "religious word" being used in a discussion... (grin)

Just forget about organized religion for once, and think metaphorically, for heaven's sake. I don't belong to an organized religion nor do I need to to grasp such a concept as I have alluded to above.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:46 PM

Don't worry about that, Carol, Bill Clinton had no further use for Monica and sent her to me.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:43 PM

So when people you define as "moderates" do it, it's "needling", and when people you disagree with do it it's "personal attacks". Interesting dictionary you're using there, pdq.

I'm not going to play that game with you, so you'll just have to play with yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:37 PM

Thanks, Jack the Sailor. That was a proper response.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:34 PM

You are moderately right about that, but when was "needling" outlawed?

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:32 PM

Yes, here it is right here...

http://www.mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=1559194

Rapper - there cannot be an equal amount of shouting from Mudcat conservatives because there are none. Three or four moderates who state facts and opinion, but seldom (if ever) engage in personal attacks. Even DougR left this place in disgust over one month ago.

I guess that either makes you the exception or a liar. Or maybe you're not a "moderate".

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:32 PM

As the surgeon once remarked to pdq.

"Good news! Your humourectomy was a success!!"

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:27 PM

I thought you said you "moderates" never make any personal attacks, pdq.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:25 PM

As the family doctor once remarked to CarolC's parents...

"Good news. Your daughter Carol shows no signs of having used mind-expanding drugs."

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:22 PM

I don't agree.

Just because the Son of Bush performed the miracle of emaculate election, it doesn't mean he deserves to be crucified.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 08:07 PM

I've always been in one minority or another, Bill. I'm quite used to it.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 07:24 PM

George Bush---the anti-Christ?

That gives him too much credit....

Besides, -I'm- the Anti-Christ!

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 07:06 PM

gee, Carol...how does it feel to be in the minority?..(meaning, most others don't feel that constraint not to keep me informed of what MY feelings must be...)

;>)

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 07:06 PM

Science and religion clash again

Take your average, ordinary run of the mill Jesus Christ made entirely out of anti matter, and you would have a son of God that try as he may...everthing he touches gets blown to hell.

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 06:28 PM

I was just telling you about how some people perceive reality, Bill. I would NEVER attempt to tell you how you perceive reality.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Peace
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 06:11 PM

LOLOLOL

Subject: RE: BS: George Bush---the anti-Christ
From: Cluin
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 06:06 PM

Does it feel like a big single-minded hand has reached out and grabbed you by the face and forced its reproductive appendage down your throat?