These images are part of a series of remarkable patterns that bacteria form when grown in a petri dish. The colony structures form as adaptive responses to laboratory-imposed stresses that mimic hostile environments faced in nature.

I got so excited about this photoset I had to show you! The full set (on tumblr anyway) is here. See how complicated we get when we face hostile environments? That reminds me of how they told us at this winery in Napa Valley how grapes will be much more delicious if you don’t give them all the water they want or need. You don’t want to kill them of dehydration, but you do want to “stress” them for much of their lives in order to give them that complexity that tastes sooooo good.

(round pond winery)

I tumblr all the time btw! Come visit kindagamey.tumblr.com and see what’s there now!

* reblog: v. the “art” of looking at other people’s posts on Tumblr.com and clicking reblog on the one’s you like.

(Note: I always take the effort to click the “open in a new tab” on the links I link – I do that for you, my lovelies. Those two seconds it takes me is my love in effect.)

Hey, when you’re done with that if you’re still bored you could check my tubes – see that thing on the right side of my youtube page? That’s my VLOG. Each VLOG contains 200 videos from the internet ~ all sorts of stuff. Brain food and empty calories.

I’m working on VLOG41 right now; guess I’ve been doing this for a while. Go random, see what happens!

Then I’ve got music tubes for when I stumble across videos:

Video Boogaloo 1
Video Boogaloo 2
Video Boogaloo 3
Video Boogaloo 4

and video game tubes:

Gamer Vision 1
Gamer Vision 2

and a dolores cannon tube.
(ew!)

and favorites.

all for you!!

—

I was listening to that paranormal paratopia.org show (Note to self: add paratopia to sidebar, those boys are funny and thoughtful ~ you have to hear this. I’m serious. Click that. Not to ruin it, but it’s a true story about a man who gets hit in the balls over and over again. You wouldn’t have clicked it if i didn’t tell you,) and Jeremy Vaeni was getting a dig in at me (he thinks i’m woowoo even though he does stuff like this. I’m not making fun, that’s actually really interesting, but you know, glass houses and all…)

He’s got a new book out if you want to check it out, Urgency:

Man, i have to link everything for you lazy asses! What do you guys do for me?

Anyhoo, he derisively mentioned my bringing up Dolores regarding hypnosis, but actually said, “Dolores Canyon” (sounds like a prostitute’s name!) on the live version of the podcast. I took a look in internet-land and there IS a Dolores Canyon and The Dolores Canyon ranch is there. Hey, that reminds me that my friend on twitter today joked that she was going to dress up as a “slutty Dolores Cannon” for Halloween. That’s two sexually suggestive references to that poor old lady in one post! (Three if you count my tube reference up there, what the hell is wrong with me today?) Maybe because her book Convoluted Universe Book Four comes out in November and I’m excited about it!

Dolores is a regressive hypnotist and I was trying to pimp her (again with the sexy talk!) on my first post on the paratopia forum to maybe get her on the podcast and I guess I forgot that Jeremy thinks hypnosis is very, very bad. Maybe I knew, but maybe I didn’t know how clenched their butt cheeks were about it cause I hadn’t listened that far back in the podcasts at that point. I didn’t know they were what you could call skeptical-experiencers, which is a new genre for me. I thought you either were or you weren’t.

So they’ve been waging war on hypnosis as well as (rightfully) chastising some particular hypnotists in the UFO field for being totally unprofessional and scaring people with memories which might not even be true and also kicking hypnosis for being a proven terrible memory tool – in laboratories, anyway. (I didn’t know that, but look it up. Seems to be true, but then again, you know scientists, they love to piss on everyone else’s field of study. Maybe their skeptical natures influenced the study? Placebo effect from the scientist end; consciousness affecting the fabric of the universe and all.)

It may be a poor memory retrieval tool for this life, but according to Dolores it does a damn fine job of regressing people to past lives and talking to people’s higher selves. Don Elkins of The Law of One fame used to use regressive hypnosis as well and talks about it in Chapter 2 of The Secrets of the UFO which is free in pdf form if you click that link! (At least read Chapters 5 and 10!)

Here’s an interview with the guy and here’s Don Elkin’s bio. I can’t believed he killed himself. (Just like Gevin Giobran who wrote the beautiful book Everything Forever Learning to See Timelessness! Why do the people who can touch the answers end up removing themselves from the equation?)

(gotta watch em all! 5 parts. Watch em via the youtubes.)

So, they chastised me on their forum but it made for a somewhat interesting thread.  I started the thread, but there seems to be some old war being waged and they could give a shit about my little interjections – haha!

I think Jer’s just cynical because he let his heart open at one time in the past and then felt foolish. Or he was “peace and love” and “i’m special” and then felt ego or hypocrisy’s fingers wrapping around him and had to go back to being cynical to preserve his own sense of genuineness. Or he just saw other kooks in New Age world and was like, “whatever the hell they are, I want to be the opposite,” ~ hey, that’s the same principle that made me a liberal, actually. I don’t know really so I shouldn’t psycho-analyze. I guess i need to read his books to find out. Whitley Strieber had him on the show; speaks highly of his book.

^ Honestly, this seems like pain to me. People who’s brains are too smart drive themselves nuts. Luckily, I’m left handed so my left brain kinda sucks – it can’t haunt me too bad. He’s caught in a feedback loop where he IS somewhat special (like many who have come to the Earth in this age, according to dolores’ The Three Wave of Volunteers and The New Earth), but to admit that you’re special makes you an asshole. I think he hurts on the inside and I send you love, brother. I may not be all right with you, but you’re all right with me. There is a middle ground between being woo-woo and being real and the way to do it seems to be always struggling to do better and wanting to love, wanting to do right, (and it isn’t just “spiritual,” there’s an intellectual basis for belief in love as a system-enhancer,) but never fail to acknowledge that you’re a flawed human and to not solidify on any one belief, but to nevertheless hold a type of faith that things can be better; that they will be better; and that by changing the structure of your mind you are changing the flavor of the stew for everybody, and they for you. That’s why we need everyone to get delicious real fast cause I have a feeling we’re about to get better spoons.

And remember, as mentioned at top, stress is delicious so humanity should be extra tasty at this point! As Don Elkins revealed in Secrets of the UFO: we evolved a native, spiritual path at one point with full awareness and grew a bit, but before rejoining the creator we circled back and compassionately helped ourselves through time by creating free will and balancing us on the head of it – allowing ourselves the choices of good and evil. It created a sweeter bounty full of richness for harvest. More experience to bring back to center. It also means we created evil. We are the things we fear that go bump in the night. And we will be the ones that forgive us when we remember who we are.

link

link

your facebook comment can be no longer than 8000 characters

haha. Ever seen THX 1138? Efficiency 98%. Computers make terrible bosses. Can’t the *people* as a whole be the intelligence engine that comes together to drive our future collaboratively? Can’t we all be the co-processors (in cooperation with nature; who is smarter, more balanced, and more resilient than we are) who compute this giant puzzle for ourselves; how to govern ourselves, produce for ourselves, find harmony and equilibrium on the individual level as well as the whole and yet continue creating novelty and expanding evolutionary progress and levels of consciousness? word! makes for a better scifi story anyway. would probably make for a better human being. and that’s the ultimate point, ya?

besides, needs and desires are emergent in conjunction with local and social environments. there is no singular solution than can fit all models. only our combined desires and checks and balances can maintain the compromise of harmony and let everyone carry a personal responsibility for (and knowledge/experience of) the whole as well as the self.

the EXACT same thing he said about humans developing improperly when subjected to the capitalistic arena and the effect on psychological development when we carry these inner fears (if you aren’t productive enough, fight hard enough, steal enough from others, or have wealth through family: you have no material worth, you will be poor in nutrition, health care, education and standard of living, you will die for your crime) and the damage the lack of trust does to us mentally ~~~ i think the same thing can be said for not having a kind of spiritual grounding. Science’s current model is still trying to desperately grasp on to the mechanistic model as quantum physics and Einstein’s relativity erode the holy grail of mathematical objectivity from within. Mechanical reality leaves you kind of cold and naked in a universe where both beings and animals and chemicals and plasmas and nuclear reactions survive by consuming each other and you’re next, buddy, and it’s all a delicate accident that could explode at any minute and then all you know and are is lost forever, scattered, wasted. So much waste means you have to scrawl your name in history by hook or by crook to preserve the self. And the science model perfectly helps the capitalistic model, almost like it was *constructed* to go along with it… hmm… “funding anyone? not you, weirdo!” There’s so much fear of being proven wrong or being proven right and creating an upheaval of everything that’s come before. The repression of free energy, UFO knowledge, and knowledge about our higher selves has been going on for ages. Someone in prehistory put the genie back in the bottle and made damn sure we didn’t know how powerful our minds and powers of creation are. And they keep us that way, because until we can control ourselves consciously creation is dangerous. Anyway, the law of irony states that if anyone egoically tells you that they know that they are right, then the universe will shift itself in defiance until they are proven embarrassingly wrong. There’s a chain of wrong going all the way back to the beginning of “objective” knowledge. I doubt it is at its end.

The mercenary institution of science will be replaced with a more holistic institution when we shed capitalism. Science will eventually have to accept that near death experiences, reincarnation, telepathy, precognition, and UFOs, are real and legitimate hints that perhaps this universe is far stranger than we have imagined (and it is already pretty damn strange.) Both spirituality and science are trying to seek understanding to the unknown, to “understand the mind of god.” It’s the same thing. The big bang (matter appearing from nothing for no reason repeatedly over again, again, for no reason), or a conscious idea budding from a sea of consciousness that unfolded into a fractal representation of separateness amongst physical laws mirrored physically over what happens energetically (gravity ~ vs ~ all densities in consciousness are drawn together emotionally, to reunite as one) in order for it to experience its understanding of itself through individuality and expansion through the levels of unconscious reaction and submission with those laws to eventual conscious triumph over causality and a full understanding of the whole. It’ll happen eventually I think.

Carl Sagan used the same topographical center in our metaphorical sphere that spirituality uses, he just re-appropriated it to sell science to a generation. Awe, wonder, humility; he repackaged it in a material realist perspective, which is brilliant. It is taking us back to where east meets west and spirit meets science. Back when understanding the universe was trying to understand the mind of god. Monastery scientists. If I had to make a chart, I honestly think atheists are closer to god than fundamentalists are. More self-will rather than re-habituation of learned behavior sets, but unfortunately harnessed into ego when the person is above average intelligence. And I don’t even like the g_ word cause I ain’t never met the fella if there is one so it is not a part of my experiential repertoire… yet. I just know things are a hell of a lot BIGGER in depth and width than we are giving it credit for, and this universe is put together intelligently ~ so intelligently it boggles the mind. It is very rare we have the the building blocks of life we do and one can say, “well we just have that perspective because we happen to be alive here” but really, this much variety? The range of species is unbelievable. Evolution needs all that complexity to function properly? Or is creation the point? Is evolution intelligent? It seems smart as all hell to me. If you have the gall to say there aren’t any larger patterns of causality then it’s blinding yourself to those possibilities.

The movie basically said “everything is interconnected” (spiritual: all is one) and then that weird flower child bit at the end (spiritual: love is the answer, full service not self-service) ~ i mean, aren’t we all headed toward the same thing? And because the universe is karmaically skewed in a remarkable way to gravitationally (a weak-force, but unrelenting) penalize the self-indulgent and reward the cooperative; one being a short-term gain, long-term loss, and the other being a long-term gain, short-term loss (personal sacrifice), can’t we all come together?

That’s what I meant when I said he stratified socially whilst saying we need to unstratify economically. He left out a huge part of the earth and divided us ideologically whilst saying that we should undivide our separation through monetary stratification; he left out the part of humanity that really gains something from spirituality and have done so since the time of cavemen, with good reason! Just as we know now that placebos work sometimes as well as regular medicines or that patients heal faster when happier (medicine learns that the mental aspect is just as important as the physical), we also know that intention effects experiments on the subatomic as well as macro level (i.e. dice rolls), and we know that optimism, and confidence, and that same love that a loving family provides, wholeness, purpose, all of that is necessary for proper functioning when you grow up. And when one thinks they are better than they are (like when you try out for a job you aren’t sure you are qualified for, then rise to the task) they become better. Meditation, learning how to rise above ego and the emotional reactive self, these are so huge. So important. Most of our world is non-physical. We know this! So why do we think it isn’t connected behind the scenes in larger ways/waves, concentric ripples of consciousness? Having my ultimate questions satiated is a huge weight off my chest. The questions used to haunt me. I’m calm now. The expansion beyond self: like free energy I had to get the energy to change who I was from somewhere other than myself. Myself was the repeating weakness and I had to get beyond it. For all practical purposes, even if there isn’t a god and even if we’re all just some causal pool balls in a random chemical stew just like science wants us to think, there is enough science, ironically, to show it is better to have an ultimate faith (optimism) for one’s mental hygiene. Big ups to Eckhart Tolle, he saved my ass from myself. I’m now a work in progress for life. It’s purpose! Pure purpose. And a break from the strain of its own weight. God I needed that.

these are posts i never finished.
i just left them in my drafts folder.
i got to let them go cause i ain’t gonna finish them.
here, you take em.

i’ve got one more about mayan origins, but i still might fix that one.

—

Solving the World

Peter Joseph, thank you so much for your presentation on Capitalism and Social Pathology. I have absorbed the information and that of Zeitgeist: Addendum and spread these memes as best I could (twitter, FB, website, verbal), not because I am a devotee of any one ideology (as all real world solutions are emergent), but because I personally deemed the information productive, the intent genuine, and the scope of awareness global.

I have been inspired by your works and fearless honesty, but in deference to you and Jacque Fresco, I have been mulling over the solving of the world independently and come to slightly different conclusions. I would like to offer some ideas that may compliment your vision and remove any accusations of a “scientific dictatorship.” Please forgive the way I process information. As I am not adept at retaining hard facts, I use a more metaphorical approach to problem solving and extrapolate scenarios outward like a running simulation. Forgive me also and bear with me if some of this seems a repetition of some of your own work as we all drink from the same fountain.

Centralization Creates a Weak Structure

Regarding cities of the future, it seems to me that having a centralized computer system invites weakness by putting too many “eggs” in one basket. We all know the egg/basket metaphor and the wonderful thing about metaphorical eggs is that they reference a law of energetic exchange that can be applied to any number of systems, ideological or physical. When we do this, we find that any centralized system or aggregation of power invites corruption no matter how pure the initial intent is. Centralized data invites tampering, restricting, seizing control, taking advantage. Centralized communication invites censorship. Centralized power creates a strategic fulcrum, but who’s weakness is that it can be exploited and misused by coercion or take-over. A centralized resource distribution center (the guv’mint) introduces a weakness in that its members become dependent on it. An added side-effect of which is that, by abdicating responsibility, the members of that system lose opportunities to become responsible (like when you rise to an occasion you didn’t feel qualified to do at first), or the chance to learn when a national-level irresponsible decision teaches an unpleasant lesson. We have created nations of zoo animals in the genus Homo (humans) who’s cages are ideological rather than physical. We suffer a deficit of awareness about self-discipline, personal responsibility, the practicality of empathy, and global management because we have so little control over the mechanisms that regulate our own lives. When seen over time, natural systems seem adaptable and self-regulating and human systems seem so short-sighted and frail because they are all built around a centralized hierarchical structure and ever threatening to “collapse” under the weight of their own manufactured complexity.

If I just receive my power from “somewhere else” then I have reduced my own total awareness with detrimental consequences for the whole. By abdicating my personal responsibility I shrink my awareness to just my own consumption and fail to incorporate a strategy that includes the whole because I am no longer aware of it and my role in it. (As you know, our system has done this purposefully to encourage wasteful consumption and dependence.)

Metaphorical References: Centralization Creates a Weak Structure

• A child who’s mother does everything for him and makes all his decisions, never giving him any personal responsibility. How can he recover from mistakes and have the courage to forge his own destiny when he hasn’t ever been asked to be responsible for anything? Apply this same lesson to any centralized form of government or resource management you can imagine.
• A zoo animal who has spent so long out of the wild that they are unable to hunt anymore and would die of starvation if returned.
• A you animal that has forgotten how to cook or make his own power, shelter, or clothing.
• If there are only two men in a system and one man abdicates his power to another, there will come a point when the “leader” will abuse that relationship knowingly or unknowingly no matter his generosity or humility. The coordination efforts of leadership seems essential to a system, but when any one person wields more control or is compensated unequally, it feels like oppression to those below his/her position. Is there a way we can all retain our personal control and self respect and yet share in a constant social pressure of self-regulation?
• I am dependent on the power company for electricity. If they have a failure, I and all of my neighbors will lose power. If the power company becomes corrupt and raises rates, I and all of my neighbors will be beholden to them and their demands. If my system is honorable, but an aggressive power distribution system wants to expand into the customer base I am a part of, it will find a way to attack the system I am dependent on. If the systems are all removed altogether, I will have forgotten how to generate power myself and will be at a loss. The potentiality of these weaknesses and the instability of my world will cause me an inner stress though I may not always be aware of it.
• I have a pot hole behind my office that I would like fixed. If I call the appropriate government office I will contribute to their overall burden as there are many pot holes that need fixing in the city. I may get ignored, rejected, or my claim may get prioritized at the very bottom of a large stack of complaints and this will cause them and I frustration. My priority is local whilst their priority is citywide and biased towards the most affluent contributors to their system. I realize that if educated on the process of hole fixing, and provided the materials, I and my neighbors could fix the pot hole ourselves and save the government the time and effort. However, there is no process in place for that. Instead, if I attempt to fix the pot hole myself, then the system will use law enforcement resources to apprehend and prosecute me, doubling their expenditures, whilst leaving the problem unresolved. (And we know this to be true of economic distribution and political “solutions”, not just pot holes.)

Trending away from Centralization:

• We scan and bag our own groceries now. Are there other ways we could distribute effort? Is there a way I could pour my own coffee at a restaurant now, rather than be a burden on the server’s time and my own? Is there a way that my personal resources won’t be wasted, I can remove myself as a burden to other systems, my local priorities are upheld, and yet the same standards of safety are upheld that we expect in a centralized system?
• Hollywood used to be very exclusive and hierarchical with centralized power and fame. Now, many people from all backgrounds and economic strata have become contributors to entertainment through the internet. Many are only paid in global attention. Would this be an adequate compensation for artists if the rest of their needs were met? If no one paid for art would we still make art? Would we still want to share it?
• If a corporation realized that everybody was essential so everybody got paid the same, would someone still want to do the CEO’s job? Why not? Are you sure?

Obscurity Creates a Weak Structure

blahblah

Distributed Solutions

I could create a distributed network of people, like a neural network, who each contribute to power generation through their own means, let’s say solar panels or wind. If my own solar panels fail I still have the rest of the network to support me until I can fix the problem. The system can instantly adapt, distribute responsibility, localize and simplify decision making, and reroute around problem areas just as our own neurons do; and yet the network can retain an  incredible overall complexity and unified motive. (See Cellular Automata and Steven Wolfram’s A New Kind of Science, offered free online.)

As far as metaphors go, the internet has provided us with the precursor to such a distributed system.

–

what if – capitalism

link

why facts don’t change anyone, why conservatives are less likely to change, are more responsive to fear, and why trauma (like 9/11) makes people become more conservative. “an ideological brain is a damaged brain. Attempting to change people’s minds by reason and evidence is like the tail wagging the dog. It is managing an effect, not a cause. … The only way for the world to become more rational, more humane, more empathetic, more peaceful, more caring, more loving, and happier is to… improve our relationship with ourselves, uncover and resolve early traumas, become better parents to our children and THEN, and only then, do we get a free, happy, and prosperous world.” http://s33light.org/post/1552375650/this-video-covers-neurological-studies-shed-light love is the anti-entropic force, selfishness moves towards chaos. love is the only sustainable answer for the future.

The Rally to Restore Sanity
Jon Stewart – Steven Colbert
Washington, D.C. ~ 10.30.2010

link

11.9.2010 ~ Jon’s response to left-wing critics

Here’s my take:

The network was so jammed the blackberry’s battery crapped out in the early part of the rally just trying to ping the mothership. I heard others say same. Apple users frustrated everywhere, AT&T was croaking. What just happened out there? We took the silver bullet train back, home already, exhausted. Humans are like locusts en masse. We arrive, we eat, we crap, we trample, we flow like water into every crevice and over everyone else’s blanket, we descend on food to the frustration of poor understaffed restaurant workers who weren’t expecting human floods. But I’ve got to say, I’ve never seen such a large group of compassionate and thoughtful people in one place. So conscientious. They brought their own trash bags for gosh don-don! If that really was a representative sampling of the great majority of people I would be very heartened about our future. I’m very sorry to the poor squirrel who tried to get down the tree and even jumped to connecting trees, but just couldn’t find a way down that wasn’t already occupied by human.

Technical Update
If there is anyone besides myself that reads this site, you may have noticed it was down for a bit. I obviously didn’t. Turns out there was something wrong with my .htaccess file. It inspired me to upgrade to PHP5, anyway, which had to be done. Maybe things will be faster now? It was a huge pain the arse. I was sweating. I thought I’d broken everything. Turns out when you upload your .htaccess certain paragraph breaks can get eliminated so it just ends up a great big string of text that the server can’t parse. No wonder it was rejecting it. I’m so glad I’m not a server admin anymore. I just want things to work now.

Brother Birthday
Here’s some Wacom (drawing tablet) stuff I did for my brother’s birtday:
(Yes, I spelled it birtday, that was a mistake that I had to leave because I liked the rest of the card. And that last birthday one was not Wacommed, it was a whiteboard drawing I did once.)

The “Log into the Innernet” one is an idea I had for a sign whilst sitting at the Rally. Feel free to steal and distribute!

Robert Monroe in this video mentions the “Innerstate” at 7:35 and 9:27. I thought that was very similar to my “Log on to the Innernet.” My friend Noah says that in Robert’s books it says “the interstate”, but you know editors… they probably nicked it; they can’t help themselves.

link

Aunties
My Auntie wrote an article about being an Auntie!
Richmond Times Dispatch – The Importance of Being Auntie

Mia loved the article. She cried for like 30 minutes after reading it. Then again, she had an emotionally charged visitation from her physiological stepmother. (Does Eckhart Tolle have any special advice for women on their periods? Like teabags, their brains get steeped in a chemical bath of raw emotions once a month, where the hell can you find solace in that? You become your own unreliable narrator!)

Auntie had asked myself, my brother, and my sister to submit some memories of Auntie and I sat up one night in a hotel (whilst on that factory business trip with pop) and wrote some stuff. All of our submissions got removed from the article because the editor said it was the kind of stuff that was only “you had to be there” funny. Um hmm…

Jackie once annoyed me (once!) by bluntly saying to me ,”your writing used to be a lot better,” but I knew immediately what she meant. On my myspace Freshlaundry account (now dead) I used to write about personal things. I used to practice my honesty daily by seeing how much of myself I could expose. I would write about intimate relationship stuff much to the horror of my ex-girlfriends. I was a lot more saucy and writing purposefully with charming an audience in mind, not just for myself.

Those kind of things are easy to catch an audience of flies with. Dirt, gossip, insults, cynicism, violence, power trips, ego, this is the cotton candy of our world. People flock to it. Tastes great, but no matter how hard you try you can’t make a healthy meal out of it. It is much harder to get something uplifting across and to make it interesting. So I’m still having problems with the interesting part. It’s tough! Maybe that’s why I prefer to just post cellphone pictures. I’m almost out of them, by the way. I haven’t been clicking my camera button as much. Maybe I’m over obsessively documenting my life through photo. What will I do then? Actually write stuff again? Yecch.

So here’s some Auntie scribblings:

She’ll be mad
There used to be a running phrase, “she’ll be mad!” (who’s she, the cat’s mother?) and if this phrase was uttered it was assuredly about Auntie who, equally assuredly, would be mad about either something somebody did or something in the world that dared to be whatever it was.

(Now when I say mad I wish to qualify that statement because I understand that there are actually people that get uncontrollably angry and even violent, and this was not that at all. The “Auntie mad” syndrome was really just the British version of irritation. This is really mild in comparison to a full blown American Jerry Springer style tantrum and I realize most people with dramatic pasts would scoff and say, “that’s all?” if witnessing an Auntie episode (she is only tiny after all), but you have to realize that as a mostly happy British family living in America, we didn’t want to be denied the experience of American drama so we made it up most of the time, or verbally jiggled a molehill into a mountain, just because it was more interesting and fun that way.)

There were many things that could set her off (or at least, we delighted in thinking they would) and there were many plans made in a certain way or arranged intricately all for the purposes of not making Auntie mad and waking the beast within her. When I just typed “waking the beast” I meant inspiring Auntie’s ire, but coincidentally, waking Auntie too early in the morning was the very thing that would do just that! I remember times (like the Westways B&B in Phoenix, Arizona) when everyone else cowered in their internal corners and made me get a cup of hot coffee (cream, no sugar) and with trembling hand enter the darkened room and ask Auntie if she’d like to get up so Dad can begin the crazy adventure he’d scheduled for that day. (When on vacation as a child, especially at places like Disney World, I would often ask why Auntie and Keith always took so long to get ready and I was usually told something like, “because Keith has to organize his sock drawer,” which thinking back on might have been a funny way to say something that may have contained a grain of truth or it might mean that my parents are very silly and it didn’t mean anything at all.)

It’s funny because I mentioned very recently to Auntie something about her getting mad and she said, “Oh, I don’t get mad any more,” and that really struck me because she really doesn’t. I’m sure we still make jokes that she’ll be mad, but I haven’t plucked the family grapevine for anything so much as a raisin about Auntie’s anger in ages. I don’t know if it’s because she’s older and wiser now, or divorced, broken, and she’s remade herself with more of what she wants and less irritations.

Cellphones
Cellphones were something that dared to be what they were back when Aunties didn’t understand them and understandably Auntie didn’t like that at all! She uses one now only because one brave member of the family (I forgot who?) dragged her into the 21st century by getting her one as a present. She was forced to adapt to the technology, I assume, to stop it from beeping at her. I still don’t think she texts yet, but then again I never thought she would be an administrator for a dog handler BBS or ever know what a “troll” was or use it unprovoked in a conversation, so Aunties can be very surprising.

Politics
I used to have great conversations with my Auntie about politics. I couldn’t vote and she couldn’t vote and my parents and most people I knew didn’t care about politics, but we loved to chatter about what was going on. We were both liberal minded and hadn’t been let down enough to allow political cynicism to truly sink in and saturate us yet. We both wanted better for the country (and the world as a whole), wanted to help the little guy and the financially downtrodden, and wanted to share the American pride, wanted to be emotionally invested in seeing the idea behind this country manifested before our very eyes, melting pots, equal opportunities, and all.

I know that personally I saw the year 2000 as the beginning of “the future” as if it wasn’t just an arbitrary date on the Gregorian calendar. This is it, here we go, the year 2000: all those zeros must mean flying cars, clean energy, and green geodesic homes that blend into the landscape like Hobbit warrens! When reviewing the political landscape, it seemed at the time that the man to make “the future” happen in any capacity was Al Gore. George Bush’s egoic (no spell check, I refuse to say egoist, and why are you even suggesting egg cup?) bravado and feigned everyman sure-shootin’ bullshit left me so cold. How could people not see through that? I was flummoxed. I think Auntie and I both stayed up all night the night of the election and both were pretty frayed afterward as no decision lead to the very strange “controlled tension” that the media lead us by the nose with. I remember Auntie crying on the phone to me after the Supreme Court thwarted the functioning of democracy. “How could they do this?” she asked me through tears. I didn’t know. It was the kind of rule bending and conspiracy that happens all the time behind closed meeting room doors, but here it was out in public for all of us to see. It was gross. It made us feel sick. We didn’t talk about politics again after that. The cynicism finally took a bite and the American dream was just another one of the dreams pierced through with a fishhook and left dangling for suckers to buy into.

this nice girl was willing to flash me her “communist party” shirt.
i just don’t get flashed nearly as much as i feel i should.

click more for the cellphone pics

[Show as slideshow]

Bonus features:

“An unusually fired up” Bill Moyers speaking at Boston University about Howard Zinn and the corporate takeover of America.

http://www.bu.edu/buniverse/view/?v=20ZaW9PO

KindaGamey’s YouTube Channel

I’m still collecting VLOG’s, collections of videos.
Commercials, inspiration, silly, funny, music, dumb.
Just keeping connected to “the feed.”

^ The newest stuff goes to the bottom. Scroll down. If that one gets full (200 videos) I make a new one.
Find them at http://www.youtube.com/kindagamey

What’s gotten me excited lately?

i’m still sad about that “turning 60, i’m a loser who didn’t accomplish his dream, conquer the dragon” kotaku story, because i’m pretty sure i’m on the same damn bus to nowhere. and that idea he had is damn close to the one i’ve been sifting about in my head for god knows how many years. we want story to MATTER, we want our place in the game world to MATTER and to make an actual difference, we want significance. his don quixote analogy might be the most appropriate, perhaps it can’t be done. perhaps it is just a dream that drives men mad. a game with breadth and depth and emotional meaning. i can see it sometimes, other times it’s just a blur.

http://kotaku.com/5682432/when-a-man-turns-60
http://www.erasmatazz.com/Personal/page70/page453/Sixty.html

link

His storytron idea (that he’s giving up on) is here. I had the same kind of idea, I have notebooks of shit to prove it, too:
Play the game “Balance of Power” here:
http://www.storytron.com/players.php

It starts on September 12, 2001 with you as the U.S. President.

He said games focus too much on “things,” he wanted to add more breadth to his games. But the gamers want depth, he says. They just want to keep climbing that ladder. Chasing that carrot.

I tried to send him a message.
I wanted him to watch this lecture:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EDF61A3E15D069E3

It mentions games in several parts (Part 5 is one). Simulations. World of Warcraft.

(I also wanted him to watch Wolfram’s TED lecture, computing a theory of everything.)

Thomas Campbell actually worked with Robert Monroe back in the day and learned to travel out of body. And yet he is a physicist and makes a great effort to put all of his world-views together. He comes up with, “we are a simulation” which is the same as “we are consciousness” only he imagines it as being discrete packets, digital. I’m not so sure.

link

“Love is a low entropy state” (more organization, stability, sustainability)
“Service to self is a high entropy state” (more chaos, deterioration)

Sidenote: Interestingly, I just stumbled into an entertaining series where seattle4truth explans Frank Znidarsic’s theories about how we have Quantum Mechanics all wrong. That classical physics still applies in the quantum world and that it isn’t a special case at all. Man, that would really take the wind out of all the new agers saying that consciousness affects the universe. Except that we know it does, as Thomas Campbell points out, like the “random robot” experiment where a robot randomly chooses directions to move and will stay on a table happily until someone wills it to move closer to the edge until it falls off. We affect the randomness in micro-amounts, just like you can do with dice rolls. Test it yourself, see if you can beat statistical chance and cause a certain value to roll more than others. It works unless you don’t believe it does, or don’t believe in yourself! Seriously! I’m glad he points out that the skepticism of scientists might actually fuck with research results because they harbor a desire to poke holes in the theory, so the universe provides it to them in spades; the universe rolls like that. I knew about Dr. Quantum and the double-slit experiment, but Thomas Campbell goes into a little detail I wasn’t aware of ~ he says that when they put a detector by one slit (which is itself shooting energy packets in order to detect energy packets) that it causes the waveforms to collapse into a single line of pulses as if they were shooting particles through one slit, but when they have the detector running, but don’t collect the data ~ then they get the interference pattern as if they were propagating a probability pattern wave through the slit. Now that is weird.

Both Campbell and Znidarsic agree that light is a 3D bubble of a waveform of energy (so does youtube’s nickharvey’s quantum light spheres). But all of these energy waves are flowing through what? Time to bring back the æther yet? I’ve been ready for that for ages.

Firstly, that crazy voicemail  that I left for Chris Piedade that he made into a movie, I posted it to youtube. It was almost lost forever, but he was able to extract it from the clutches of Facebook. I don’t think I normally speak with that high of a pitch, but I must have been in an odd state.

link

Two Comics to Consider from xkcd, thanks babylemonade:

El Done

So, some posts back I added a Red Ice Creations interview that Eldon Taylor made. I liked the message, “Who’s thoughts are you thinking?” and thought that it was a meme worth repeating back into the internet machine, which I did dutifully. It’s good that people question themselves for growth opportunities and though his film presentation was a bit hokie (cheap brain tricks are not compelling material) it did at least make one want to ponder the higher questions for themselves.

The way I imagine it right now* an unconscious person is beholden to their habits and needs and reacting to the body’s impulses. (I’m not judging, I’ve got plenty of addictive behavioral traits to keep me humble.) Unconscious people make up the majority of the population’s bell curve and they are like pool balls; if you had technology advanced enough you could measure all the neural inputs and see your balls on an input and output path and ricochet system, your basic laws of physics in action. I need fuck, fuck. I need food, food. I feel mad, mad. Fear. When you advance in consciousness you are able to step up out of the procedural lock-down on behavior choices and you may get the same cyclical emotional triggers as inputs, but you have a bigger menu of responses to choose from. (Oh, I’m getting a video game idea here…)

Suddenly you can do things that pool balls aren’t supposed to do, like swerving to dodge a black hole in the corner pocket in total irreverence to the whack by the cue stick that done set you on your path. Of course, no one is always of a higher consciousness or lower consciousness. Getting to a higher level means facing higher challenges. We all flicker back and forth between the states, some frequencies are higher, some are lower, many have different speeds and spatial bounds. Children and animals can be highly reactive creatures, but can also show amazing explosions of consciousness at times. My cat, for instance, is the ding dang old guru of cats, except when it comes to other cats, then she’s a bitch. I wonder if Eldon Taylor prefers dogs to cats. I don’t wonder it enough to type a question mark, just enough to make a point.

I just watched that French no-talky Babies documentary on the insta-flix. I highly recommend. I took pictures of a newspaper article about it when I was in Napa!

(* Why I say “the way I imagine it…” ~ because I try not to subscribe to belief systems or scientific theories which will eventually be proven wrong or irrelevant, I instead use my imagination to hold a spectrum of scenarios, often at odds with each other. That way if anything seems right and might add to one of the jigsaw puzzles I have going, I can apply it and move on. The imaginative puzzle I like the best that produces the best behavioral results and doesn’t screw up my ability to function in the world is the one that wins at any given moment. I find things to be much more enjoyable this way and the tiny fleeting emanations of hope I see here and there can be construed as part of a larger plan, all of which revolves around refining consciousness into gold, moving it up the evolutionary chain from reactive to creative. Anything less than that is too damn depressing and the cynicism can take root and transform you in terrible ways, make you separate from the whole instead of repairing it, thus becoming part of the problem: a willfully dissonant tone to the center.)

Editor’s Brain: Omg! Where’d all that text come from? I blacked out for a second and when I came to, I was drooling and the page was full of shit. Back to what I was typing originally when I wasn’t cooing my siren’s sermon…

Instead of listening to music at work I often play an audio interview from somewhere on the net and I looked through some of Eldon’s archives and saw that Eldon interviewed Sonia Barrett, who also did an interview on Red Ice Creations.

The Holographic Canvas – The Fusing of Mind and Matter

Her Red Ice interview here.

I’m not vouching for the material and I haven’t read her book, but I enjoyed the interview and intuited that she’s a person who has done a lot of meditation and work on herself. (Some work on houses, some on cars, some on their plastic selfery, whilst some work on refining who they are by removing definitions.)

So it kind of blew me away that Eldon had gotten her on his show just to bully her about gaps in her scientific knowledge (she references scientific advancements, but is not a scientist herself and gets some information from means other than Earthly.) He was Rolodexing philosophers like he’s dropping names at a cock/tale party as if that was some kind of standalone argument that implied that she was not smart or well informed. I guess it is called the Provocative Enlightenment Show, but I thought that meant the ideas would provoke, not the host. I’d listened to a few of his shows and thought he was alright. A little big on himself, like Master Charles come to think of it.

Whoa, they even look alike and they both do audio entrainment technology! Brainwashing old white men! Oh noes!

Master Charles, at the Shoebox Dialogue (with himself) we attended, was talking shit about Steven Hawking being stupid (who, being a little provocateur himself said purposefully that the universe didn’t need a God to be created or to fire up his book sales (but it helps! -KG) ) and Mia walked out on the Master, not in defense of old Steven, but because she knew that anyone calling anyone else stupid obviously wasn’t one with everything, obviously couldn’t see from another’s perspective and understand why a set of circumstances over time would lead someone to believe exactly the way they do, and therefore Master C.’s judgmental quip had lost her, and to Mia, he was then just another attention- and money-seeking rip off. Or as she concisely put it, “he sounds like an arrogant ****!”

(If that isn’t true and you really are enlightened then I’m very sorry, but know you will forgive me. Whoohoo! Will do dishes for a free week of audio entrainment retreat. Monroe Institute, that goes for you too. Come on, somebody get me on the Gamma train, I wanna go!)

Just zoned out again, here’s where I went:

Gamma Wave ->  Distributed Matrix (this page does not exist) +-> “According to a popular 20-year-old theory, gamma waves may be implicated in creating the unity of conscious perception (the binding problem)”

Experiments on Tibetan Buddhist monks have shown a correlation between transcendental mental states and gamma waves. A suggested explanation is based on the fact that the gamma is intrinsically localized. Neuroscientist Sean O’Nuallain suggests that this very existence of synchronized gamma indicates that something akin to a singularity – or, to be more prosaic, a conscious experience – is occurring. This work adduces experimental and simulated data to show that what meditation masters have in common is the ability to put the brain into a state in which it is maximally sensitive and consumes power at a lower (or even zero) rate, briefly. The “Zero power hypothesis” suggests that the lower power states may correspond to a “selfless” state and the more typical non-zero state, in which gamma is not so prominent, corresponds to a state of empirical self.

Recently, attempts to induce gamma waves in mice brains using optogenetics have been successful, leading to possibilities of testing many other implications.

(Part of the Master Charles Synchronicity program is flashing lights in eye-gear, not just audio entrainment. -KG)

The combination problem

The binding problem, as it applies to the “unity of consciousness” is related to the problem of the homunculus—a putative inner “little man” who is the true subject within the brain. The question is how coloured squares and circles can be “experienced together” as a single scene. The implication is that something is experiencing all these data. It has become popular to deny any need to give a physical account of what it is that has the experience, often with the suggestion that it is the “person as a whole” or the “system”. However, to ascribe input to such vague physical domains is not without problems. Such suggestions appear to arise from the common misconception that there cannot be a limited internal physical domain that has access to, for instance, data from blue sensitive and square sensitive cells. This domain is often equated with a “paradoxical” homunculus, but it is often not appreciated that a homunculus is only paradoxical under limited conditions. Sutherland denotes the fear of the homunculus as “homuphobia”: “But if you look inside the brain you can’t find any little green men and this has given rise to a fear of homunculi, agents and Cartesian theatres. All this has resulted in some desperate and flawed attempts to build a bottom-up theory.”

The homunculus concept is often equated with someone “watching a wonderfully integrated internal TV screen” and, as René Descartes noted, nothing is more certain than that there is an internal observer (“Cogito ergo sum“), so the only alternative option to the homunculus is infinite regress (who is watching the screen inside the homunculus?). Some materialists refuse to accept the reality of subjective consciousness and so are led to conclude that infinite regress and homunculi are equally repugnant or absurd and so adopt the third alternative: eliminativism. Daniel Dennett maintains that “homunculi are only bogey men if they repeat entirely the talents they are rung in to explain”. Limited domains within brains supporting percepts based on signals that have undergone several transductive steps almost certainly have to be postulated because much of brain activity appears to be outside consciousness. How signals are finally transduced into percepts in these domains remains a major mystery but there need be no further regress (again the regress/homunculus/eliminativism alternatives). What is much less clear is whether there is one such domain per brain or many, as in Dennett’s “Multiple Draft” hypothesis.

The synchronisation of oscillating cellular potentials has also been invoked as a solution to the combination problem. Thus it was never very clear whether Francis Crick was trying to solve the segregation or the combination problem in his book The Astonishing Hypothesis. However, one criticism of the synchronisation idea is that experiential combination of information in separate neurons is incompatible with any standard biophysical explanation of the brain, whether or not there is any synchrony. One possible explanation for binding is that the information is integrated in each of many individual downstream neurons. This requires that percepts exist in multiple complete copies. This difficulty has led many to suggest unconventional physical explanations for percepts, often invoking quantum theory (e.g. the approach of Freeman and Vitiello). Also, multiply experiencing neurons seems to make no sense if their experience is not pooled in a “global workspace” (see Bernard Baars or Cartesian theatre). And indeed they may be another example of a “desperate and flawed attempt” to build a bottom up theory.

Whoa. That was cool.

So anyway, I sent Sonia a letter on Facebook apologizing for Eldon’s behavior:

Her response was gracious.

Then Eldon Taylor posts this article “Are we living in a Hologram?” on Facebook about universe being a hologram, but of course from approved scientific sources, which is apparently ok. When Sonia talked of the universe being a matrix he’d hear none of it. In fact, the audience didn’t hear any of it because most of the interview was him bloviating. Maybe this was his way of humoring the idea, maybe he just stumbled on it and thought it afro’pos. Here are the comments that were there before I posted anything. One person mentioned The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot (which I’d read ages ago and loved) and other people were talking religion and I figured if the universe dangled this out in front of me, I had to put my two cents in about Sonia.

This was my comment. I don’t know why I do these things:

link

Eldon’s response further down the post wasn’t exactly directed at me, but I’m damn sure he felt the reverberations, and then guised a general statement to the crowd:

Which is nicely played because it is kind of an insult to my crazy rant (saying I’m just being “creative”) and also an innocent clap from the enlightened persona. Best o’ both worlds!

This morning the smoke alarm went off due to the Heat Pump trying to go into ***Emergency Heat!*** Ahhhhh!!!! Smelled like burnt ass. So I launched the cat out of bed and then we ran around uselessly until it stopped. I checked my phone and it got a ding from “InnerTalk” and there was Eldon’s Newsletter for my groggy eyes, flying in at 3:33AM:

1.) You don’t even know this {and you don’t click my links anyway you bastards} I protected you all from getting his newsletter. When I linked to the video I jumped on the grenade and signed up in order to get the unadulterated link to the movie that doesn’t force you to sign up, which was the one I gave you. Newsletter free living!

2) At the Jon Stewart rally for Sanity I didn’t bring a poster, but I thought of one whilst I was there. It was a foreground iconic person sitting in meditation wired to a background network (silver cord from the back of the neck, right?) with a circle of other iconic people in meditation wired into a network around a framework of the Earth. It has a big label “Log  on to the Inner-net” and a smaller caption at the bottom: “Wireless free hotspots available everywhere!” Dude, that is badass. See, most people think of it as a solitary venture; what if we started to reach out to each other in practice? Harmonize? Even if it wasn’t people actually connecting we’d think it was and that would make all the difference in how we saw other people which would make us more harmonious. I need someone to make that poster for me and I’ll give it away in .pdf format for college bulletin boards. Not that anyone would be motivated by a poster to do much of anything except eat a hot dog.

Edit: Whoa, my buddy Noah posted this on Facebook. He’s got a nose for innernews. Have you seen his site?
@ 7:35 Robert talks about the “Going on the Innerstate…” 9:27 “… to meet your maker.”
That’s very similar to “Log on to the Innernet” even stylistically. Information super highway.
Also, Master Charles worked with Robert Monroe (founder of the Monroe Institute, mentioned above) back in the day.
Synchy!

#7 Robert Monroe Out-of-Body – Transformation of Human Consciousness

link

So here is the first chunk of Eldon’s newsletter:

Guiding Thoughts:
“That’s not a lie, it’s a terminological inexactitude. Also, a tactical
misrepresentation.”
~Alexander Haig
__________________________
Clutter and False Claims

Recently I had a guest on my radio show that took liberties with
science–so much so that her statements were often misrepresentations of
the science they purported to represent. I took issue with this and did
so on the air.

Here’s the problem, if you call on science as your authority, then
please do so but do so correctly. Don’t try to explain something like
an escalating Schumann resonance when you don’t understand how it is
calculated in the first place—because doing so is likely to embarrass
you and your associates. If you want to use physics as your basis for
spirituality, then don’t just quote bits out of context that fit your
use, take the time to understand what the principles are and how they
apply.

There are word users who embellish their claims by adding jargon or
using some heuristic they simply don’t understand. They often also
defend their positions by referring to some expert. They quote the
expert but often misquote the meaning by portraying the context
erroneously. Now, I don’t mean to suggest that they necessarily do this
with any evil intent. No, some of these people have the highest of
intent so when they do this they both betray themselves and their
message.

Look–if I meet someone, and they tell me they see angels and that the
angels tell them things, I will listen. I will make my discernment
about the individual and their message based on what I witness.
However, if a person begins by telling me about some principle in
science and they take liberties with their application or
interpretation of the science, then I dismiss them and I believe you
should as well. Indeed, in my view, this kind of abuse only gives the
entire field of spiritual enquiry or the so-called new age a bad name.
Think about it, how many times have you heard someone attack the field
by attacking some individual who has made a ludicrous statement.

So here is the problem in the proverbial nutshell. In the world of
experts, a physicist writes about physics, a chemist about chemistry, a
behavioral scientist about behavior and so forth. If you have a
hypothesis, you test it. You set up studies and allow the chips to fall
where they may. Science is not about coming up with some idea and then
rushing that idea out into the public as fact without any verification.
Indeed, someone who calls themselves a scientist but has not tested
their own hypothesis and yet presents these hypotheses as though they
are factual, is anything but a scientist. The scientific method insists
on verifiability– replication!

Now, when a chemist writes about paleontology, you have every right to
question their credentials. If they make statements that are false,
then you simply dismiss the person as lost–perhaps well intentioned,
but not up to par with the subject of their choosing. The real problem
is with certain members of the public. We can be so anxious to have
someone with credentials validate our beliefs, that we sell ourselves
down the drain by latching onto our so-called authority with an
arrogated attitude of, “See–I was right all along.”

Please don’t just swallow what you read or hear especially nowadays,
for there are altogether too many who want to own your thoughts and
many others selling you something that is often a lie. It may sound
good, but as political scientists have long noted, a good lie begins
with a truth. And remember, the area of the brain responsible for
discernment shuts down in most people when an authority is present. So
it behooves all of us to pay attention to whom we accept as our
authority. And this is a subject I know something about, because when I
designed the InnerTalk system and entered the subliminal arena, there
were many who ridiculed and criticized the entire field. So to that
end, I practiced what I preach. We conducted studies and we had other
independent researchers conduct their studies, many of which employed
the most rigorous of scientific methods–the double blind study. When
the research repeatedly demonstrated efficacy, the naysayers in the
field equivocated by saying something like, “What Taylor does is not
truly subliminal.” As for me, I filed the patent.

Now I received a few letters in dissent to my actions on the radio
show. One Listener wrote, “I haven’t read the book, but from the
interview you conducted I learned more about your desire for
intellectual validation than I did about her actual beliefs. Whilst you
are right that her stated facts might not be so, the same could be said
for the conclusions of your philosophical heroes and ‘scientifically
validated’ champions. The underlying structure of the argument that
needed to be probed was ‘does the universe show signs of being a type
of matrix?’”

My answer was short, “Whether the earth is a matrix or not is
irrelevant!” (em-PHAsis mine -KG.) It’s Election time so let’s just create a timely example.
Assume I said that democracy was not the best form of government, nor
was it the favored method of government by the truly great thinkers of
Greece. Assume then that I went on to say this. “Plato argued for a
philosopher king to rule and his student Aristotle insisted that this
would lead to corruption–absolute power absolutely corrupts. For
Aristotle, the polis should be governed by the middle class and they
should be the only ones with a vote. Neither of these great thinkers
believed a democracy, such as ours, was the best form of government.”

Okay–here is the relevance. Should I make these statements to you and
were you to know or discover that they were false, then my assertion
that democracy was not the best form of government, an assertion I made
on the basis of two Greek thinkers, would be erroneous on the principle
of its false foundation. Maybe democracy is not the best form of
government after all–but when I insist that this is true based on false
statements attributed to Aristotle and Plato, then my entire argument
becomes a spoof. (And by the way, just for the record, the positions I
attributed to both men are indeed accurate).

So once again, if you are going to make foundation statements and you
do so incorrectly, expect that someone will take you to task! I just
don’t see my role as a redeemer of bad arguments committed to exploring
their potential for possibilities.

Thanks for the read and I welcome your opinions.

Eldon
__________________________
Humorous Side:
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.
~Arthur McBride Bloch
__________________________

This puts me in a bind because I want to share it with you for you to react to as you will. If I take a position and respond, well then I’m going to come off sounding as defensive as he sounded to me and the point is not to mount a defense, but to find the common slice of ground where we can both stand. I mean, he says right there his own audio stuff was not blessed by the pastors (Pastuers) of science, the ‘humorous’ quote afterward references the exhaustion of people that have restricted their own abilities to progress beyond any single idea, and I know from the first interview I linked to that he is personally forced to believe in a God due to an incident that didn’t fit the mold (as my telepathy did me), one where he somehow was projected from a train wreck into a grassy field unharmed right after the car had stopped on some train tracks because he tried to scare (authoritarian) his date as if the car was running out of gas on the tracks. Had this not happened I doubt he would have given up that little atheistic slice of superiority so easily, and nor would I have given up mine.

Anyway, more fun on the web. I get in these little scuffles sometimes here and there, taking my lance to arrogant positions, not people. Why? Because irony is stronger than gravity and if I created a universe I damn sure would make sure that anyone who thought their idea was the shit got shown it to be blowhard bullcrap in the end. I mean, how you gonna wow anyone at the end of the movie if they can’t see their own folly for thinking it would end up some other way?

Is it just movie programming that has done this to me or does humility really seem like a genuinely “godly” trait if there ever was one and arrogance the lamest kind of self-salesmanship? I’d chalk forgiveness to self and fellow in the same godly column. Both of those admirable qualities seem to be centered around finding love where you thought it wasn’t before. Raising someone’s level of respect by lowering your own, or accepting your own or other’s faults as by a complex design by which you can learn and make growth towards harmony.

(Just spit-balling for fun: Why was the Old Testamint such an arrogant jerk? What if God really was kind of an ass before and he grew on his path as well? What if anyone giving enough consciousness to the idea of a God manifests that idea as a reality within the operations of consciousness and imbues it with its own independent individuality, like we do when we make children. And what if that God may have dominion over us within consciousness even though we are the ones that unconsciously hold it in place and allow it being. Hmm… no, that can’t be right. If we are the parents we need to grow up a hell of a lot faster and learn to discipline our children. If we are the kids, we need move out of the nest and start acting like co-creating adults. Not co-creating for individual wealth or selfishness, but for all. 1)

So disappointed by the elections.
Voted for the first time as an American today.

The American Hero

I swear my Blackberry said that Eldon Taylor had ‘Liked’ this video on youtube and then when I went to look on his page the message was no longer there, but still showed up on my phone. At the end it says, “time to send the hippies home.” It tries to make out like the dems are the elite corporate lackeys cuddling poodles on jet planes; uh, project much guys? You’re always accusing us of the shit you’re doing. Get some better script writers.

It bothers me when I see people that are smart enough to manipulate other people, do so, and then blame them for being “stupid enough” to get manipulated as their own personal justification. “I’m taking advantage of you, but you should have stopped me therefore it’s your fault.” Like this quote about L. Ron Hubbard: “I always knew he was exceedingly anxious to hit big money – he used to say he thought the best way to do it would be to start a cult.” The Fox news brigade has basically done that. The moneymakers keep singing that song and the followers have no idea they’re the butt of the joke. You really think that old white bankers and oil executives care about you and helping you with your problems? Why the hell is the guy on TV selling you a guide on how to be rich? Hasn’t he read his own guide?

I do not endorse this message. In fact, it makes me ill it is so disingenuous. Here’s what you just voted for as a remedy. You took the same damn pill that made you sick in the first place. At least if the Republicans get the house, I wont have to be disappointed later by the spineless actions of the Dems. Oh noes! Be strong angry little inner guru! The flowers of compassion and universal justice will take root somewhere… it gets darkest before the dawn!

Why are Democrats going to lose when they are more popular? – Cenk Uygur

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2010/10oct/RIR-101005.php

Interview on Red Ice Creations with Eldon Taylor.

When is the last original thought you’ve had?

Free Video – Mind, Meaning, and Mysteries

link

you do know i store vlogs full of youtube videos, yeah?

here’s another helpful kick,
Timothy Leary Schools You In Monotone

link

>> This post was supposed to be a continuation of this one. It was never finished and never will be finished. It has sat in my drafts folder since I sloppily drafted it in September 22, 2009. I don’t need a grand unified theory (GUT) anymore. What I needed was a cohesive storyline. Thanks to Dolores Cannon’s books I have one now. More on that soon. Publishing this only because I didn’t have the heart to throw it away. – KG, June 14, 2010

If I was given a unified theory, however, I would want it to explain all of the following:

Gravity
How can everything with mass (basically everything) pull on everything else in the universe at the same time, instantaneously? Doesn’t that require something acting upon something else faster than the supposed light speed limit?Most other interactions in the universe seem to take place via cause and effect chains; this object hits that, that object moves and hits that one.

(* if you are yelling angrily at the screen right now, then you are a nerd. click this and calm thyself.)

How can we simulate this in a program? Cellular Automata works with a discrete architecture where chains of cells can only be affected by the neighboring cells next to them. (For instance, one could set the universal rules where 4 or more neighbors in the ON position (black cell) can turn a white cell to black, and if a black cell has 3 or less black neighbors, then it becomes a white cell. It isn’t as racist as you think.)

define:speed of light
In Conway’s Game of Life (and related cellular automata), the speed of light is a propagation rate across the grid of exactly one step (either horizontally, vertically or diagonally) per generation

So it is claimed that these systems have universality because they can emulate any other system, but can they emulate gravity? That which acts upon something else instantly at a distance? Could I have little cells rotating around each other according to a gross simplification of the Newtonian gravitational laws? I can’t discover how it can be done. Think about it… let’s say we have one cellular layer of ‘matter’ and one cellular layer that only contains lines of force, like rows and rows of little compasses, one per cell. The matter layer is persistent (it doesn’t just vanish and appear anywhere, it moves a filled cell to the next cell based on a calculation of the aggregate of force lines (but what if forces are tied between two different non-canceling directions, like North by Northwest? Where would the black cube decide to go, the cell above it, or the cell above and to the left? there can be no randomness or it wouldn’t be legitimate automata, so perhaps my automata experiment needs to be rethought here.) You have two objects in cellular space and each one is constantly sending out ‘gravitational arrows of force’ (gravitons?) which spread to the entire universe… that’s a hell of a lot of energy expenditure, no? Where does it come from? If every action is paired with an equal and opposite re-action, then where is the counterpart? And even then it doesn’t act instantaneously, and multiple objects in the system causes pools of gravitational pull where force lines are tugging on each other, but maybe I shouldn’t let the gravitational force lines affect each other? But then I’d need one entire grid of forces per object to keep track of the gravitational effect of each piece of matter because each wave would be independent! Fuck it.

So, the idea that the universe is constructed of a uniform series of individual processors called cells which calculate the nature of their contents based on the neighbors doesn’t seem to be a valid working hypothesis for the theory of every structure, that is, unless each cell calculates its state by reviewing the states of every other cell in the universe. Highly unlikely? Unless geographic location is a myth and everything really is next to everything else in thoughtspace.

That, or science is wrong about gravity. Which honestly wouldn’t surprise me.

Wolfram: Cellular Automaton
Example: Hexagonal Automata
(neat, I had been thinking about hexagonal automata! thought i came up with the idea. saves me from having to work on that, then.)

Sidenote: From the universal consciousness perspective one could say that everything that was one just wants to return to being one. Like breaking apart a magnetized iron rod into billions of little iron shavings, all of which mimic the original polarization with their own little north and south ends – and they may push and shove away when north comes to north, but in the end they want equilibrium, they all just want to be together. I find it easier to rationalize this universal compaction if I’m thinking about vibrational thought fields and I’m not limited to physical forces.

For Turtles: Gravity
Why does everything in the universe want to stick together with everything else? Because it was all one big thing at some point? Like if you pulled a solid piece of taffy into loads of tendrils coming from the center mass?

(note: the act of pulling taffy is actually adding air/space to the matter and reducing the overall density of the taffy. taking stuff and adding not-stuff/space! creates shape, the basis of what we call matter! the color spectrum is white light divided; one thing divided to many. music is frequencies divided by spaces. mmm…)

sorry turtles

The Night Sky
Why is the night sky black?
Here’s some bullshit answers. What’s the real answer?

Nassim Harramein says it is because we are in a singularity (black hole) and that each of our atoms are a singularity as well, which is why they have such a strong local gravitational field. Hmm… interesting idea, but *shrug*? You’ve heard the riff about ‘It’s turtles all the way down‘? Well it’s singularities all the way down according to Nassim. And up.

Our eyes supposedly take an upside down image and make it right side up in our heads, right? Maybe the eye takes an inverse image of the universe and inverts it to the colors we see. Really, everything is light and the stars are holes in the sky, big light vacuums sucking it all down and puking out the heat which they can’t stomach.

For Turtles: The Night Sky
Why is it black when there’s all that light out there and light doesn’t diminish if not messed with (refracted) from A to B? Actually, even then it keeps careening on. Shouldn’t the night sky be full of light instead?

I’ve had some beers and fertilizer, so now it really is turtles all the way down!

Light
We are spinning on a planet, spinning in a solar system, spinning in a galaxy, spinning in a universe, spinning in a toilet bowl, so we’re probably moving pretty damn fast. How can light be moving as fast as it does relative to the speed of all that other shit spinning? And how on earth could it be a relative constant for everybody? And why would the energetic content of an atom be tied to the speed of light? (E=MC^2, energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.)

And Turtles…
A. Light is a particle.
B. Light is a wave.
C. Light is something else.
D. Light is consciousness.

Sorry scientists, the answer “light is a particle/wave duality” is so ridiculous I refuse to include it as a reasonable theory and you should be ashamed of yourselves for being such ignora-mooses.

Subatomic matter is certainly injected by a lot of space, where my subatomic golfball is more than a baseball field away from yours and nothing really contacts anything else except with forces/fields, but are subatomic particles made of quanta? Of light? Is it all light? Is light consciousness/thought?

A lot of UFO and spiritual and ghost and alien activity involves light, as it does with angel/bible stuff. UFO was a bright light in the sky that could change form, a light shone from a UFO through the window, picked me up, and pulled me through the matter in the window, I saw aliens appear in a pool of light, he held up a wand and touched me with a light, DNA exchanges light signals, and god appeared in a ball of light, i felt this light pass through me and energize me, I was meditating and breathed in light to my chakras and rose up in a body of light, there was a thread from the back of my neck made of silver light, I stared in the alien’s big black eyes and saw this swirling light that sucked me in, a vortex of light extended outward from my chest… I died and there was a light, don’t go into the light… go into the light…

Spin

> We are spinning on a planet, spinning in a solar system, spinning in a galaxy, spinning in a universe, spinning in a toilet bowl

What’s up with all the spinning in the universe? Interesting that a major theme of the universe seems to be polarity because it would take a push and pull to make spin/a vortex, or would that just create stasis? Maybe a third force is required to make spin?

Water

Talk about complexity, water is a rather high complexity form as it can be gaseous, liquid, or solid fairly easily without too much coercion. And then we are, what, 70 percent water or something ridiculous?

What is it about water? Is a wave really just a cut-away of an expanding sphere?

Walking Across the Room

Meditation

link

Catching a Baseball

Polarity

Evolution

Near Death Experience

Soul

Angel

Reincarnation

Cymatics

Technology

DNA

Mayan Calendar

Fractals

Earth

Metaphor

History

Ghosts

Dreams

“Cool”

Crop Circles

Time

Extraterrestrials

Synchronicity

* Simultaneous thoughts

Psychic Phenomena

(Not all reports of psychic phenomena are true, of course. But given the sheer number of reports we must assume that at least one of these events have been reported accurately. And if so, it needs to be considered real phenomena.)

* Predictive Dreams

Example: A woman has a dream that her village is about to get crushed by a mudslide. She tries to tell people, but they do not listen because it was just a dream. The next day her village gets crushed by a mudslide.

Possibilities

~ During traumatic events, humans send psychic information forward and backward through time which manifest within dreams, premonitions, or intuition. The interactions of inert matter is only through causal effects, but the group conscious mind is able to traverse time to manipulate human and consciousness-related affairs.

~ Human beings co-create and maintain the entirety of the illusion of reality simultaneously, past present, and future, including the creation and influence of supposed ‘inert’ matter (like rocks, galaxies, mountains and mudslides) and are subconsciously aware of the grand design as well as that of the individual. In other words, we make the illusion/movie, and we make the storyline of a lady who has been given a peek at that in order to constantly remind ourselves that there is something else going on besides the movie.

x

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/stephen-hawking-the-planet-has-entered-a-new-phase-of-evolution.html

I used to have an illogical belief that old books were outdated information and that if I wanted the secrets of the universe I would have to peruse the new books because they contain the latest aggregate of wisdom on the planet. Turns out I was completely and utterly false. A guy figured out the whole universe back in 1978. Took him 15 years. I guess nobody paid attention.

This incredible work was passed on to my girlfriend from her uncle who died. He was a priest and it was in his collection, Father Joseph Daniel Blascovich is stamped on the inside cover. I can’t remember why she pulled it out one day, but something I said inspired her to get it and she got it out and started reading pages. She’d bookmark one page with a strip of sticky note, then another, then another. Nearly every page is astounding and filled with informational tidbits to chew on. Every page has its own title.

Whilst it does contain discussions about possibilities of God and occasionally makes a passing bible reference it is mostly a book about life and as far as I can make out, the author comes to the conclusion that whatever life and consciousness is, it seems to go all the way down the chain to the very, very small and considering the enormous size of the majority of things in the universe, probably all the way up the chain as well. It is doubtful that consciousness only evolved to our particular stature and stopped there. It is also doubtful that inanimate matter just randomly evolved aliveness and more likely that life just yearns to be and appears wherever it can, from volcanic trenches to beneath the ice caps of the south pole. He makes a great case that it is more likely then that there is no real division between an inanimate hunk of iron and a life sustaining component in our blood. We are all connected. As Sagan said, we are all star-stuff. Now to think of stars as possibly alive, ejecting the components of life, and then using heat energy to assembly them on planets, which may also be alive, is an incredible thought whether true or not; certainly worthy of pondering.

This book lets you do all that and more. Whether the science is outdated or not in 2010 is irrelevant, as the truly fascinating thing for me is the way this man makes connections between seemingly disparate things. I’ve already bought two copies from two different Barnes and Noble stores in Richmond. I intend to buy a few more to distribute to people I know with inquiring minds.

Guy Murchie was a polymath genius of the highest order. Unlike the fatal disease that befalls most intelligent people, subdividing matter into more and more complexity, Guy Murchie never failed to adjoin things in a relative simplicity as well. He certainly understood the complicated world of science as it stood at the time, but he is able to transcend that beautifully when he wants to get deep and interconnected. I feel like it does my mind good just being with him and the way he extrapolates information. Here’s hoping I can do the same in my own life.

Wikipedia: Guy Murchie
And no, I know nothing about the Bahá’í Faith and I don’t care to. No single, unfixed, religion, path, idea, or belief system will ever be a true solution in life because ALL SOLUTIONS ARE EMERGENT, ALL KNOWLEDGE IS TRANSIENT. (Means changing, not transsexual.)

Link to entire book posted online in google books.
Link to Amazon books, Seven Mysteries of Life $13.57.
Link to Barnes and Noble, Seven Mysteries of Life, $17.05.

used copies are all over the web for like, $1.
so much book and wisdom for such a low price!!!

Excerpts:

I hesitate giving you too many scans because if I give you a little you are more likely to read; when I give you too much you turn away so quickly. Hopefully these four pages will give you an adequate idea of what you are in store for if you invest in this book.

Introduction – p. 6 and 7

(click to embiggen)

The Polarity Principle – p. 484 – 487

I posted two pages, but the entire chapter on Polarity is here. About 4MB worth of scans in a zip file. Right-click and Save As to your computer.
Polarity is the essence of the material world and the source of our frustration, friction, and development.

(click to embiggen)

(Does efficiency then somewhere blend into charity? - Yes! Yes it does. A global efficiency.)

if you like it, please invest some time to get the book.
if you know someone else who might like it, pass this on.

if you are the publisher and don’t like me releasing these pages, please eat my shorts. i’m trying to help you sell some books here. besides, copyright laws and intellectual protocol are instruments by which we restrict our own evolution.

twitter/kindagamey