[FairfieldLife] Hillary's prescience on the 2008 Bank Bailouts

[raunchydog]

Hillary appeared on talk shows during the financial crisis September 23, 2008, 
a month after the nomination. She wanted to bailout homeowners, and hold banks 
accountable. Jeez, what a novel idea. Four years later, the Occupy Wall Street 
folks agree with her. Hillary strongly supported regulating the banks and the 
public option for health insurance. Too bad no one listened to her. Maybe more 
people could have stayed in their homes and have less expensive health 
insurance. No wonder the DNC wanted Obama. Had he not rolled over for the 
banks, and dropped the ball on the public option, the DNC would have to go 
begging for campaign donations. 

Still smarting from Obama's renewed populist rhetoric, Wall Street now loves 
them some Mittens but not to worry, Obama's ace in the hole is money from the 
military industrial complex now tooling up to manufacture insect-sized drones 
that can fly around in your backyard to see if you're smoking pot or doing sun 
salutations in the buff. Who will win the future? The war profiteers or free 
market libertarians, for whom greed is the only virtue? 

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path 
leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us 
pray we have the wisdom to choose wisely." Woody Allen

Hillary Uneasy Over Bank Bailout 
http://youtu.be/11qXjmmx7m4

Hillary Talks About The Economy on NBC Today Show
http://youtu.be/YT8VManPu0c

HRC on MSNBC's Morning Joe 
http://youtu.be/9cCPngU_TqI

HRC on CNN's American Morning 
http://youtu.be/xj3bzyMOomA

[FairfieldLife] Diorama of humans coexisting peacefully with T-Rex

[Yifu]

Yup...no doubt about it. This diorama from a Creation Museum courtesy of Wiki 
proves that humans lived peacefully with the dinosaurs.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Creation_Museum_10.png

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 02/23/2012 01:19 PM, John wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros 
> > Anartaxius"  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> >> anartaxius@ wrote:
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
>  Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be
> >> the significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the
> >> floor. They are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room
> >> they look like they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they
> >> are far, far apart.
> >>
> >>
> >>> This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different
> >> perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the
> >> Moon of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by
> >> the Moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be
> >> affected by the presence of the planet Earth.
> >>
> >> Current position (23 February 2012) of the planets, from a different
> >> point of view. Constellation names included.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The fuzzy spot to the right of the sun is the Large Magellanic Cloud,
> >> and the bright spot below the cloud is the Tarantula Nebula. Suppose
> >> someone is born at this time at this viewing location. What is their
> >> future?
> >
> >
> > With an alignment of planets like that, the location of the viewer must be 
> > outside the planet Earth.  As such, the environment must be unlike Earth 
> > and no humans could possibly live there.  I would venture to guess that 
> > this viewpoint could only be taken by a space probe.
> >
> 
> Well, maybe no "humans" but why does sentient life have to be human or 
> even be composed of matter visible in our narrow visual range?   I go 
> with the universe behaving more like fractals and as such our species 
> would be replicated throughout the universe along with other intelligent 
> species too.  We can't be so vain to think we're that unique or even 
> that bright.  We seem to be just highly domesticated apes and who did 
> the domestication is a real mystery.  Or maybe an ape ate some matter 
> from an asteroid that contained DNA of an intelligent species and the 
> modification came from that.  I also look up on a living beings 
> including humans to be biological machines just following learned patterns.
>

These are good points.  MMY would certainly agree that there is consciousness 
in every particle of atom throughout the universe and the multiverse.  
Sentience could certainly appear anywhere given the billions of galaxies 
throughout the universe.

Human sentience in primates could have developed as part of the natural process 
of evolution.  However, there are some people, like Michael Cremo, who believe 
that humans devolved from the spirit world into this physical world.

Humans can be considered biological machines.  But you would have to account 
for human consciousness.  Where did it come from?


  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Barriers to Enlightenment

[John]

wgm4u,

My comments are shown below:

1.> > In the Old Testament, the story of Adam and Eve tells us of the 
devolution of the first human beings from unity consciousness to the bondage of 
the gunas.  The main key to their fall was their pride of being equal to the 
Source of the unified field.  Thus, they disobeyed the rule by eating the 
forbidden fruit.
> 
> Actually, involution would perhaps describe it better, they certainly weren't 
> in Unity Consciousness. 

There are many ways to interpret the story of Adam and Eve.  The bible author 
could have meant that the dawning of human awareness or consciousness started 
out at the highest level, namely at unity consciousness.  This is the reason 
why we read in the bible text that Adam and Eve walked with God in the Garden 
of Eden.

This idea doesn't necessarily mean that the theory of evolution is incorrect.  
It's still possible that the human physiology evolved from lesser species.  The 
major change of event is when the first humans acquired awareness or 
consciousness of themselves.

However, there are some people both Christians and others who believe that 
humans did not evolve from the lower species.  They believe that humans 
devolved from the spirit world to the world of the flesh.  Thus, we encounter 
the likes of the Christian Creationists who interpret the bible literally. 


A. Infant humanity was the product of eons of evolution through all the 
kingdoms of nature, mineral, plant and animal. The consciousness that 
evolved/involved through the kingdoms finally arrived at the state where a 
special creation was made (man) by God, with all the potentials possible as 
reflected in man as having all 7 chakras.


I agree somewhat with what you're saying here.  But there is an author by the 
name of Michael Cremo who believes that human beings have been on earth for 
millions of years, perhaps during the time of the dinosaurs.

However, he believes that humans devolved directly from the spirit world.  In 
other words, humans are not related to the lower primates.



> 
B.> The Divine Plan is to evolve man to the point where his 
material/astral/causal physiology can unfold a pure reflection of Being or 
Consciousness, (which is Cosmic Consciousness or what MMY calls Unity 
Consciousness), then man can be said to be truly made "In the Image of God".

I understand your point.  Using the bible story, it is possible to believe that 
this apex of development started out at unity consciousness, which is in the 
"image of God".


C.> The lose-knit allegory of the 'fall' is merely a story encapsulating the 
ingredients of this transformation of nescient (ignorant) man.

Using the bible text, the first humans may not have been as ignorant as you may 
think.  They may have been fully aware of their consciousness and of God the 
Father who walked with them.  That means they lived life in bliss and 
enlightenment, as MMY would describe it.

 
> 
D.> Pride came later; once they were given *free will* they were also told by 
the Almighty, "if you yield to the sex sensations you will 'fall' from the 
Garden of Eden" (Paradise lost), but as Satan (the Luciferian spirits, the 
light givers who 'opened' their eyes) proclaimed, "but ye shall be as Gods". 
Both 'Satan' and 'God' were right and merely stating the facts of the matter! 
(It's just a story!!)

Pride comes along with human awareness, IMO.  It is possible that Adam and Eve 
wanted something more than what God had given them.  They wanted to experience 
evil for themselves.  They were not satisfied with knowing evil by inference 
during their stay in the Garden of Eden.  Thus, they rebelled and ate the 
forbidden fruit.





> 
E.> So Adam and Eve (early man) persevered and became the 'pioneers' who 
ventured forth from their passive nescience (ignorant) state of being to 
fulfill their inner urge to unfold their full potential. It was all part of a 
plan, 'Satan' was merely playing a role.

It's also possible to interpret that after their experience of evil, they fully 
realized that they have voluntarily put their spirit in bondage to the senses 
and matter.  Thus, the bible tells us that they lost their immortal status and 
suffered for the rest of their life here on earth.




>  
2.>  > Along with pride came the desire to indulge in the senses.  Since they 
thought they were gods, then they can get anything they wanted in the 
phenomenal world.  By doing so, they knowingly put their spirit in bondage to 
matter.
> 
> I don't think they had much mind function in those early periods, I think the 
> 'chit' (sensation and feeling) was the first to evolve and mind came later, 
> FWIW.

The point I'm saying is that when the animal physiology and mind became fully 
human, then there was full awareness, but at the same time there was an 
inherent danger of falling into the sin of pride.


> 
> Sources: The Cosmo Conception (Max Heindel) and The Second Coming of Christ 
> (Paramahansa Yogananda).
>

[FairfieldLife] Clint Eastwood with armadillo

[Yifu]

Wouldn't touch that either!

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/59520.jpg

[FairfieldLife] A glass of wine with Caesar Borgia

[Yifu]

I wouldn't touch that wine
by John Collier, 1893

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/59499.jpg

[FairfieldLife] The remains of Cosmonaut Vladimir Komorov

[Yifu]

after the crash of Soyuz 1; 1967

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/59539.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Wreck of the Gratitude

[Yifu]

Macquairie Island, 1911

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/59541.jpg

[FairfieldLife] The Butterfly

[Yifu]

by John Collier

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/59507.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Madonna of Chancellor Rolin

[Yifu]

Jan Van Eyck, 1435; commissioned by Chancellor Nicolas Rolin for a Parish 
Church.

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/1/26.jpg

[FairfieldLife] The Crucifixion

[Yifu]

Jan Van Eyck, 1430

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=735 

[FairfieldLife] The Ghent Altarpiece

[Yifu]

Jan Van Eyck, 1432; featuring Adam, Eve, and "God". ...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Eyck.hubert.lamb.750pix.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bullying

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> >>> 
> 
> >> I checked many definitions of the term when I designed my course
> >> including over a dozen books on the subject.  I am familiar with 
> >> the term in detail and you are misusing it as a way to make Sal 
> >> look bad. It also neuters an important term following your absurd 
> >> assertion that a power differential is not key.
> > 
> > This is just bluster, Curtis. In fact, you're attempting
> > to bully *me*.
> 
> I think Curtis is just elucidating points. "Misusing it
as a way to make Sal look bad" is bullying.

> >>> The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition,
> >>> has this definition:
> >>> 
> >>> "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one
> >>> habitually cruel to others who are weaker."
> >>> 
> >>> "Especially" does not mean "limited to."
> >> 
> >> The definition of browbeating includes "intimidation" because
> >> it also rests on an inequality of power to be 
> >> meaningful.
> > 
> > Are you really trying to claim one person can't intimidate
> > another person unless there's an inequality of power to
> > start with? That's just bizarre. Intimidation can *create*
> > an inequality of power between two people who were peers
> > to start with. And so, of course, can bullying.
> > 
> >> "Especially" means in particular, to help distinguish this
> >> word's meanings from others.  In other words they are
> >> defining the term in terms of its reliance on the other
> >> person being weaker.
> > 
> > Nope, you're wrong, sorry. "Especially" defines a special
> > sense distinguished from the more general sense of the
> > definition that precedes it. "Especially" does not *limit*
> > how the word may be used to that special sense. At least
> > not per Merriam-Webster. It's called a "sense divider."
> 
> 
>   es·pe·cial·ly
> 
>   adverb
> 
>   Used to single out one person, thing, or situation over all others
>   - he despised them all, especially Sylvester
>   - a new song, written especially for Jonathan
> 
>   To a great extent; very much
>   - he didn't especially like dancing
>   - sleep is especially important for growing children
> 
> 
> I think Judy got you there Curtis.

Thanks, but note that it's Merriam-Webster who got him
there. That's how they use the "esp." designation, to
elucidate a particular sense encompassed by a more
general sense. "He despised them all, especially
Sylvester" is the closest example you've given above:
the general followed by the particular. What Curtis is
trying to claim with regard to the "bully" definition
amounts to insisting that the person despised *only*
Sylvester, which is clearly absurd.

The M-W dictionary has extensive explanations in the
front of the book of all the various terms used in its
definitions; this isn't just my interpretation based
on the definition of "especially."

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bullying

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:

> I do not think Curtis talks like a bully normally,

I do not think I said he did. He does not, in fact, talk like
a bully except in the context of a hostile conflict.

> and Judy, I think you tend to use language in a way that
> seems kind of like bullying, in the sense of the New Zealand
> definition, I think you use it to attempt to get power over
> others.

Usually only in response to others' attempts to get power
over me or over somebody else by bullying me/them.

[FairfieldLife] Bullying

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
>>> 

>> I checked many definitions of the term when I designed my course
>> including over a dozen books on the subject.  I am familiar with 
>> the term in detail and you are misusing it as a way to make Sal 
>> look bad. It also neuters an important term following your absurd 
>> assertion that a power differential is not key.
> 
> This is just bluster, Curtis. In fact, you're attempting
> to bully *me*.

I think Curtis is just elucidating points

> 
>>> The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition,
>>> has this definition:
>>> 
>>> "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one
>>> habitually cruel to others who are weaker."
>>> 
>>> "Especially" does not mean "limited to."
>> 
>> The definition of browbeating includes "intimidation" because
>> it also rests on an inequality of power to be 
>> meaningful.
> 
> Are you really trying to claim one person can't intimidate
> another person unless there's an inequality of power to
> start with? That's just bizarre. Intimidation can *create*
> an inequality of power between two people who were peers
> to start with. And so, of course, can bullying.
> 
>> "Especially" means in particular, to help distinguish this
>> word's meanings from others.  In other words they are
>> defining the term in terms of its reliance on the other
>> person being weaker.
> 
> Nope, you're wrong, sorry. "Especially" defines a special
> sense distinguished from the more general sense of the
> definition that precedes it. "Especially" does not *limit*
> how the word may be used to that special sense. At least
> not per Merriam-Webster. It's called a "sense divider."


  es·pe·cial·ly

  adverb

  Used to single out one person, thing, or situation over all others
  - he despised them all, especially Sylvester
  - a new song, written especially for Jonathan

  To a great extent; very much
  - he didn't especially like dancing
  - sleep is especially important for growing children


I think Judy got you there Curtis.



I got this definition of 'bullying' from a New Zealand website:

"Bullying is when someone keeps doing or saying things to have power over 
another person. Some of the ways they bully other people are by: calling them 
names, saying or writing nasty things about them, leaving them out of 
activities, not talking to them, threatening them, making them feel 
uncomfortable or scared, taking or damaging their things, hitting or kicking 
them, or making them do things they don't want to do."

Maybe there is a difference in the way girls and women intimidate, and the way 
boys and men intimidate. Whether there is a perceived power differential or 
not, the bully thinks they have the power, that the power differential exists 
and the advantage is on their side. In a person to person situation, this may 
already be established early in childhood. Certain people are known to be 
weaker than others, less agressive than others, and some take advantage of that 
knowledge. A bully is only surprised if their perception of power is in error. 
For example, in male oriented action movies, the protagonist is theatened by 
the antagonist or his henchmen. The protagonist and/or the henchment make their 
move and get creamed, they get their butts kicked by the protagonist. But in a 
school yard etc., this is much less likely, kids kind of know where they are in 
the heirarchy of doom.

Online it is a bit more complicated because the visual, intuitive physical 
clues about power are much less in evidence. A number of online incidents of 
bullying seem to have relied on an actual physical familiarity of the people. 
Now here on FFL, it is less clear, though there are pictures of some of the 
people here. I do not think Curtis talks like a bully normally, and Judy, I 
think you tend to use language in a way that seems kind of like bullying, in 
the sense of the New Zealand definition, I think you use it to attempt to get 
power over others. Your are probably better at this than Curtis could be 
because you know meanings and syntax better. Curtis mispells words from time to 
time.

>> But all this is bluff and bluster parsing on your part.  You
>> know that you were using the term to make Sal look worse than
>> if she was just being sarcastic, you were implying that she
>> was doing something that we all sense is unfair, bullying.
> 
> That would make no sense at all, Curtis, since we all know
> there are no power differentials on FFL.
> 
>> Or would you be comfortable with a claim that Robin's long 
>> criticisms of me were an act of bullying on his part?
> 
> Sure. Not anywhere near as nasty as Sal's bullying, though.
> Or as malicious as 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Barriers to Enlightenment

[wgm4u]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> In the Old Testament, the story of Adam and Eve tells us of the devolution of 
> the first human beings from unity consciousness to the bondage of the gunas.  
> The main key to their fall was their pride of being equal to the Source of 
> the unified field.  Thus, they disobeyed the rule by eating the forbidden 
> fruit.

Actually, involution would perhaps describe it better, they certainly weren't 
in Unity Consciousness. Infant humanity was the product of eons of evolution 
through all the kingdoms of nature, mineral, plant and animal. The 
consciousness that evolved/involved through the kingdoms finally arrived at the 
state where a special creation was made (man) by God, with all the potentials 
possible as reflected in man as having all 7 chakras.

The Divine Plan is to evolve man to the point where his material/astral/causal 
physiology can unfold a pure reflection of Being or Consciousness, (which is 
Cosmic Consciousness or what MMY calls Unity Consciousness), then man can be 
said to be truly made "In the Image of God".

The lose-knit allegory of the 'fall' is merely a story encapsulating the 
ingredients of this transformation of nescient (ignorant) man. 

Pride came later; once they were given *free will* they were also told by the 
Almighty, "if you yield to the sex sensations you will 'fall' from the Garden 
of Eden" (Paradise lost), but as Satan (the Luciferian spirits, the light 
givers who 'opened' their eyes) proclaimed, "but ye shall be as Gods". Both 
'Satan' and 'God' were right and merely stating the facts of the matter! (It's 
just a story!!)

So Adam and Eve (early man) persevered and became the 'pioneers' who ventured 
forth from their passive nescience (ignorant) state of being to fulfill their 
inner urge to unfold their full potential. It was all part of a plan, 'Satan' 
was merely playing a role.
 
 > Along with pride came the desire to indulge in the senses.  Since they 
 > thought they were gods, then they can get anything they wanted in the 
 > phenomenal world.  By doing so, they knowingly put their spirit in bondage 
 > to matter.

I don't think they had much mind function in those early periods, I think the 
'chit' (sensation and feeling) was the first to evolve and mind came later, 
FWIW.

Sources: The Cosmo Conception (Max Heindel) and The Second Coming of Christ 
(Paramahansa Yogananda).

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Feb 18 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Feb 25 00:00:00 2012
374 messages as of (UTC) Thu Feb 23 23:34:25 2012

41 turquoiseb 
37 Yifu 
32 Buck 
31 authfriend 
27 Bhairitu 
22 seventhray1 
17 Emily Reyn 
16 nablusoss1008 
16 "Richard J. Williams" 
14 merudanda 
13 marekreavis 
13 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
12 Vaj 
11 cardemaister 
 9 John 
 8 awoelflebater 
 7 wgm4u 
 7 curtisdeltablues 
 5 raunchydog 
 5 Rick Archer 
 4 merlin 
 3 obbajeeba 
 3 jpgillam 
 3 azgrey 
 3 Susan 
 2 emptybill 
 2 Robert 
 1 wleed3 
 1 hermandan0 
 1 feste37 
 1 wle...@aol.com
 1 Patrick Gillam 
 1 Frank 
 1 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 1 Duveyoung 
 1 Dick Mays 
 1 Carol 
 1 "emilymae.reyn" 

Posters: 38
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 5:34 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

 

  



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 ]
> On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:34 AM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 

> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?
> 
> > > How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> > > credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> > > too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> > > Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> > > 
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM
> 
> Got a lot of LOL moments out of that video.

Shows how serious you are :-)

Not serious in the least. And I like Bill Maher a lot, although I'm no
atheist.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:34 AM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , nablusoss1008 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >> > 
> > > How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> > > credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> > > too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> > > Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> > > 
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM
> 
> Got a lot of LOL moments out of that video.


Shows how serious you are :-)

[FairfieldLife] Almost New Freezer and Washer/Dryer For Sale

[Dick Mays]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Lohrainne Janell 
> Subject: Almost New Freezer and Washer/Dryer For Sale
> Date: February 23, 2012 3:38:39 PM CST
> To: Jack Robins 
> 
> Kenmore Freezer  with shelves – only 2 months old.  New $580.  Selling for 
> $300!  Large upright freezer.
>  
> Maytag Washer and Dryer – only 6 months old.  New $1149.  Selling for $700 
> for both.
>  
> Call my parents, Lottie and Jack Robins, at 641-469-5412.
>  
> They are moving at the end of March to independent living in Iowa City.
>  
> Sincerely,
>  
> Lohrainne K. Janell
> TeleConsulting Services
> 641-472-0099 or 1-800-297-7712
> fax 1-888-426-4009
> lohrai...@telerates.com
> www.telerates.com  
> www.janelljewelry.com
> www.quantumenergeticsiowa.com
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  

[FairfieldLife] Chenrezig

[Yifu]

http://blog.dwbuk.org/diamond-way-teachings/chenrezig-the-embodiment-of-the-sangha/

[FairfieldLife] Guanyin Mountain

[Yifu]

Dungguan, China

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Dongguan_Guanyinshan.jpg

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[Bhairitu]

On 02/23/2012 01:19 PM, John wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros 
> Anartaxius"  wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
>> anartaxius@ wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
 Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be
>> the significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the
>> floor. They are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room
>> they look like they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they
>> are far, far apart.
>>
>>
>>> This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different
>> perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the
>> Moon of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by
>> the Moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be
>> affected by the presence of the planet Earth.
>>
>> Current position (23 February 2012) of the planets, from a different
>> point of view. Constellation names included.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The fuzzy spot to the right of the sun is the Large Magellanic Cloud,
>> and the bright spot below the cloud is the Tarantula Nebula. Suppose
>> someone is born at this time at this viewing location. What is their
>> future?
>
>
> With an alignment of planets like that, the location of the viewer must be 
> outside the planet Earth.  As such, the environment must be unlike Earth and 
> no humans could possibly live there.  I would venture to guess that this 
> viewpoint could only be taken by a space probe.
>

Well, maybe no "humans" but why does sentient life have to be human or 
even be composed of matter visible in our narrow visual range?   I go 
with the universe behaving more like fractals and as such our species 
would be replicated throughout the universe along with other intelligent 
species too.  We can't be so vain to think we're that unique or even 
that bright.  We seem to be just highly domesticated apes and who did 
the domestication is a real mystery.  Or maybe an ape ate some matter 
from an asteroid that contained DNA of an intelligent species and the 
modification came from that.  I also look up on a living beings 
including humans to be biological machines just following learned patterns.

[FairfieldLife] Supper at Emmaus

[Yifu]

by Jocobo Pontorno, (1494-1557); 1525:

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/2/16748.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> anartaxius@ wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >>> The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
> >>
> >> Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be
> the significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the
> floor. They are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room
> they look like they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they
> are far, far apart.
> 
> 
> > This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different
> perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the
> Moon of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by
> the Moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be
> affected by the presence of the planet Earth.
> 
> Current position (23 February 2012) of the planets, from a different
> point of view. Constellation names included.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fuzzy spot to the right of the sun is the Large Magellanic Cloud,
> and the bright spot below the cloud is the Tarantula Nebula. Suppose
> someone is born at this time at this viewing location. What is their
> future?



With an alignment of planets like that, the location of the viewer must be 
outside the planet Earth.  As such, the environment must be unlike Earth and no 
humans could possibly live there.  I would venture to guess that this viewpoint 
could only be taken by a space probe.








> 
> >> Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in
> a double star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you
> are on the outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky.
> All the stars and planets are completely different than on Earth. How
> would you create a system of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth
> the trouble?
> 
> 
> > In speculating, I would think that life would be drastically different
> when you're located in another galaxy, star system and planet.  If the
> system can sustain human life, then the environment must be similar to
> that of earth.  That means the planet must have similar ingredients as
> the earth and it must be located in a habitable zone from the host star.
> Otherwise, humans cannot live there.
> 
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>  On 02/22/2012 03:01 AM, merlin wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8br4JiFEik
> 
>  One of the things I neglected to mention about "Another Earth" was
> the
>  poetic license they took about the idea of a planet as large as
> earth
>  that close to us.  A planet of that mass would have played all
> kinds of
>  havoc with our environment and they would be too busy dealing with
> that
> >>> than to try to communicate (same for the inhabitants of the other
>  planet).  I'm wondering how much this alignment might mess with the
>  perturbations of Earth and the Moon orbits though it has probably
> been
>  factored into any planetary calculations.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of turquoiseb
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:34 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

 

  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , nablusoss1008 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , turquoiseb  wrote:
> >> > 
> > How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> > credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> > too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> > Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM

Got a lot of LOL moments out of that video.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
> > > 
> > > Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be the 
> > > significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the floor. 
> > > They are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room they look 
> > > like they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they are far, 
> > > far apart.
> > 
> > This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different 
> > perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the 
> > Moon of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by 
> > the Moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be 
> > affected by the presence of the planet Earth.
> > > 
> > > Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in a 
> > > double star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you are 
> > > on the outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky. All 
> > > the stars and planets are completely different than on Earth. How would 
> > > you create a system of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth the 
> > > trouble?
> > 
> > In speculating, I would think that life would be drastically different when 
> > you're located in another galaxy, star system and planet.  If the system 
> > can sustain human life, then the environment must be similar to that of 
> > earth.  That means the planet must have similar ingredients as the earth 
> > and it must be located in a habitable zone from the host star.  Otherwise, 
> > humans cannot live there.
> 
> I'd venture a guess that any civilization of sentient
> beings, assuming their planet had a night and that they
> were able to see the night sky clearly, would in its
> early stages develop a system of astrology.
>

This idea would be about right.  If they had different planets nearby, those 
would be affecting their brains and physiology in different ways.  As such, 
they would have different significators for their emotional and physical traits.

[FairfieldLife] Who leads on mobile Internet traffic??

[cardemaister]

http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/02/21/nokia-leads-on-mobile-internet-traffic/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > >
> > > The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
> > 
> > Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be the 
> > significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the floor. They 
> > are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room they look like 
> > they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they are far, far 
> > apart.
> 
> This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different 
> perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the Moon 
> of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by the Moons 
> of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be affected by 
> the presence of the planet Earth.
> > 
> > Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in a 
> > double star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you are 
> > on the outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky. All the 
> > stars and planets are completely different than on Earth. How would you 
> > create a system of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth the trouble?
> 
> In speculating, I would think that life would be drastically different when 
> you're located in another galaxy, star system and planet.  If the system can 
> sustain human life, then the environment must be similar to that of earth.  
> That means the planet must have similar ingredients as the earth and it must 
> be located in a habitable zone from the host star.  Otherwise, humans cannot 
> live there.

I'd venture a guess that any civilization of sentient
beings, assuming their planet had a night and that they
were able to see the night sky clearly, would in its
early stages develop a system of astrology.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Dome Numbers

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Just as commentary, compare this post:
> 
> > Sal, IMHO, is a bully, an exceptionally nasty one, and a
> > dishonest one at that (as you yourself have reason to know,
> > Steve). If she couldn't deal with getting a taste of her
> > own medicine from me, maybe she'll have learned something
> > from that. Hopefully her hypothetical therapist will help
> > her recognize it's not OK for her to gratuitously take out
> > her own private hurts, whatever they may be, on other
> > people.
> 
> to a post made by the same FFL member, less than a 
> month ago in post #302968:
> 
> > I wouldn't be in favor of legislating it, but IMHO FFL
> > would be a better, more enjoyable place, and its
> > discussions more interesting and productive, if we all
> > would refrain from personal attacks against each other,
> > if we could express our disagreements without being
> > disagreeable, in Obama's phrase.
> > Wouldn't hurt if we all made an effort to be as truthful
> > as we possibly can, either.
> 
> Which poster was "right," and which "wrong?"

Wait, you said it was the same poster. Opsie!

 The debate
> should prove interesting, because after all:

No debate involved between those two posts, sorry. Maybe
you should read them both again, along with the context.
If there are any words you don't understand, let me know.



 
> > Yes, I usually double down when I'm right and someone
> > maliciously tries to pretend otherwise.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Dome Numbers

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > 
> > > > > Middle School last week after presenting the school with
> > > > > an assembly concerning bullying and creating a culture of
> > > > > respect in a school.  She told me that because of the
> > > > > focus on bullying today, students are misusing the term,
> > > > > as you have here,
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know whether students are "misusing the term," but
> > > > I wasn't. Check Mr. Dictionary, please.
> > > > 
> > > > I suspect the principal has adopted the "power differential"
> > > > sense of the term because it serves her purposes in educating
> > > > the children.
> > > 
> > > No, it is a part of all the definitions I read, Websters'
> > > for example.  Do you think we can't look things up too?
> > 
> > I can't decide whether this is a tactic--pretending that I
> > didn't just get done saying "Check Mr. Dictionary, please"
> > five lines above and hoping nobody else will notice--or
> > whether you're losing the ability to keep track of what
> > you read.

(Curtis avoids copping to his goof, as usual.)
 
> I checked many definitions of the term when I designed my course
> including over a dozen books on the subject.  I am familiar with 
> the term in detail and you are misusing it as a way to make Sal 
> look bad. It also neuters an important term following your absurd 
> assertion that a power differential is not key.

This is just bluster, Curtis. In fact, you're attempting
to bully *me*.


> > The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition,
> > has this definition:
> > 
> > "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one
> > habitually cruel to others who are weaker."
> > 
> > "Especially" does not mean "limited to."
> 
> The definition of browbeating includes "intimidation" because
> it also rests on an inequality of power to be 
> meaningful.

Are you really trying to claim one person can't intimidate
another person unless there's an inequality of power to
start with? That's just bizarre. Intimidation can *create*
an inequality of power between two people who were peers
to start with. And so, of course, can bullying.

> "Especially" means in particular, to help distinguish this
> word's meanings from others.  In other words they are
> defining the term in terms of its reliance on the other
> person being weaker.

Nope, you're wrong, sorry. "Especially" defines a special
sense distinguished from the more general sense of the
definition that precedes it. "Especially" does not *limit*
how the word may be used to that special sense. At least
not per Merriam-Webster. It's called a "sense divider."

> But all this is bluff and bluster parsing on your part.  You
> know that you were using the term to make Sal look worse than
> if she was just being sarcastic, you were implying that she
> was doing something that we all sense is unfair, bullying.

That would make no sense at all, Curtis, since we all know
there are no power differentials on FFL.

> Or would you be comfortable with a claim that Robin's long 
> criticisms of me were an act of bullying on his part?

Sure. Not anywhere near as nasty as Sal's bullying, though.
Or as malicious as your bullying of him with regard to the
"open letter." Or your collusion with Barry to bully him
about not giving you a Reader's Digest version of his
five-parter.

> Do you bully Barry in your long castigation exercises here?

Sure. Just as he bullies me in his long castigation exercises
here.

> The meaningfulness of the term relies on the unequal nature
> of the relationship and therefore Sal never bullied anyone
> here, you never bullied anyone here, because we are all equal
> and cannot bully each other here.

Curtis Has Spoken. Thus Must It Be, because Curtis will not
permit any context but his own, no matter how valid another
context is.

> > The verb "to bully" is defined thus:
> > 
> > "1: to treat abusively; 2: to affect by means of force
> > or coercion; intransitive verb: to use browbeating
> > language or behavior: BLUSTER"

So I guess if I said "Sal bullies people," Curtis would
have trouble finding a way to object. That's why Curtis
carefully ignored the definition of the verb, which does
not include anything about a power differential.


> > Of course the "power differential" notion is *part of*
> > most definitions, but it's usually in the "especially"
> > sense, i.e., the term "bully" does not *require* that
> > a power differential exist.
> 
> Just if you want the term to be meaningfully distinguished
> from other concepts. If you are arguing that blibbity blab
> is the same as blibbity blimp then you have left a rational 
> discussion.

Empty and lame, Curtis. No such distinction is necessary,
*unless you want to convey a power differential* as distinct
from bullying that does *not* involve a power differentia

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
anartaxius@ wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>>> The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
>>
>> Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be
the significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the
floor. They are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room
they look like they are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they
are far, far apart.


> This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different
perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the
Moon of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by
the Moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be
affected by the presence of the planet Earth.

Current position (23 February 2012) of the planets, from a different
point of view. Constellation names included.




The fuzzy spot to the right of the sun is the Large Magellanic Cloud,
and the bright spot below the cloud is the Tarantula Nebula. Suppose
someone is born at this time at this viewing location. What is their
future?

>> Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in
a double star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you
are on the outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky.
All the stars and planets are completely different than on Earth. How
would you create a system of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth
the trouble?


> In speculating, I would think that life would be drastically different
when you're located in another galaxy, star system and planet.  If the
system can sustain human life, then the environment must be similar to
that of earth.  That means the planet must have similar ingredients as
the earth and it must be located in a habitable zone from the host star.
Otherwise, humans cannot live there.

>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
 On 02/22/2012 03:01 AM, merlin wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8br4JiFEik

 One of the things I neglected to mention about "Another Earth" was
the
 poetic license they took about the idea of a planet as large as
earth
 that close to us.  A planet of that mass would have played all
kinds of
 havoc with our environment and they would be too busy dealing with
that
>>> than to try to communicate (same for the inhabitants of the other
 planet).  I'm wondering how much this alignment might mess with the
 perturbations of Earth and the Moon orbits though it has probably
been
 factored into any planetary calculations.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Watching this video from "UFO Phil," the former alien
> > > > > abductee who says he'll assume the Presidency of the
> > > > > US (and the Earth) without a single vote, I found 
> > > > > myself wondering if "Phil" were our own Nabby. Watch
> > > > > the video and decide for yourself.
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/ufo-phil-for-president_n_1289440.html
> > > > 
> > > > I'm disapointed. The text seemed promising. Particularily the 
> > > > idea of building a gigantic pyramid behind the Hollywood sign 
> > > > and replacing the Statue of Liberty with a Monument of Zaxon. 
> > > > The video revealed a phony :-(
> > > 
> > > How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> > > credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> > > too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> > > Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> > > 
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM
> > 
> > Like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme has been from time to time 
> > exposed to idiots. And like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme shows 
> > an astonishing patience with meeting yet another moron. 
> > 
> > This Maher fellow is probably a socalled Buddhist, which 
> > makes his performance seem even worse.
> 
> Actually, it's even worse than that, Nabs. Bill Maher 
> is an atheist. 
> 
> If you're unclear on the difference, neither atheists
> nor Buddhists believe in a God, but atheists eat babies
> and small children whereas we Buddhists merely spirit
> them away to monasteries, shave their heads, and teach
> them to persecute TMers.

Wow, I missed this memo.  Any hints on preparation?  Due to the fat content I 
think wrapping them in  bacon would be overkill, but a nice poaching at a low 
temp might be nice covered with thinly sliced lemons and perhaps studded with 
cloves.  Or with the right marinade they might be good in a smoker like pulled 
pork.  I suspect low and slow would be the way to go whatever technique was 
used, due to the assumed delicacy of the flesh.  

One last thing, at what age do they toughen up?  There is such a temptation to 
get a bargain for an older child when having a big atheist blowout, but you 
would hate your guests to complain afterwards that you had gone cheapo on the 
event with off brand generic cheese doodles and a child past its culinary prime.









>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Barriers to Enlightenment

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> In the Old Testament, the story of Adam and Eve tells us 
> of the devolution of the first human beings from unity 
> consciousness to the bondage of the gunas.  The main key 
> to their fall was their pride of being equal to the Source 
> of the unified field.  Thus, they disobeyed the rule by 
> eating the forbidden fruit.
> 
> Along with pride came the desire to indulge in the senses.  
> Since they thought they were gods, then they can get anything 
> they wanted in the phenomenal world.  By doing so, they 
> knowingly put their spirit in bondage to matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDZFf0pm0SE

[FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >
> > The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
> 
> Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be the 
> significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the floor. They 
> are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room they look like they 
> are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they are far, far apart.


This is a good question.  I believe the planets would have different 
perspectives and effects when on Mars.  From Mars, you would not see the Moon 
of Earth on the horizon.  Instead, you would see and be affected by the Moons 
of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.  In addition, you would see and be affected by the 
presence of the planet Earth.


> 
> Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in a double 
> star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you are on the 
> outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky. All the stars and 
> planets are completely different than on Earth. How would you create a system 
> of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth the trouble?

In speculating, I would think that life would be drastically different when 
you're located in another galaxy, star system and planet.  If the system can 
sustain human life, then the environment must be similar to that of earth.  
That means the planet must have similar ingredients as the earth and it must be 
located in a habitable zone from the host star.  Otherwise, humans cannot live 
there.












> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> 
> >> On 02/22/2012 03:01 AM, merlin wrote:
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8br4JiFEik
> 
> >> One of the things I neglected to mention about "Another Earth" was the 
> >> poetic license they took about the idea of a planet as large as earth 
> >> that close to us.  A planet of that mass would have played all kinds of 
> >> havoc with our environment and they would be too busy dealing with that 
> >> than to try to communicate (same for the inhabitants of the other 
> >> planet).  I'm wondering how much this alignment might mess with the 
> >> perturbations of Earth and the Moon orbits though it has probably been 
> >> factored into any planetary calculations.
> >>
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Alignment of Planets

[Bhairitu]

On 02/22/2012 07:18 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>> The Moon is now in conjunction with Mercury and the Sun in Aquarius.
> Suppose you were *on* Mars. What would it look like and what would be the 
> significance from that viewpoint? I spilled two Cheerios on the floor. They 
> are lying there eight inches apart. From across the room they look like they 
> are in conjunction, but to an ant between them, they are far, far apart.
>
> Suppose you were transported to another galaxy, to another planet in a double 
> star system with four planets around one of the stars, and you are on the 
> outer one. You woke up there at dusk and looked at the sky. All the stars and 
> planets are completely different than on Earth. How would you create a system 
> of astrolgy from this? Would it even be worth the trouble?

It is possible the ancients were using the planets as time keepers for 
macro cycles in nature and society.  Some of these cycles come close to 
the timing of planetary returns.  The Sun and Moon however obviously do 
exact influence on our environment and even human behavior.  On another 
planet one would have to chronicle such effects and develop a new system 
but if you already understand macro cycle effects it might not be 
necessary.  But then on another planet the macro cycles might even be 
different.  They might be just a harmonic of the effects of the planet's 
"Sun" and any moons.

If you run two planetary calculation engines (this is astronomy not 
astrology), one where perturbations are calculated and the other without 
you'll find that dates where conjunctions occur to be the most off in 
position for the set that perturbation terms are not applied.


>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>>> On 02/22/2012 03:01 AM, merlin wrote:
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8br4JiFEik
>>> One of the things I neglected to mention about "Another Earth" was the
>>> poetic license they took about the idea of a planet as large as earth
>>> that close to us.  A planet of that mass would have played all kinds of
>>> havoc with our environment and they would be too busy dealing with that
>>> than to try to communicate (same for the inhabitants of the other
>>> planet).  I'm wondering how much this alignment might mess with the
>>> perturbations of Earth and the Moon orbits though it has probably been
>>> factored into any planetary calculations.
>>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Your Uplifting Thought Of The Day

[turquoiseb]

Courtesy of There's One Reborn Every Minute, Inc.
Today's Uplifting Thought Of The Day Is:

"I could have been born in Germany, or in Zimbabwe."

http://digg.com/newsbar/Worldnews/giant_chunks_of_frozen_shit_and_urine_falling_from_planes_in_germany

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/crocodile-bites-off-testicles_n_1290647.html

:-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Heaven continues to entertain

[Bhairitu]

On 02/23/2012 07:22 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda  wrote:
>> another  heavenly TYROL MMY loved already since the mid 60s
>> A Magic Day in Tyrol (by Georg Riha)
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5ds0p0iDS8
> Nice find. One thing you can say for the Swiss and
> Austrian Alps...it's one of the few places on Earth
> where the landscape looks better than the postcards
> of it.
>
> As for Maharishi liking the terrain, as I watched the
> film I could not help but notice how similar some of
> the Tyrol terrain was to the Himalayas. I've seen a
> number of films and clips of that area lately, and
> as postcard landscapes go, its would probably be
> better even than those in Tyrol gift shops.
>
> Made me wonder if part of Maharishi still longed for
> the terrain of the place he was sent to meditate
> after Guru Dev died. If he thought, from time to
> time, "What would my life have been like if I'd stayed
> there? What would have happened if I had taken the
> Red Pill instead of the Blue Pill?"

One thing I noticed with a lot of Bollywood films is they don't shoot 
mountain scenes in the Himalayas but travel to Switzerland and shoot 
there.  Never understood why.  Maybe they just couldn't find the chalets 
they wanted in the Himalayas.

>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1E2EwKTBJE&feature=youtu.be
>>>
>>> What you see is what you get.
>>>
>>> Edg
>>>
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[Bhairitu]

Actually the US is actually exporting oil so why would I want to move to 
Nigeria or Venezuela though the latter might suit my tastes in climates 
and politics. ;-)

Oil being such an important resource should have never been left to 
capitalist sociopaths to game and control.  As you well know they kept 
the US from building good mass transit just so they could line their own 
pockets.  They've run their businesses like drug dealers.

On 02/23/2012 04:16 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> Don't complain. Consider moving to Nigeria or Venezuela.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/
> 
>
> Now you see why over 50% of all commutes in the Netherlands
> are via bicycle. To give them some credit, most of the high price
> for gas in Holland goes to taxes, which pay for the infrastructure
> and social services.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> I know it's higher elsewhere but this is a refinery town and when I
>> filled up the other day it was only $3.89.  Yesterday the same station
>> showed $4.09 for unleaded.  Now it is a little hard to discuss gas
>> prices because some will brag of lower prices in states that don't
> have
>> a lot of highways to pay for or pay for them otherwise (toll roads,
>> yuk!).  He have higher gas taxes here and we get mad because those
> taxes
>> were supposed to go only for highway building but the dumb ass
> assembly
>> used those funds elsewhere.  We even passed a proposition saying those
>> taxes could only be use for roads.
>>
>> But the important thing to remember is that the oil companies don't
> need
>> more money.  They are robber barons and robbing YOU!  Time to rise up,
>> seize those companies and nationalize them.  The Koch monsters are
> rich
>> enough!
>>
>

[FairfieldLife] Barriers to Enlightenment

[John]

In the Old Testament, the story of Adam and Eve tells us of the devolution of 
the first human beings from unity consciousness to the bondage of the gunas.  
The main key to their fall was their pride of being equal to the Source of the 
unified field.  Thus, they disobeyed the rule by eating the forbidden fruit.

Along with pride came the desire to indulge in the senses.  Since they thought 
they were gods, then they can get anything they wanted in the phenomenal world. 
 By doing so, they knowingly put their spirit in bondage to matter.   

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Dome Numbers

[turquoiseb]

Just as commentary, compare this post:

> Sal, IMHO, is a bully, an exceptionally nasty one, and a
> dishonest one at that (as you yourself have reason to know,
> Steve). If she couldn't deal with getting a taste of her
> own medicine from me, maybe she'll have learned something
> from that. Hopefully her hypothetical therapist will help
> her recognize it's not OK for her to gratuitously take out
> her own private hurts, whatever they may be, on other
> people.

to a post made by the same FFL member, less than a 
month ago in post #302968:

> I wouldn't be in favor of legislating it, but IMHO FFL
> would be a better, more enjoyable place, and its
> discussions more interesting and productive, if we all
> would refrain from personal attacks against each other,
> if we could express our disagreements without being
> disagreeable, in Obama's phrase.
> Wouldn't hurt if we all made an effort to be as truthful
> as we possibly can, either.

Which poster was "right," and which "wrong?" The debate
should prove interesting, because after all:

> Yes, I usually double down when I'm right and someone
> maliciously tries to pretend otherwise.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > 
> > > > > Middle School last week after presenting the school with
> > > > > an assembly concerning bullying and creating a culture of
> > > > > respect in a school.  She told me that because of the
> > > > > focus on bullying today, students are misusing the term,
> > > > > as you have here,
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know whether students are "misusing the term," but
> > > > I wasn't. Check Mr. Dictionary, please.
> > > > 
> > > > I suspect the principal has adopted the "power differential"
> > > > sense of the term because it serves her purposes in educating
> > > > the children.
> > > 
> > > No, it is a part of all the definitions I read, Websters'
> > > for example.  Do you think we can't look things up too?
> > 
> > I can't decide whether this is a tactic--pretending that I
> > didn't just get done saying "Check Mr. Dictionary, please"
> > five lines above and hoping nobody else will notice--or
> > whether you're losing the ability to keep track of what
> > you read.
> 
> I checked many definitions of the term when I designed my course including 
> over a dozen books on the subject.  I am familiar with the term in detail and 
> you are misusing it as a way to make Sal look bad. It also neuters an 
> important term following your absurd assertion that a power differential is 
> not key.
> 
> > 
> > "Webster's," by the way, has long since become a generic
> > term; any publisher can use it for their dictionary. It
> > no longer carries any special authority.
> > 
> > The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition,
> > has this definition:
> > 
> > "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one
> > habitually cruel to others who are weaker."
> > 
> > "Especially" does not mean "limited to."
> 
> The definition of browbeating includes "intimidation" because it also rests 
> on an inequality of power to be meaningful. "Especially" means in particular, 
> to help distinguish this word's meanings from others.  In other words they 
> are defining the term in terms of its reliance on the other person being 
> weaker.
> 
> But all this is bluff and bluster parsing on your part.  You know that you 
> were using the term to make Sal look worse than if she was just being 
> sarcastic, you were implying that she was doing something that we all sense 
> is unfair, bullying.  Or would you be comfortable with a claim that Robin's 
> long criticisms of me were an act of bullying on his part?  Do you bully 
> Barry in your long castigation exercises here?
> 
> The meaningfulness of the term relies on the unequal nature of the 
> relationship and therefore Sal never bullied anyone here, you never bullied 
> anyone here, because we are all equal and cannot bully each other here.
> 
> 
> > 
> > The verb "to bully" is defined thus:
> > 
> > "1: to treat abusively; 2: to affect by means of force
> > or coercion; intransitive verb: to use browbeating
> > language or behavior: BLUSTER"
> > 
> > -
> > * To save you time and embarrassment, I'll point out
> > that "Collegiate" in the title does not mean "dumbed
> > down." The M-W Collegiate is the one used by most book
> > publishers and is considered among the most authoritative.
> 
> I am familiar.
> 
> 
> > -
> > 
> > Of course the "power differential" notion is *part of*
> > most definitions, but it's usually in the "especially"
> > sense, i.e., the term "bully" does not *require* that
> > a power differential exist.
> 
> 
> Just if you want the term to be mean

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Dome Numbers

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> 
> > > > Middle School last week after presenting the school with
> > > > an assembly concerning bullying and creating a culture of
> > > > respect in a school.  She told me that because of the
> > > > focus on bullying today, students are misusing the term,
> > > > as you have here,
> > > 
> > > I don't know whether students are "misusing the term," but
> > > I wasn't. Check Mr. Dictionary, please.
> > > 
> > > I suspect the principal has adopted the "power differential"
> > > sense of the term because it serves her purposes in educating
> > > the children.
> > 
> > No, it is a part of all the definitions I read, Websters'
> > for example.  Do you think we can't look things up too?
> 
> I can't decide whether this is a tactic--pretending that I
> didn't just get done saying "Check Mr. Dictionary, please"
> five lines above and hoping nobody else will notice--or
> whether you're losing the ability to keep track of what
> you read.

I checked many definitions of the term when I designed my course including over 
a dozen books on the subject.  I am familiar with the term in detail and you 
are misusing it as a way to make Sal look bad. It also neuters an important 
term following your absurd assertion that a power differential is not key.

> 
> "Webster's," by the way, has long since become a generic
> term; any publisher can use it for their dictionary. It
> no longer carries any special authority.
> 
> The Merriam Webster Collegiate* Dictionary, 11th edition,
> has this definition:
> 
> "a blustering browbeating person; especially: one
> habitually cruel to others who are weaker."
> 
> "Especially" does not mean "limited to."

The definition of browbeating includes "intimidation" because it also rests on 
an inequality of power to be meaningful. "Especially" means in particular, to 
help distinguish this word's meanings from others.  In other words they are 
defining the term in terms of its reliance on the other person being weaker.

But all this is bluff and bluster parsing on your part.  You know that you were 
using the term to make Sal look worse than if she was just being sarcastic, you 
were implying that she was doing something that we all sense is unfair, 
bullying.  Or would you be comfortable with a claim that Robin's long 
criticisms of me were an act of bullying on his part?  Do you bully Barry in 
your long castigation exercises here?

The meaningfulness of the term relies on the unequal nature of the relationship 
and therefore Sal never bullied anyone here, you never bullied anyone here, 
because we are all equal and cannot bully each other here.


> 
> The verb "to bully" is defined thus:
> 
> "1: to treat abusively; 2: to affect by means of force
> or coercion; intransitive verb: to use browbeating
> language or behavior: BLUSTER"
> 
> -
> * To save you time and embarrassment, I'll point out
> that "Collegiate" in the title does not mean "dumbed
> down." The M-W Collegiate is the one used by most book
> publishers and is considered among the most authoritative.

I am familiar.


> -
> 
> Of course the "power differential" notion is *part of*
> most definitions, but it's usually in the "especially"
> sense, i.e., the term "bully" does not *require* that
> a power differential exist.


Just if you want the term to be meaningfully distinguished from other concepts. 
If you are arguing that blibbity blab is the same as blibbity blimp then you 
have left a rational discussion.  The word has a meaning and you purposefully 
misapplied it to make her look worse.  Now your dancing is getting comical and  
I appreciate that.

> 
> > But more importantly, there is a whole body of knowledge about
> > bullying behavior that I am referencing.  There is no use of
> > the term in a social situations that doesn't include this
> > important piece.  You  know this, which is why you chose the
> > term as adding more inappropriate drama to your charge.
> 
> Well, actually, I know to the contrary. And "inappropriate
> drama" is not the best way to make one's case, so it's not
> an approach I'd be likely to take.


Nice dodge of the whole body of knowledge about bullying that goes beyond the 
words of the definition to make sure people don't misunderstand its meaning and 
misuse it as you have.

And yes, the drama of the word was inappropriate because it is inaccurate and 
misleading. Sal never bullied anyone here.

> 
> 
> > > > What you are mischaracterizing as bullying is your judgement
> > > > that Sal was being unfriendly to others maybe.
> > > 
> > > No, I meant "bullying" in the more general sense of the term.
> > 
> > All the definitions I have read contain the power differential
> > as a part of what defines it as b

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Watching this video from "UFO Phil," the former alien
> > > > abductee who says he'll assume the Presidency of the
> > > > US (and the Earth) without a single vote, I found 
> > > > myself wondering if "Phil" were our own Nabby. Watch
> > > > the video and decide for yourself.
> > > > 
> > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/ufo-phil-for-president_n_1289440.html
> > > 
> > > I'm disapointed. The text seemed promising. Particularily the 
> > > idea of building a gigantic pyramid behind the Hollywood sign 
> > > and replacing the Statue of Liberty with a Monument of Zaxon. 
> > > The video revealed a phony :-(
> > 
> > How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> > credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> > too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> > Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM
> 
> Like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme has been from time to time 
> exposed to idiots. And like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme shows 
> an astonishing patience with meeting yet another moron. 
> 
> This Maher fellow is probably a socalled Buddhist, which 
> makes his performance seem even worse.

Actually, it's even worse than that, Nabs. Bill Maher 
is an atheist. 

If you're unclear on the difference, neither atheists
nor Buddhists believe in a God, but atheists eat babies
and small children whereas we Buddhists merely spirit
them away to monasteries, shave their heads, and teach
them to persecute TMers. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > Watching this video from "UFO Phil," the former alien
> > > abductee who says he'll assume the Presidency of the
> > > US (and the Earth) without a single vote, I found 
> > > myself wondering if "Phil" were our own Nabby. Watch
> > > the video and decide for yourself.
> > > 
> > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/ufo-phil-for-president_n_1289440.html
> > 
> > I'm disapointed. The text seemed promising. Particularily the 
> > idea of building a gigantic pyramid behind the Hollywood sign 
> > and replacing the Statue of Liberty with a Monument of Zaxon. 
> > The video revealed a phony :-(
> 
> How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
> credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
> too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
> Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.
> 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM



Like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme has been from time to time exposed to idiots. 
And like Maharishi, Benjamin Creme shows an astonishing patience with meeting 
yet another moron. 

This Maher fellow is probably a socalled Buddhist, which makes his performance 
seem even worse.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > Now you see why over 50% of all commutes
> > > in the Netherlands are via bicycle...
> > >
> > That sounds like a lot of fun...
> >
turquoiseb:
> Actually, it is. Riding a bike in the snow is 
> an adventure.
> 
Me and Rita can't wait to get over there for a 
visit, but it will probably be in the summertime.

> But I'm uncharacteristically replying to one of your 
> posts, Richard, because you happened to pick a photograph 
> of a street near where I used to live in Amsterdam. We 
> (me and a few other Rama students) rented a nice apartment 
> there and taught meditation from it.
> 
>     >

[FairfieldLife] Why Even Educated Conservatives Deny Science -- and Reality

[Rick Archer]

The Republican Brain: Why Even Educated Conservatives Deny Science -- and
Reality

New research shows that conservatives who consider themselves well-informed
and educated are also deeper in denial about issues like global warming. 

February 22, 2012 | 

Bottom of Form

This essay is adapted from Chris Mooney’s forthcoming book, The Republican
Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science
 —and Reality, due out in April from Wiley.

I can still remember when I first realized how naïve I was in
thinking—hoping—that laying out the “facts” would suffice to change
politicized minds, and especially Republican ones. It was a typically
wonkish, liberal revelation: One based on statistics and data. Only this
time, the data were showing, rather awkwardly, that people ignore data and
evidence—and often, knowledge and education only make the problem worse.

Someone had sent me a 2008 Pew report
  documenting the intense partisan divide in the U.S. over the
reality of global warming.. It’s a divide that, maddeningly for scientists,
has shown a paradoxical tendency to widen even as the basic facts about
global warming have become more firmly established.

Those facts are these: Humans, since the industrial revolution, have been
burning more and more fossil fuels to power their societies, and this has
led to a steady accumulation of greenhouse gases, and especially carbon
dioxide, in the atmosphere. At this point, very simple physics takes over,
and you are pretty much doomed, by what scientists refer to as the
“radiative” properties of carbon dioxide molecules (which trap infrared heat
radiation that would otherwise escape to space), to have a warming planet.
Since about 1995, scientists have not only confirmed that this warming is
taking place, but have also grown confident that it has, like the gun in a
murder mystery, our fingerprint on it. Natural fluctuations, although they
exist, can’t explain what we’re seeing. The only reasonable verdict is that
humans did it, in the atmosphere, with their cars and their smokestacks.

Such is what is known to science--what is true (no matter what Rick Santorum
might say). But the Pew data showed that humans aren’t as predictable as
carbon dioxide molecules. Despite a growing scientific consensus about
global warming, as of 2008 Democrats and Republicans had cleaved over the
facts stated above, like a divorcing couple. One side bought into them, one
side didn’t—and if anything, knowledge and intelligence seemed to be
worsening matters.

Buried in the Pew report was a little chart showing the relationship between
one’s political party affiliation, one’s acceptance that humans are causing
global warming, and one’s level of education. And here’s the mind-blowing
surprise: For Republicans, having a college degree didn’t appear to make one
any more open to what scientists have to say. On the contrary,
better-educated Republicans were more skeptical of modern climate science
than their less educated brethren. Only 19 percent of college-educated
Republicans agreed that the planet is warming due to human actions, versus
31 percent of non-college-educated Republicans.

For Democrats and Independents, the opposite was the case. More education
correlated with being more accepting of climate science—among Democrats,
dramatically so. The difference in acceptance between more and less educated
Democrats was 23 percentage points.

This was my first encounter with what I now like to call the “smart idiots”
effect: The fact that politically sophisticated or knowledgeable people are
often more biased, and less persuadable, than the ignorant. It’s a reality
that generates endless frustration for many scientists—and indeed, for many
well-educated, reasonable people.

And most of all, for many liberals.

Let’s face it: We liberals and progressives are absolutely outraged by
partisan misinformation. Lies about “death panels.” People seriously
thinking that President Obama is a Muslim, not born in the United States.
Climate-change denial. Debt ceiling denial. These things drive us crazy, in
large part because we can’t comprehend how such intellectual abominations
could possibly exist.

And not only are we enraged by lies and misinformation; we want to refute
them—to argue, argue, argue about why we’re right and Republicans are wrong.
Indeed, we often act as though right-wing misinformation’s defeat is nigh,
if we could only make people wiser and more educated (just like us) and get
them the medicine that is correct information.

No less than President Obama’s science adviser John Holdren (a man whom I
greatly admire, but disagree with in this instance) has stated, when asked
how to get Republicans in Congress to accept our mainstream scientific
understanding of climate change, that it’s an “education problem

[FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
> turquoiseb:
> > Now you see why over 50% of all commutes
> > in the Netherlands are via bicycle...
> >
> That sounds like a lot of fun...

Actually, it is. Riding a bike in the snow is an adventure.

But I'm uncharacteristically replying to one of your posts, Richard,
because you happened to pick a photograph of a street near where
I used to live in Amsterdam. We (me and a few other Rama students)
rented a nice apartment there and taught meditation from it.

    >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Heaven continues to entertain

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda  wrote:
>
> another  heavenly TYROL MMY loved already since the mid 60s
> A Magic Day in Tyrol (by Georg Riha)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5ds0p0iDS8

Nice find. One thing you can say for the Swiss and
Austrian Alps...it's one of the few places on Earth
where the landscape looks better than the postcards
of it. 

As for Maharishi liking the terrain, as I watched the
film I could not help but notice how similar some of
the Tyrol terrain was to the Himalayas. I've seen a 
number of films and clips of that area lately, and 
as postcard landscapes go, its would probably be 
better even than those in Tyrol gift shops.

Made me wonder if part of Maharishi still longed for
the terrain of the place he was sent to meditate 
after Guru Dev died. If he thought, from time to
time, "What would my life have been like if I'd stayed
there? What would have happened if I had taken the
Red Pill instead of the Blue Pill?" 

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1E2EwKTBJE&feature=youtu.be
> >
> > What you see is what you get.
> >
> > Edg
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[Richard J. Williams]

turquoiseb:
> Now you see why over 50% of all commutes
> in the Netherlands are via bicycle...
>
That sounds like a lot of fun...


     


Amsterdam City Tours:
http://tinyurl.com/883j3jx 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Heaven continues to entertain

[merudanda]

another  heavenly TYROL MMY loved already since the mid 60s
A Magic Day in Tyrol (by Georg Riha)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5ds0p0iDS8

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1E2EwKTBJE&feature=youtu.be
>
> What you see is what you get.
>
> Edg
>

[FairfieldLife] Heaven continues to entertain

[Duveyoung]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1E2EwKTBJE&feature=youtu.be

What you see is what you get.

Edg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[seventhray1]

"All prices updated March 2005"

I think they could have found something a little more current.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Don't complain. Consider moving to Nigeria or Venezuela.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/
> 
>
> Now you see why over 50% of all commutes in the Netherlands
> are via bicycle. To give them some credit, most of the high price
> for gas in Holland goes to taxes, which pay for the infrastructure
> and social services.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote:
> >
> > I know it's higher elsewhere but this is a refinery town and when I
> > filled up the other day it was only $3.89. Yesterday the same
station
> > showed $4.09 for unleaded. Now it is a little hard to discuss gas
> > prices because some will brag of lower prices in states that don't
> have
> > a lot of highways to pay for or pay for them otherwise (toll roads,
> > yuk!). He have higher gas taxes here and we get mad because those
> taxes
> > were supposed to go only for highway building but the dumb ass
> assembly
> > used those funds elsewhere. We even passed a proposition saying
those
> > taxes could only be use for roads.
> >
> > But the important thing to remember is that the oil companies don't
> need
> > more money. They are robber barons and robbing YOU! Time to rise up,
> > seize those companies and nationalize them. The Koch monsters are
> rich
> > enough!
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Demonic Gaga

[Vaj]

Lady Gaga haunted by devilTUESDAY, 21 FEBRUARY 2012 11:36 IANS | LOS ANGELESPop star Lady Gaga believes the devil keeps haunting her during sleep.   The 25-year-old has enlisted the help of Michael Jackson's former doctor and spiritual adviser Deepak Chopra to try to ward off evil spirits from her "terrifying" dreams.  Chopra helped the late Jackson achieve better sleep and breathing patterns with counselling sessions.  "I have this recurring dream where there's a phantom in my home and he takes me into a room where there's a blonde girl with ropes tied to her limbs pulling her apart," showbizspy.com quoted Gaga as saying.  "I told Deepak the dream was so terrifying I thought somehow that a devil force was trying to take hold of me," she added.  Gaga has also asked Chopra to help her achieve her dreams of "going into a coma" and levitating.  "I want to go into a coma and levitate. I am a very spiritual person. Deepak is the most influential person in my life. His message is a true inspiration. He helps me to reach inside my spirituality and we take it to the next level," she said.

[FairfieldLife] Members breach Yogi trusts with land deal

[Vaj]

When non-invincibility is established in consciousness,
bickering and greed prevails
and radiates into the environment.

Jai Guru Dev.

Members breach Yogi trusts with land deal
MONDAY, 23 JANUARY 2012 00:20 PIONEER NEWS SERVICE | NEW DELHI

Several trusts established by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi are mired in  
controversy following allegation of illegal disposal of their land.  
The members of these trusts have alleged that huge plots of lands in  
Delhi, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh were “illegally sold off” by  
some trust members without any authorisation from the trusts. These  
trusts became “non-functional” after the death of the founder in  
early 2008.
A complaint filed by some persons, claiming as the real trust members  
and disciples of Maharishi in the Economic Offences Wing of Delhi  
Police, allege a prime property in the Golf Links was  “illegally”  
sold by their rival group in the trust.


Maharishi’s disciples allege that similar kind of “illegal sales and  
land encroachments” have happened in Rajnandgaon, Dongargarh and Durg  
ashrams, with the connivance of some relatives of the late spiritual  
guru. They claim that such incidents started within a year of  
Maharishi’s death in February 2008.


The late guru, who first started a television channel in India for  
yoga and spiritual classes, had established several trusts like  
Spiritual Regeneration Movement Foundation (SRM Foundation),  
Maharishi Siksha Sansthan, Maharishi Veda Vigyan Vidyapeeth,  
Maharishi Gandharv Ved Vidyapeeth, Maharishi Mahila Dhyan Vidyapeeth.  
Most of these trusts have massive  moveable and immovable assets in  
India and abroad.


Soon after the death of Maharishi, bickering started between the  
trust members and followers for the control of the billions of worth  
of assets. In the petitions to different authorities, his disciples  
alleged that “all such illegal  transactions were routed through  
hawala transaction with  the connivance of certain persons from  
Yogi’s  ashrams located abroad.”


“Some people purposefully started activities to paralyse the  
functions of these trusts to take away the properties according to  
their wish. Several illegal and bogus land deeds were created to mint  
money. Some land deeds were just bogus and buyers and sellers were  
created to fool the government. Our request to the government is to  
take over all the orphaned assets of the trusts established by  
Maharishi,” the disciples have said in their  petitions to  
Enforcement Directorate, Income Tax and various State Governments.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Gas hits $4+ here

[turquoiseb]

Don't complain. Consider moving to Nigeria or Venezuela.

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/


Now you see why over 50% of all commutes in the Netherlands
are via bicycle. To give them some credit, most of the high price
for gas in Holland goes to taxes, which pay for the infrastructure
and social services.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> I know it's higher elsewhere but this is a refinery town and when I
> filled up the other day it was only $3.89.  Yesterday the same station
> showed $4.09 for unleaded.  Now it is a little hard to discuss gas
> prices because some will brag of lower prices in states that don't
have
> a lot of highways to pay for or pay for them otherwise (toll roads,
> yuk!).  He have higher gas taxes here and we get mad because those
taxes
> were supposed to go only for highway building but the dumb ass
assembly
> used those funds elsewhere.  We even passed a proposition saying those
> taxes could only be use for roads.
>
> But the important thing to remember is that the oil companies don't
need
> more money.  They are robber barons and robbing YOU!  Time to rise up,
> seize those companies and nationalize them.  The Koch monsters are
rich
> enough!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Laughing Yoga for politics:Dawn of a new era of politics?

[merudanda]

ooops forget to mention:  Jon Gnarr promised not to keep his campaign
promises: [:D]

+ Continuous visibility

+ Free towels at all swimming pools

+ A polar bear at the zoo

+ For only ONE Santa Claus

+ All kinds of misfortune

+ A drug-free Parliament in 2020
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda  wrote:
>
> A verbal ball to improvise as experiencing the Trinity of God,politics
> and posting at FFL
> We all have so many resources retained in us. Subjecting us to so many
> restrictions, individually and in the system. This creates
frustration,
> paralyzes. Art and fun can encourage and demonstrate to break out of
our
> narrow limits.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obg_sdo5uFo
> Icelander's Campaign Is a Joke, Until He's Elected
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/world/europe/26iceland.html
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMiKpVylV_8
>
> The interaction between politics and cabaret are numerous and often
> deliberate. Jon Gnarr, mayor of Reykjavik, Munich mayor Christian Ude,
> Beppe Grillo, a comedian and star party leader in Italy, are just
three
> examples of the bizarre combination.
> Beppe Grillo interview
> Could Italy's answer to Michael Moore possibly be his country's next
> PrimeMinister?
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/comedy/8362260/Beppe-Grillo-i\
\
> nterview.html
>   [182]
> They fight against boredom and disenchantment with politics. When
> comedians go into politics, they want to stifle creativity and humor
> where otherwise dreary meetings and records the daily routine work.
> Voters sometimes give them a chance. Mostly, if unconventional
solutions
> are then announced  by Jon Gnarr, mayor of Reykjavik, Beppe Grillo, a
> comedian and star party leader in Italy, they all bring their audience
> to laugh - even outside the office.
>
> And even politicians, such as Munich's mayor Christian Ude occur in
the
> spotlight of the cabaret. It's about  unmasking the false policy of
the
> professional politician cares so much. It is an ambivalent
relationship
> between the constraints of the politician and the unmasking of the
> cabaret humor telling us how good it is to draw from the full can,
once
> you sit at the source from which supplies the cabaret.
> Good example is Jon Gnarr - from actor to the original Mayor Europe.
For
> 9 months he ruled Reykjavik. Dawn of a new era of politics?
> As Mayor Gnarr he is committed to:
> + Continuous visibility
>
> + Free towels at all swimming pools
>
> + A polar bear at the zoo
>
> + For only ONE Santa Claus
>
> + All kinds of misfortune
>
> + A drug-free Parliament in 2020
>
> As he and the contractor / interior, bankers, etc. get along?
> "I entertain companies".
> He uses his power, where it is possible. Calmly, disarmingly, radical,
> playful.
>
> One of his favorite initiatives, since he is the mayor, is a"Good day
> day". In a television spot, where he is seen grimacing, he calls for
the
> wish to "Good Day" in honor of the "good-day tags." And whether or not
> it also be possible, the "good day day" more often than twice a year
to
> celebrate one - perhaps even daily?
> Sure all of them,Munich's mayor Christian Ude , Jon Gnarr, mayor of
> Reykjavik, Beppe Grillo, are interested  in further suggestion from
FFL-
> Fairy Field Light  [:D] forever
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Watching this video from "UFO Phil," the former alien
> > abductee who says he'll assume the Presidency of the
> > US (and the Earth) without a single vote, I found 
> > myself wondering if "Phil" were our own Nabby. Watch
> > the video and decide for yourself.
> > 
> > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/ufo-phil-for-president_n_1289440.html
> 
> I'm disapointed. The text seemed promising. Particularily the 
> idea of building a gigantic pyramid behind the Hollywood sign 
> and replacing the Statue of Liberty with a Monument of Zaxon. 
> The video revealed a phony :-(

How exactly could you tell? Was there some lack of
credulity in his presentation? Improper aura? Costume
too garish? Maybe this clip of Benjamin Creme channeling 
Maitreya on Bill Maher's show is more...uh...promising.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gi68lzwzYM

[FairfieldLife] Laughing Yoga for politics:Dawn of a new era of politics?

[merudanda]

A verbal ball to improvise as experiencing the Trinity of God,politics
and posting at FFL
We all have so many resources retained in us. Subjecting us to so many
restrictions, individually and in the system. This creates frustration,
paralyzes. Art and fun can encourage and demonstrate to break out of our
narrow limits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obg_sdo5uFo
Icelander's Campaign Is a Joke, Until He's Elected
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/world/europe/26iceland.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMiKpVylV_8

The interaction between politics and cabaret are numerous and often
deliberate. Jon Gnarr, mayor of Reykjavik, Munich mayor Christian Ude,
Beppe Grillo, a comedian and star party leader in Italy, are just three
examples of the bizarre combination.
Beppe Grillo interview
Could Italy's answer to Michael Moore possibly be his country's next
PrimeMinister?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/comedy/8362260/Beppe-Grillo-i\
nterview.html
  [182]
They fight against boredom and disenchantment with politics. When
comedians go into politics, they want to stifle creativity and humor
where otherwise dreary meetings and records the daily routine work.
Voters sometimes give them a chance. Mostly, if unconventional solutions
are then announced  by Jon Gnarr, mayor of Reykjavik, Beppe Grillo, a
comedian and star party leader in Italy, they all bring their audience
to laugh - even outside the office.

And even politicians, such as Munich's mayor Christian Ude occur in the
spotlight of the cabaret. It's about  unmasking the false policy of the
professional politician cares so much. It is an ambivalent relationship
between the constraints of the politician and the unmasking of the
cabaret humor telling us how good it is to draw from the full can, once
you sit at the source from which supplies the cabaret.
Good example is Jon Gnarr - from actor to the original Mayor Europe. For
9 months he ruled Reykjavik. Dawn of a new era of politics?
As Mayor Gnarr he is committed to:
+ Continuous visibility

+ Free towels at all swimming pools

+ A polar bear at the zoo

+ For only ONE Santa Claus

+ All kinds of misfortune

+ A drug-free Parliament in 2020

As he and the contractor / interior, bankers, etc. get along?
"I entertain companies".
He uses his power, where it is possible. Calmly, disarmingly, radical,
playful.

One of his favorite initiatives, since he is the mayor, is a"Good day
day". In a television spot, where he is seen grimacing, he calls for the
wish to "Good Day" in honor of the "good-day tags." And whether or not
it also be possible, the "good day day" more often than twice a year to
celebrate one - perhaps even daily?
Sure all of them,Munich's mayor Christian Ude , Jon Gnarr, mayor of
Reykjavik, Beppe Grillo, are interested  in further suggestion from FFL-
Fairy Field Light  [:D] forever

[FairfieldLife] Re: Has Nabby finally been outed?

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Watching this video from "UFO Phil," the former alien
> abductee who says he'll assume the Presidency of the
> US (and the Earth) without a single vote, I found 
> myself wondering if "Phil" were our own Nabby. Watch
> the video and decide for yourself.
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/ufo-phil-for-president_n_1289440.html


I'm disapointed. The text seemed promising. Particularily the idea of building 
a gigantic pyramid behind the Hollywood sign and replacing the Statue of 
Liberty with a Monument of Zaxon. 
The video revealed a phony :-(