date:20120522



Tuesday, May 22, 2012
 
Talking to Yourself? Not as Crazy as It Sounds
 

We all do it at some time or anothertalk to ourselves while we're performing a 
task. Researchers from the University of Pennsylvania have found that this 
seemingly "irrational" behavior can benefit our brainsespecially when we're 
talking about something we're looking for. In fact, they found that when we say 
the word for what we're looking for, we tend to find the object more 
quicklyprobably because we're concentrating on it. So the next time you lose 
your keys (or anything else), repeat the words "keys, keys, keys" to yourself 
as you hunt. And let us know if it seems to help!

[FairfieldLife] Bevan's homeland?


Ain't Australia Dr. Bevan's homeland?

I wonder if there are lots of YFfers there...

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > Why on earth would anyone want to support the meditation
> > technique responsible for more deaths, suicides, psychotic
> > breaks than any other meditation technique in human history
> 
> Hands, please: Is Vaj stupid, or does he think everyone
> else here is stupid?
> 
> TM has been around for a little over 50 years.
> 
> Buddhist meditation has been around for (fill in the
> blank) __ years.
> 
> In fact, of course, most meditation techniques have been
> around for far, far longer than TM. And Vaj would have us
> believe TM has racked up more deaths, suicides, and
> psychotic breaks than any other meditation technique in
> human history?

None of the above. He's a religious fundamentalist with Goebbels as his 
godfather. He believes that if he tells a lie often it will eventually become 
an established truth.
As more and more people are turning away from organized religion including his 
own and looking for alternatives, including TM he is becoming increasingly 
desperate. 
I don't think we have seen the worst from this fellow yet.

[FairfieldLife] Suckerberry!


In Swedish, the word 'berg' is pronounced approx. like 'berry' 
or 'barry'.

Wonder if Mark should change his family name to Suckerberry... ;D

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/zuckerberg-loses-friends-on-wall-street-as-regulators-probe-19bn-slump-7778894.html

http://translate.google.com/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Is there a way to unsubscribe to this thing?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> I emailed the unsubscribe thing and it didn't work. What do I do?

There's no escape. You have been assimilated.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> Why on earth would anyone want to support the meditation
> technique responsible for more deaths, suicides, psychotic
> breaks than any other meditation technique in human history

Hands, please: Is Vaj stupid, or does he think everyone
else here is stupid?

TM has been around for a little over 50 years.

Buddhist meditation has been around for (fill in the
blank) __ years.

In fact, of course, most meditation techniques have been
around for far, far longer than TM. And Vaj would have us
believe TM has racked up more deaths, suicides, and
psychotic breaks than any other meditation technique in
human history?

[FairfieldLife] Re: How Obama spends your money without you knowing it!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> I think the treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner reports directly to Obama
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > On 05/22/2012 04:39 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> > > By printing more money Obama cleverly 'steals' your money
> > > from your bank by deflating the dollar.

Hmm, I've always thought printing money results in
*inflation*, not deflation.

Fortunately, the runaway inflation the GOP has been
screaming is going to happen hasn't.


> Basically Obama is nothing but a clever pick pocket! NOW your dollar isn't 
> worth as much, but Obama siphons it off for Solar and wind, etc. (and pay 
> offs) the Dude's dangerous!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/11/05/what-is-qe2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you/
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > I though the Federal Reserve printed money not Obama.  When did he get 
> > into that? :-D
> > 
> > Isn't the Federal Reserve a front for the big banks?
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> >
> > But carbon based fuel is ruining the planet. We have no other
> > place to go.  
> 
> Yes we do, natural gas, we have plenty

Um, BillyG, you might want to look up "natural gas" and
find out what it is.

> also Nuclear, we can get this economy going again and still be 
> *green*.

Not if we're using carbon-based fuel like coal and natural
gas. And it will take a lot of time to build enough nuclear
plants.

> States in the North East are dependent on coal for heating and
> cooling I hope nobody dies this summer from heat exhaustion due
> to lack of affordable energy.

A lot more people are going to die if we don't do something
to get off carbon-based fuels.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How Obama spends your money without you knowing it!

I think the treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner reports directly to Obama

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 05/22/2012 04:39 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> > By printing more money Obama cleverly 'steals' your money from your bank by 
> > deflating the dollar. Basically Obama is nothing but a clever pick pocket! 
> > NOW your dollar isn't worth as much, but Obama siphons it off for Solar and 
> > wind, etc. (and pay offs) the Dude's dangerous!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/11/05/what-is-qe2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you/
> >
> >
> 
> I though the Federal Reserve printed money not Obama.  When did he get 
> into that? :-D
> 
> Isn't the Federal Reserve a front for the big banks?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
>
> But carbon based fuel is ruining the planet. We have no other place to go.  

Yes we do, natural gas, we have plentyalso Nuclear, we can get this economy 
going again and still be *green*. States in the North East are dependent on 
coal for heating and cooling I hope nobody dies this summer from heat 
exhaustion due to lack of affordable energy.

[FairfieldLife] Is there a way to unsubscribe to this thing?

I emailed the unsubscribe thing and it didn't work. What do I do?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fly me to the Moon

2012-05-22 Thread John

Srijau,

I had a similar experience once in the beginning of my TM practice.  In my 
case, I saw the light receptor cone and a rod inside my retina.  I saw these in 
bright pink colors as my awareness floated by them like an airplane.

IMO, this experience like yours may be related to the recent discoveries in 
physics--quantum entanglement in particular.


JR

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@...  wrote:
>
> I consider this to be just a refined perception and not a Sidhi.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >
> > Srijau,
> > 
> > This is very interesting.  Can you tell us in more detail what  these 
> > particles look like, as far patterns and colors are concerned?  Are you 
> > using TM or some other meditation method?
> > 
> > IMO, you are experiencing the siddhi relating to becoming as small as an 
> > atom, described by Patanjali in the Yoga Sutras.  If those are actually 
> > atomic particles, scientists should determine how these are related to the 
> > recent discoveries in quantum physics.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@  wrote:
> > >
> > > I see atoms or perhaps atomic particles, if I choose to focus on them. I 
> > > ignore it though, it has no particular charm nor practical value.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A few years ago, according to Deepak Chopra, in one of his books, MMY 
> > > > stated that some TMers have been able to see the features of the Moon, 
> > > > while in samadhi or TC, as if they were transported there.  This is 
> > > > some kind of siddhi that's similar to teleportation.  IMO, there is a 
> > > > scientific explanation for this phenomena.  This is probably the human 
> > > > experience of quantum entanglement, a scientific phenomenon that has 
> > > > been discovered recently.
> > > > 
> > > > The serious mediatators here on FFL should tell us of any experiences 
> > > > that are similar to this one.  Also, I am sure there are a few who have 
> > > > experienced the other siddhils as well.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How Obama spends your money without you knowing it!

2012-05-22 Thread Susan



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 05/22/2012 04:39 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> > By printing more money Obama cleverly 'steals' your money from your bank by 
> > deflating the dollar. Basically Obama is nothing but a clever pick pocket! 
> > NOW your dollar isn't worth as much, but Obama siphons it off for Solar and 
> > wind, etc. (and pay offs) the Dude's dangerous!!

Excuse me, Bush 2 and Reagan were worse than Obama on money.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/11/05/what-is-qe2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you/
> >
> >
> 
> I though the Federal Reserve printed money not Obama.  When did he get 
> into that? :-D
> 
> Isn't the Federal Reserve a front for the big banks?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

2012-05-22 Thread Susan

But carbon based fuel is ruining the planet. We have no other place to go.  The 
problem is that there is no alternative right now.  But to move ahead with coal 
without mentioning the terrible costs and without promoting more alternative 
research is what is irresponsible to me.  People from both "sides" need to 
speak up about how deadly coal is  - even if we have to continue to use it for 
a while longer - we need to be honest.  I think it is that lack on honesty and 
being able to take both perspectives that has divided us.  IT has become an 
eitiher/or games rather than a discussion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> I'm really not sure on coal, but coal is only the beginning of Obama's war on 
> carbon based energy in general. The EPA is way out of control, they want 
> change at ANY cost, that's irresponsible in my opinion.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > WGM, I am confused.  Do you back the Republican desire to have us use more 
> > coal, or do you support Obama's War on Coal?  I assume you don't want 
> > American's to continue to use coal, cause otherwise, my mind boggles.  
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
> > >
> > > Published May 22, 2012
> > > 
> > > Obama's War on Coal has already taken a remarkable toll on coal-fired 
> > > power plants in America. 
> > > 
> > > Last week the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a shocking 
> > > drop in power sector coal consumption in the first quarter of 2012. 
> > > Coal-fired power plants are now generating just 36 percent of U.S. 
> > > electricity, versus 44.6 percent just one year ago. 
> > > 
> > > It's the result of an unprecedented regulatory assault on coal that will 
> > > leave us all much poorer.
> > > 
> > > Last week PJM Interconnection, the company that operates the electric 
> > > grid for 13 states (Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, 
> > > Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, 
> > > Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia) held its 2015 
> > > capacity auction. These are the first real, market prices that take 
> > > Obama's most recent anti-coal regulations into account, and they prove 
> > > that he is keeping his 2008 campaign promise to make electricity prices 
> > > "necessarily skyrocket."
> > > 
> > > The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity  almost all natural gas 
> > >  was $136 per megawatt. That's eight times higher than the price for 
> > > 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering 
> > > New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per 
> > > megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the 
> > > price is a shocking $357 per megawatt.
> > > 
> > > Why the massive price increases? Andy Ott from PJM stated the obvious: 
> > > "Capacity prices were higher than last year's because of retirements of 
> > > existing coal-fired generation resulting largely from environmental 
> > > regulations which go into effect in 2015." Northern Ohio is suffering 
> > > from more forced coal-plant retirements than the rest of the region, 
> > > hence the even higher price.
> > > 
> > > These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the 
> > > actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new 
> > > capacity. The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.
> > > 
> > > House Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) aptly 
> > > explained: "The PJM auction forecasts a dim future where Americans will 
> > > be paying more to keep the lights on. We are seeing more and more coal 
> > > plants fall victim to EPA's destructive regulatory agenda, and as a 
> > > result, we are seeing more job losses and higher electricity prices."
> > > 
> > > The only thing that can stop this massive price hike now is an all-out 
> > > effort to end Obama's War on Coal and repeal this destructive regulatory 
> > > agenda.
> > > 
> > > The Senate will have a critical opportunity to do just that when it votes 
> > > on stopping Obama's most expensive anti-coal regulation sometime in the 
> > > next couple of weeks. The vote is on the Inhofe Resolution, S.J. Res 37, 
> > > to overturn the so-called Utility MACT rule, which the EPA itself 
> > > acknowledges is its most expensive rule ever.
> > > 
> > > This vote is protected from filibuster, and it will take just 51 votes to 
> > > send a clear message to Obama that his War on Coal must end. 
> > > 
> > > Of course, Obama could veto the resolution and keep the rule intact, 
> > > although that would force him to take full political responsibility for 
> > > the massive impending jump in electricity prices.
> > > 
> > > I have a form set up at www.WarOnCoal.com to make it easy to contact your 
> > > senators on this crucial issue.
> > > 
> > > Read more: 
> > > http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-w

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

2012-05-22 Thread Richard J. Williams

> > Look at all the positives behind TM and what it
> > has done for the world, yet people will try to
> > tear it down for no apparent reason.
> >
vajradhatu:
> Why on earth would anyone want to support the
> meditation technique responsible for more deaths,
> suicides, psychotic breaks than any other
> meditation technique in human history...
>
Uh, I think your Vajradhatu Org USA holds that
dubious honor!

So, why didn't you tell us about your guru, the
Trungpa Tulku and his Regent; the one you took
the name of, trying to pass yourself off as one
of the Vajradhatu Org's apologists?

"He was reffering to the Buddhist Llama who
raped his secretaries and gave AIDS to a number
of people."
309215

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fly me to the Moon

2012-05-22 Thread srijau

I consider this to be just a refined perception and not a Sidhi.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> Srijau,
> 
> This is very interesting.  Can you tell us in more detail what  these 
> particles look like, as far patterns and colors are concerned?  Are you using 
> TM or some other meditation method?
> 
> IMO, you are experiencing the siddhi relating to becoming as small as an 
> atom, described by Patanjali in the Yoga Sutras.  If those are actually 
> atomic particles, scientists should determine how these are related to the 
> recent discoveries in quantum physics.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@  wrote:
> >
> > I see atoms or perhaps atomic particles, if I choose to focus on them. I 
> > ignore it though, it has no particular charm nor practical value.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > >
> > > A few years ago, according to Deepak Chopra, in one of his books, MMY 
> > > stated that some TMers have been able to see the features of the Moon, 
> > > while in samadhi or TC, as if they were transported there.  This is some 
> > > kind of siddhi that's similar to teleportation.  IMO, there is a 
> > > scientific explanation for this phenomena.  This is probably the human 
> > > experience of quantum entanglement, a scientific phenomenon that has been 
> > > discovered recently.
> > > 
> > > The serious mediatators here on FFL should tell us of any experiences 
> > > that are similar to this one.  Also, I am sure there are a few who have 
> > > experienced the other siddhils as well.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

2012-05-22 Thread FFL PostCount

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat May 19 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat May 26 00:00:00 2012
258 messages as of (UTC) Tue May 22 23:58:13 2012

24 cardemaister 
22 salyavin808 
19 Emily Reyn 
17 Bhairitu 
16 sparaig 
16 shainm307 
14 Jason 
12 nablusoss1008 
11 turquoiseb 
10 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
10 Share Long 
10 John 
 9 Vaj 
 7 marekreavis 
 7 authfriend 
 7 Yifu 
 6 Shain McVay 
 6 "Richard J. Williams" 
 5 seventhray1 
 4 wgm4u 
 4 raunchydog 
 4 merudanda 
 3 obbajeeba 
 2 sri...@ymail.com, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@".SYNTAX-ERROR.
 2 mehran ghainian 
 2 Susan 
 2 Buck 
 1 shanti2218411 
 1 merlin 
 1 feste37 
 1 wle...@aol.com
 1 Robert 
 1 Rick Archer 
 1 Duveyoung 

Posters: 34
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

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!

2012-05-22 Thread Richard J. Williams



> > I think his argument extends equally to MUM. 
> > It's not real school.
> >
Vaj:
> It's a Vedic madrassa - unconvincingly disguised 
> behind a veneer of pseudoscience. Really, it's not 
> all that different from Liberty, Oral Roberts U. 
> and other similar level of consciousness diploma 
> mills.
>
So unlike your Buddhist Trungpa guru's university. 

LoL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naropa_University

Re: [FairfieldLife] How Obama spends your money without you knowing it!

On 05/22/2012 04:39 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> By printing more money Obama cleverly 'steals' your money from your bank by 
> deflating the dollar. Basically Obama is nothing but a clever pick pocket! 
> NOW your dollar isn't worth as much, but Obama siphons it off for Solar and 
> wind, etc. (and pay offs) the Dude's dangerous!!
>
>
>
>
> http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/11/05/what-is-qe2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you/
>
>

I though the Federal Reserve printed money not Obama.  When did he get 
into that? :-D

Isn't the Federal Reserve a front for the big banks?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Indra and Northern Mesopotamia!

2012-05-22 Thread Richard J. Williams



cardemaister:
> Indra and Northern Mesopotamia!
>
Witzel believes that a portion of the Aryan people 
migrated to the region now called Afghanistan and 
Pakistan, the Land of the Five Rivers, Bharatvarsh, 
where they composed the Vedas. They were a tribal 
and nomadic peoples living in the far reaches of 
Euro-Asia in hostile steppe lands.

According to Abbas Alizadeh, in "The Oxford 
Companion to Archaeology" Iran, or Eran, was the 
land of the Aryans (nobles) or Iranians, a branch 
of the Indo-European peoples, who, in a number of 
waves, emigrated from the steppes of Central Asia 
to Europe and the Near East during the second and 
first millennia B.C..."

Work Cited:

Michael Witzel, Professor of Sanskrit
Harvard University, United States

'Autochthonous Aryans?'
http://tinyurl.com/57hujf

Read more:

Subject: Speaking of Aryans
Author: Willytex
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: January 25, 2004
http://tinyurl.com/yjknybs

[FairfieldLife] How Obama spends your money without you knowing it!

By printing more money Obama cleverly 'steals' your money from your bank by 
deflating the dollar. Basically Obama is nothing but a clever pick pocket! NOW 
your dollar isn't worth as much, but Obama siphons it off for Solar and wind, 
etc. (and pay offs) the Dude's dangerous!! 




http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/11/05/what-is-qe2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

I'm really not sure on coal, but coal is only the beginning of Obama's war on 
carbon based energy in general. The EPA is way out of control, they want change 
at ANY cost, that's irresponsible in my opinion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
>
> 
> WGM, I am confused.  Do you back the Republican desire to have us use more 
> coal, or do you support Obama's War on Coal?  I assume you don't want 
> American's to continue to use coal, cause otherwise, my mind boggles.  
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
> >
> > Published May 22, 2012
> > 
> > Obama's War on Coal has already taken a remarkable toll on coal-fired power 
> > plants in America. 
> > 
> > Last week the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a shocking 
> > drop in power sector coal consumption in the first quarter of 2012. 
> > Coal-fired power plants are now generating just 36 percent of U.S. 
> > electricity, versus 44.6 percent just one year ago. 
> > 
> > It's the result of an unprecedented regulatory assault on coal that will 
> > leave us all much poorer.
> > 
> > Last week PJM Interconnection, the company that operates the electric grid 
> > for 13 states (Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, 
> > New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West 
> > Virginia and the District of Columbia) held its 2015 capacity auction. 
> > These are the first real, market prices that take Obama's most recent 
> > anti-coal regulations into account, and they prove that he is keeping his 
> > 2008 campaign promise to make electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket."
> > 
> > The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity  almost all natural gas  
> > was $136 per megawatt. That's eight times higher than the price for 2012, 
> > which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New 
> > Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. 
> > For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a 
> > shocking $357 per megawatt.
> > 
> > Why the massive price increases? Andy Ott from PJM stated the obvious: 
> > "Capacity prices were higher than last year's because of retirements of 
> > existing coal-fired generation resulting largely from environmental 
> > regulations which go into effect in 2015." Northern Ohio is suffering from 
> > more forced coal-plant retirements than the rest of the region, hence the 
> > even higher price.
> > 
> > These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the 
> > actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new 
> > capacity. The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.
> > 
> > House Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) aptly 
> > explained: "The PJM auction forecasts a dim future where Americans will be 
> > paying more to keep the lights on. We are seeing more and more coal plants 
> > fall victim to EPA's destructive regulatory agenda, and as a result, we are 
> > seeing more job losses and higher electricity prices."
> > 
> > The only thing that can stop this massive price hike now is an all-out 
> > effort to end Obama's War on Coal and repeal this destructive regulatory 
> > agenda.
> > 
> > The Senate will have a critical opportunity to do just that when it votes 
> > on stopping Obama's most expensive anti-coal regulation sometime in the 
> > next couple of weeks. The vote is on the Inhofe Resolution, S.J. Res 37, to 
> > overturn the so-called Utility MACT rule, which the EPA itself acknowledges 
> > is its most expensive rule ever.
> > 
> > This vote is protected from filibuster, and it will take just 51 votes to 
> > send a clear message to Obama that his War on Coal must end. 
> > 
> > Of course, Obama could veto the resolution and keep the rule intact, 
> > although that would force him to take full political responsibility for the 
> > massive impending jump in electricity prices.
> > 
> > I have a form set up at www.WarOnCoal.com to make it easy to contact your 
> > senators on this crucial issue.
> > 
> > Read more: 
> > http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vdViVv55
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish

2012-05-22 Thread Yifu

There's no scientific evidence for the existence of Consciousness, or 
consciousness (relative).  There are circumstantial inferences.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411"  wrote:
> >
> >  
> > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It is 
> > > true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was based on 
> > > things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the vacuum 
> > > state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way 
> > > one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy describing 
> > > how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am not 
> > > acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the 
> > > quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field 
> > > equivalency that we see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course 
> > > talking about this. I do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > 
> > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement any 
> > > more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, including 
> > > the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked 
> > > Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was really 
> > > interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist 
> > > Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered Chopra a short 
> > > course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse of quantum 
> > > notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a 
> > > book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw said he had never 
> > > come across a definition of consciousness that made any sense. It was 
> > > clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations between consciouness and quantum 
> > > mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, 
> > > it was nonsense.
> > > 
> > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > > nomenclature and physics.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > Science is based on materialism. All scientific theories are likewise based 
> > on materialism.Obviously that would include quantum mechanics.
> > Materialism proposes that consciousness is an epiphenomenon and has no 
> > existence independent of matter( i.e. consciousness is an emergent property 
> > of matter e.g the human nervous system). Given the latter it would seem 
> > illogical to assert that "pure consciousness" is the same as the vacuum 
> > state.The real question is whether consciousness is of a completely 
> > different order of reality then matter/energy. IMHO that
> > question can't be answered by science which is grounded in 
> > materialism.Chopra et al are making a fundamental error in attempting to 
> > describe the nature of consciousness using constructs taken from a 
> > materialistic/scientific framework.
> >
> Shanti,
> 
> Based on MMY's teachings, Hagelin is stating that there is a grand 
> unification between consciousness and matter.  He believes that this can be 
> done through the superstring theory.  If he is right, he might have found the 
> formula for the Grand Unification, which has been the holy grail since 
> Einstein's theories.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish

2012-05-22 Thread Yifu

There's no evidence of anything "outside the Universe"if the Universe is 
defined as the class of all sets, both relative and Absolute. This definition 
can be used with reference to the Multiverse hypothesis, a model not at all 
dependent on consciousness.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > >> 
> > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > 
> > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Barry,
> > > > > 
> > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > >  ...
> > > >  "
> > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do 
> > > >  with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what 
> > > >  physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with 
> > > >  consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people 
> > > >  meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a unified field 
> > > >  of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. The presentation 
> > > >  of the ideas of modern physics side by side, and apparently 
> > > >  supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness 
> > > >  can only be intended to deceive those who might not know any 
> > > >  better.
> > > >  
> > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a 
> > > >  feeling of compassion for those who might be taken in by these 
> > > >  distortions. I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and his 
> > > >  movement because it supports world peace and other high ideals. 
> > > >  But none of these ideals could possibly be realized within the 
> > > >  framework of a philosophy that so willfully distorts scientific 
> > > >  truth (Pagels).
> > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > 
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It 
> > > > is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was 
> > > > based on things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the 
> > > > vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in 
> > > > the way one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy 
> > > > describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of 
> > > > gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy 
> > > > morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently 
> > > > morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we see today under 
> > > > Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I do not know 
> > > > what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > 
> > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement 
> > > > any more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, 
> > > > including the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the 
> > > > skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was 
> > > > really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and 
> > > > physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered 
> > > > Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse 
> > > > of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, 
> > > > recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw 
> > > > said he had never come across a definition of consciousness that made 
> > > > any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations between 
> > > > consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no 
> > > > sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > > > 
> > > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > > > nomenclature and physics.
> > > >
> > > Xeno,
> > > 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

2012-05-22 Thread Susan


WGM, I am confused.  Do you back the Republican desire to have us use more 
coal, or do you support Obama's War on Coal?  I assume you don't want 
American's to continue to use coal, cause otherwise, my mind boggles.  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u  wrote:
>
> Published May 22, 2012
> 
> Obama's War on Coal has already taken a remarkable toll on coal-fired power 
> plants in America. 
> 
> Last week the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a shocking drop 
> in power sector coal consumption in the first quarter of 2012. Coal-fired 
> power plants are now generating just 36 percent of U.S. electricity, versus 
> 44.6 percent just one year ago. 
> 
> It's the result of an unprecedented regulatory assault on coal that will 
> leave us all much poorer.
> 
> Last week PJM Interconnection, the company that operates the electric grid 
> for 13 states (Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New 
> Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West 
> Virginia and the District of Columbia) held its 2015 capacity auction. These 
> are the first real, market prices that take Obama's most recent anti-coal 
> regulations into account, and they prove that he is keeping his 2008 campaign 
> promise to make electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket."
> 
> The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity  almost all natural gas  
> was $136 per megawatt. That's eight times higher than the price for 2012, 
> which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New 
> Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. 
> For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a 
> shocking $357 per megawatt.
> 
> Why the massive price increases? Andy Ott from PJM stated the obvious: 
> "Capacity prices were higher than last year's because of retirements of 
> existing coal-fired generation resulting largely from environmental 
> regulations which go into effect in 2015." Northern Ohio is suffering from 
> more forced coal-plant retirements than the rest of the region, hence the 
> even higher price.
> 
> These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the 
> actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. 
> The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.
> 
> House Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) aptly 
> explained: "The PJM auction forecasts a dim future where Americans will be 
> paying more to keep the lights on. We are seeing more and more coal plants 
> fall victim to EPA's destructive regulatory agenda, and as a result, we are 
> seeing more job losses and higher electricity prices."
> 
> The only thing that can stop this massive price hike now is an all-out effort 
> to end Obama's War on Coal and repeal this destructive regulatory agenda.
> 
> The Senate will have a critical opportunity to do just that when it votes on 
> stopping Obama's most expensive anti-coal regulation sometime in the next 
> couple of weeks. The vote is on the Inhofe Resolution, S.J. Res 37, to 
> overturn the so-called Utility MACT rule, which the EPA itself acknowledges 
> is its most expensive rule ever.
> 
> This vote is protected from filibuster, and it will take just 51 votes to 
> send a clear message to Obama that his War on Coal must end. 
> 
> Of course, Obama could veto the resolution and keep the rule intact, although 
> that would force him to take full political responsibility for the massive 
> impending jump in electricity prices.
> 
> I have a form set up at www.WarOnCoal.com to make it easy to contact your 
> senators on this crucial issue.
> 
> Read more: 
> http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vdViVv55
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama’s war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

On 05/22/2012 02:28 PM, wgm4u wrote:
> Published May 22, 2012
>
> Obama's War on Coal has already taken a remarkable toll on coal-fired power 
> plants in America.
>
> Last week the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a shocking drop 
> in power sector coal consumption in the first quarter of 2012. Coal-fired 
> power plants are now generating just 36 percent of U.S. electricity, versus 
> 44.6 percent just one year ago.
>
> It's the result of an unprecedented regulatory assault on coal that will 
> leave us all much poorer.
>
> Last week PJM Interconnection, the company that operates the electric grid 
> for 13 states (Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New 
> Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West 
> Virginia and the District of Columbia) held its 2015 capacity auction. These 
> are the first real, market prices that take Obama's most recent anti-coal 
> regulations into account, and they prove that he is keeping his 2008 campaign 
> promise to make electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket."
>
> The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – 
> was $136 per megawatt. That's eight times higher than the price for 2012, 
> which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New 
> Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. 
> For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a 
> shocking $357 per megawatt.
>
> Why the massive price increases? Andy Ott from PJM stated the obvious: 
> "Capacity prices were higher than last year's because of retirements of 
> existing coal-fired generation resulting largely from environmental 
> regulations which go into effect in 2015." Northern Ohio is suffering from 
> more forced coal-plant retirements than the rest of the region, hence the 
> even higher price.
>
> These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the 
> actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. 
> The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.
>
> House Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) aptly 
> explained: "The PJM auction forecasts a dim future where Americans will be 
> paying more to keep the lights on. We are seeing more and more coal plants 
> fall victim to EPA's destructive regulatory agenda, and as a result, we are 
> seeing more job losses and higher electricity prices."
>
> The only thing that can stop this massive price hike now is an all-out effort 
> to end Obama's War on Coal and repeal this destructive regulatory agenda.
>
> The Senate will have a critical opportunity to do just that when it votes on 
> stopping Obama's most expensive anti-coal regulation sometime in the next 
> couple of weeks. The vote is on the Inhofe Resolution, S.J. Res 37, to 
> overturn the so-called Utility MACT rule, which the EPA itself acknowledges 
> is its most expensive rule ever.
>
> This vote is protected from filibuster, and it will take just 51 votes to 
> send a clear message to Obama that his War on Coal must end.
>
> Of course, Obama could veto the resolution and keep the rule intact, although 
> that would force him to take full political responsibility for the massive 
> impending jump in electricity prices.
>
> I have a form set up at www.WarOnCoal.com to make it easy to contact your 
> senators on this crucial issue.
>
> Read more: 
> http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vdViVv55

Republicons want to blame Obama for everything so they can screw over 
the election and then further screw the American public.  Republicons 
are treasonous.





To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[FairfieldLife] Obamas war on coal hits electric bills (just the beginning).

Published May 22, 2012

Obama's War on Coal has already taken a remarkable toll on coal-fired power
plants in America.

Last week the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported a shocking drop
in power sector coal consumption in the first quarter of 2012. Coal-fired power
plants are now generating just 36 percent of U.S. electricity, versus 44.6
percent just one year ago.

It's the result of an unprecedented regulatory assault on coal that will leave
us all much poorer.

Last week PJM Interconnection, the company that operates the electric grid for
13 states (Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New
Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia
and the District of Columbia) held its 2015 capacity auction. These are the
first real, market prices that take Obama's most recent anti-coal regulations
into account, and they prove that he is keeping his 2008 campaign promise to
make electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket."

The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity almost all natural gas was
$136 per megawatt. That's eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was
just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware,
Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio
territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt.

Why the massive price increases? Andy Ott from PJM stated the obvious:
"Capacity prices were higher than last year's because of retirements of
existing coal-fired generation resulting largely from environmental regulations
which go into effect in 2015." Northern Ohio is suffering from more forced
coal-plant retirements than the rest of the region, hence the even higher price.

These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the actual
prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. The
costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.

House Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) aptly
explained: "The PJM auction forecasts a dim future where Americans will be
paying more to keep the lights on. We are seeing more and more coal plants fall
victim to EPA's destructive regulatory agenda, and as a result, we are seeing
more job losses and higher electricity prices."

The only thing that can stop this massive price hike now is an all-out effort
to end Obama's War on Coal and repeal this destructive regulatory agenda.

The Senate will have a critical opportunity to do just that when it votes on
stopping Obama's most expensive anti-coal regulation sometime in the next
couple of weeks. The vote is on the Inhofe Resolution, S.J. Res 37, to overturn
the so-called Utility MACT rule, which the EPA itself acknowledges is its most
expensive rule ever.

This vote is protected from filibuster, and it will take just 51 votes to send
a clear message to Obama that his War on Coal must end.

Of course, Obama could veto the resolution and keep the rule intact, although
that would force him to take full political responsibility for the massive
impending jump in electricity prices.

I have a form set up at www.WarOnCoal.com to make it easy to contact your
senators on this crucial issue.

Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vdViVv55

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, at least for me, a lot of stuff in QM, or stuff, seems
> like nonsense. For instance, it's impossible for me to grasp
> that an elementary particle can *literally* be in two places
> simultaneously! :o
> 
> "Nobody [not even Mlodi? -- card] knows how it can be like that."
>  -- Richard Feynman
>

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/einstein-was-right-you-can-be-in-two-places-at-once-2162648.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > >> 
> > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > 
> > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Barry,
> > > > > 
> > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > >  ...
> > > >  "
> > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do 
> > > >  with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what 
> > > >  physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with 
> > > >  consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people 
> > > >  meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a unified field 
> > > >  of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. The presentation 
> > > >  of the ideas of modern physics side by side, and apparently 
> > > >  supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness 
> > > >  can only be intended to deceive those who might not know any 
> > > >  better.
> > > >  
> > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a 
> > > >  feeling of compassion for those who might be taken in by these 
> > > >  distortions. I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and his 
> > > >  movement because it supports world peace and other high ideals. 
> > > >  But none of these ideals could possibly be realized within the 
> > > >  framework of a philosophy that so willfully distorts scientific 
> > > >  truth (Pagels).
> > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > 
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It 
> > > > is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was 
> > > > based on things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the 
> > > > vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in 
> > > > the way one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy 
> > > > describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of 
> > > > gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy 
> > > > morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently 
> > > > morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we see today under 
> > > > Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I do not know 
> > > > what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > 
> > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement 
> > > > any more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, 
> > > > including the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the 
> > > > skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was 
> > > > really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and 
> > > > physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered 
> > > > Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse 
> > > > of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, 
> > > > recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw 
> > > > said he had never come across a definition of consciousness that made 
> > > > any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations between 
> > > > consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no 
> > > > sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > > > 



Well, at least for me, a lot of stuff in QM, or stuff, seems
like nonsense. For instance, it's impossible for me to grasp
that an elementary particle can *literally* be in two places
simultaneously! :o

"Nobody [not even Mlodi? -- card] knows how it can be like that."
 -- Richard Feynman

[FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:

2012-05-22 Thread obbajeeba

Some sort of dual existence is here. The post was posted twice without my 
knowledge I may have hit "send," twice. haha

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
>   It (Random subject as posted on this thread), has lead me to post the first 
> post in a long time to randomly express to the poster of the below that 
> randomness counts as long as it can't be counted, to conclude, this may have 
> not been a random post at all, since it was described as above. : ) (see 
> below.)
>   Since the karma attached to this posting is somehow adhering to the 
> directional movement of Saturn at this present time, from this present 
> position where I sit and experience what? 
> Time, in a motion as slow as molasses they say. Witnessing it as the same, I 
> do not see much difference than ten years ago today, when it comes to action, 
> the will, and material matter.
> 
> The only difference, there is a nice person named Emily to respond to. : )
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > "Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> > directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> > initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> > will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> > viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> > arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?"
> > 
> > 
> > How does this reconcile with "WE ARE THE MASTERS OF OUR OWN DESTINY." Â ???
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 1:29 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:
> >  
> > 
> > Â  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> > 
> >  --- Share Long wrote:
> > > 
> > > Can you give a nutshell version?
> > > 
> > >>> On 05/19/2012 11:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> > 
> >  The determinists on this forum are about to go
> >  bat shit crazy. :-)
> > > 
> > >> --- Bhairitu  wrote:
> > >>> 
> > >>> Ah, but can you prove that there is really any such thing as 
> > >>> "randomness". What appears to be random may be part of a 
> > >>> pattern and not random at all. :-D
> > > 
> > > --- turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> And vice versa. :-)
> > >> 
> > >> I'd be perfectly comfortable with a completely random
> > >> universe. What I sometimes wonder about are the folks
> > >> who not only wouldn't, but who seem to get their
> > >> buttons pushed at the very thought of it.
> > >>
> > > The universe is perfectly balanced between order and chaos.
> > > 
> > > This 'order' is more apparent when computers expand the 
> > > "view" of the universe to a very very large scale. On such a 
> > > Galactic level there is an eerie order.
> > > 
> > > The fact that nature has fixed set of laws proves that it's 
> > > not 100 percent random.
> > > 
> > > Evolutionary biologists say there is a balance netween 
> > > determinism and randomness in biological evolution. There 
> > > is a certain broad set of laws in evolution which will be 
> > > followed on any planet, yet randomness plays a role.
> > 
> > From the article that started this thread:
> > 
> > 'The two scientists stress that they have not thereby proved that the world 
> > is non-deterministic. However, they say there is nothing in between [that 
> > is, the world is either deterministic or non-deterministic, but not a 
> > mixture of both possibilities]. The existence of weak randomness 
> > automatically implies that there must be an unlimited amount of strong 
> > randomness. However, Colbeck says it is first of all necessary to achieve a 
> > particular "randomness threshold": "Our method allows randomness to be 
> > amplified once a certain threshold has been reached. It would now be 
> > interesting to know whether this threshold can be made arbitrarily small by 
> > using improved methods." This would then mean that an arbitrarily small 
> > amount of indetermisism would be sufficient to generate an unlimited amount 
> > of randomness.'
> > 
> > Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> > directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> > initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> > will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> > viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> > arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:

2012-05-22 Thread obbajeeba

  It (Random subject as posted on this thread), has lead me to post the first 
post in a long time to randomly express to the poster of the below that 
randomness counts as long as it can't be counted, to conclude, this may have 
not been a random post at all, since it was described as above. : ) (see below.)
  Since the karma attached to this posting is somehow adhering to the 
directional movement of Saturn at this present time, from this present position 
where I sit and experience what? 
Time, in a motion as slow as molasses they say. Witnessing it as the same, I do 
not see much difference than ten years ago today, when it comes to action, the 
will, and material matter.

The only difference, there is a nice person named Emily to respond to. : )

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> 
> "Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?"
> 
> 
> How does this reconcile with "WE ARE THE MASTERS OF OUR OWN DESTINY." Â ???
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 1:29 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:
>  
> 
> Â  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> 
>  --- Share Long wrote:
> > 
> > Can you give a nutshell version?
> > 
> >>> On 05/19/2012 11:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
>  The determinists on this forum are about to go
>  bat shit crazy. :-)
> > 
> >> --- Bhairitu  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Ah, but can you prove that there is really any such thing as 
> >>> "randomness". What appears to be random may be part of a 
> >>> pattern and not random at all. :-D
> > 
> > --- turquoiseb  wrote:
> >>
> >> And vice versa. :-)
> >> 
> >> I'd be perfectly comfortable with a completely random
> >> universe. What I sometimes wonder about are the folks
> >> who not only wouldn't, but who seem to get their
> >> buttons pushed at the very thought of it.
> >>
> > The universe is perfectly balanced between order and chaos.
> > 
> > This 'order' is more apparent when computers expand the 
> > "view" of the universe to a very very large scale. On such a 
> > Galactic level there is an eerie order.
> > 
> > The fact that nature has fixed set of laws proves that it's 
> > not 100 percent random.
> > 
> > Evolutionary biologists say there is a balance netween 
> > determinism and randomness in biological evolution. There 
> > is a certain broad set of laws in evolution which will be 
> > followed on any planet, yet randomness plays a role.
> 
> From the article that started this thread:
> 
> 'The two scientists stress that they have not thereby proved that the world 
> is non-deterministic. However, they say there is nothing in between [that is, 
> the world is either deterministic or non-deterministic, but not a mixture of 
> both possibilities]. The existence of weak randomness automatically implies 
> that there must be an unlimited amount of strong randomness. However, Colbeck 
> says it is first of all necessary to achieve a particular "randomness 
> threshold": "Our method allows randomness to be amplified once a certain 
> threshold has been reached. It would now be interesting to know whether this 
> threshold can be made arbitrarily small by using improved methods." This 
> would then mean that an arbitrarily small amount of indetermisism would be 
> sufficient to generate an unlimited amount of randomness.'
> 
> Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:

2012-05-22 Thread obbajeeba

  It (Random subject as posted on this thread), has lead me to post the first 
post in a long time to randomly express to the poster of the below that 
randomness counts as long as it can't be counted, to conclude, this may have 
not been a random post at all, since it was described as above. : ) (see below.)
  Since the karma attached to this posting is somehow adhering to the 
directional movement of Saturn at this present time, from this present position 
where I sit and experience what? 
Time, in a motion as slow as molasses they say. Witnessing it as the same, I do 
not see much difference than ten years ago today, when it comes to action, the 
will, and material matter.

The only difference, there is a nice person named Emily to respond to. : )

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> 
> "Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?"
> 
> 
> How does this reconcile with "WE ARE THE MASTERS OF OUR OWN DESTINY." Â ???
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 1:29 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A small amount of randomness can be amplified:
>  
> 
> Â  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> 
>  --- Share Long wrote:
> > 
> > Can you give a nutshell version?
> > 
> >>> On 05/19/2012 11:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
>  The determinists on this forum are about to go
>  bat shit crazy. :-)
> > 
> >> --- Bhairitu  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Ah, but can you prove that there is really any such thing as 
> >>> "randomness". What appears to be random may be part of a 
> >>> pattern and not random at all. :-D
> > 
> > --- turquoiseb  wrote:
> >>
> >> And vice versa. :-)
> >> 
> >> I'd be perfectly comfortable with a completely random
> >> universe. What I sometimes wonder about are the folks
> >> who not only wouldn't, but who seem to get their
> >> buttons pushed at the very thought of it.
> >>
> > The universe is perfectly balanced between order and chaos.
> > 
> > This 'order' is more apparent when computers expand the 
> > "view" of the universe to a very very large scale. On such a 
> > Galactic level there is an eerie order.
> > 
> > The fact that nature has fixed set of laws proves that it's 
> > not 100 percent random.
> > 
> > Evolutionary biologists say there is a balance netween 
> > determinism and randomness in biological evolution. There 
> > is a certain broad set of laws in evolution which will be 
> > followed on any planet, yet randomness plays a role.
> 
> From the article that started this thread:
> 
> 'The two scientists stress that they have not thereby proved that the world 
> is non-deterministic. However, they say there is nothing in between [that is, 
> the world is either deterministic or non-deterministic, but not a mixture of 
> both possibilities]. The existence of weak randomness automatically implies 
> that there must be an unlimited amount of strong randomness. However, Colbeck 
> says it is first of all necessary to achieve a particular "randomness 
> threshold": "Our method allows randomness to be amplified once a certain 
> threshold has been reached. It would now be interesting to know whether this 
> threshold can be made arbitrarily small by using improved methods." This 
> would then mean that an arbitrarily small amount of indetermisism would be 
> sufficient to generate an unlimited amount of randomness.'
> 
> Ramdomness is also not the same as free will, that is, randomness is not 
> directed by something as 'the faculty by which a person decides on and 
> initiates action'. Thus if the universe is deterministic, there is no free 
> will, and if the universe is random, there still is no free will. From the 
> viewpoint of physics, it would seem that the question of free will does not 
> arise, and so, if it exists, what is it, where is it, what has it?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Message from Dr. Steven Greer - Most UFO phenomena are manmade for ulterior piuposes by Masters of the Universe (MOTUs)!



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>
> If there are aliens and they're in cahoots with the Illuminati, then FUCK THE 
> ALIENS


They're not. They are working in close cooperation with the Masters.
http://www.share-international.org/magazine/old_issues/2012/2012-01.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: I learned how compassionate I am today, by trying to do my best (laugh)



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Yet another potential addition to the wonderful mix that
> FFL *should* be driven off by Barry's vicious intolerance
> of perspectives that differ from his own.
> 
> shain, it was nice having you here even briefly; sorry
> you were made to feel unwelcome. 


The list of the old man's disgusting people here is getting looong...

It wasn't you who
> screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
> >
> > I decided someone needed my car more than me! so give it away as I have 
> > everything I need, but I don't trust myself too much as I called my parents 
> > and asked them. They were negative and told me not to do it! This is a true 
> > story from me. Call it god support because he's being honest to me. 
> > Honestly I just saw it as perfect knowing that;s THE THING TO DO! so I gave 
> > in. and guess what I learned from my parents or my beliefs in life not to 
> > do that. So go figure, this is life saying I screwed up trying to help as 
> > they don't need to to help them, i guess. So byby fairfieldlife it was fun. 
> > No more help from me!
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
>
> > 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMB_cold_spot
> 
> http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/12/is-the-massive-cold-spot-a-sign.html
> 
> > 

Thanks, very interesting. Who would've thought just a few years
ago we'd have this sort of view of creation. Amazing really

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any 
> > > > > > > > > >>> statements 
> > > > > > > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by 
> > > > > > > > > >>> discoveries 
> > > > > > > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > > > > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Barry,
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > > > > > > >  ...
> > > > > > > > >  "
> > > > > > > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have 
> > > > > > > > >  anything to do with the "field of consciousness" is 
> > > > > > > > >  false. The notion that what physicists call "the vacuum 
> > > > > > > > >  state" has anything to do with consciousness is 
> > > > > > > > >  nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people 
> > > > > > > > >  meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a 
> > > > > > > > >  unified field of consciousness is foolishness of a high 
> > > > > > > > >  order. The presentation of the ideas of modern physics 
> > > > > > > > >  side by side, and apparently supportive of, the ideas of 
> > > > > > > > >  the Maharishi about pure consciousness can only be 
> > > > > > > > >  intended to deceive those who might not know any better.
> > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi 
> > > > > > > > >  causes me distress because I am a man who values the 
> > > > > > > > >  truth. To see the beautiful and profound ideas of modern 
> > > > > > > > >  physics, the labor of generations of scientists, so 
> > > > > > > > >  willfully perverted provokes a feeling of compassion for 
> > > > > > > > >  those who might be taken in by these distortions. I 
> > > > > > > > >  would like to be generous to the Maharishi and his 
> > > > > > > > >  movement because it supports world peace and other high 
> > > > > > > > >  ideals. But none of these ideals could possibly be 
> > > > > > > > >  realized within the framework of a philosophy that so 
> > > > > > > > >  willfully distorts scientific truth (Pagels).
> > > > > > > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his 
> > > > > > > > > opinion? It is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum 
> > > > > > > > > mechanics. This was based on things Larry Domash had written. 
> > > > > > > > > As I recall, Domash used the vacuum state of quantum 
> > > > > > > > > mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way one 
> > > > > > > > > might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy 
> > > > > > > > > describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common 
> > > > > > > > > centre of gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the quantum 
> > > > > > > > > vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or 
> > > > > > > > > how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field 
> > > > > > > > > equivalency that we see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still 
> > > > > > > > > of course talking about this. I do not know what Domash's 
> > > > > > > > > view would be today. 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak 
> > > > > > > > > Chopra, neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, 
> > > > > > > > > and scholar Jean Houston that took place in 2010. Though 
> > > > > > > > > Chopra is not in the movement any more, he does hew to the 
> > > > > > > > > new age quantum nonsense that many, including the TMO, make 
> > > > > > > > > their stock in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked 
> > > > > > > > > Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was 
> > > > > > > > > really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, 
> > > > > > > > > and physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up 
> > > > > > > > > and offered Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to 
> > > > > > > > > straighten out his misuse of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, 
> > > > > > > > > whose field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a bo

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
>
> 
> > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any 
> > > > > > > > >>> statements 
> > > > > > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > > > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > > > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Barry,
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > > > > > >  ...
> > > > > > > >  "
> > > > > > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything 
> > > > > > > >  to do with the "field of consciousness" is false. The 
> > > > > > > >  notion that what physicists call "the vacuum state" has 
> > > > > > > >  anything to do with consciousness is nonsense. The claim 
> > > > > > > >  that large numbers of people meditating helps reduce crime 
> > > > > > > >  and war by creating a unified field of consciousness is 
> > > > > > > >  foolishness of a high order. The presentation of the ideas 
> > > > > > > >  of modern physics side by side, and apparently supportive 
> > > > > > > >  of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness 
> > > > > > > >  can only be intended to deceive those who might not know 
> > > > > > > >  any better.
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes 
> > > > > > > >  me distress because I am a man who values the truth. To 
> > > > > > > >  see the beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, 
> > > > > > > >  the labor of generations of scientists, so willfully 
> > > > > > > >  perverted provokes a feeling of compassion for those who 
> > > > > > > >  might be taken in by these distortions. I would like to be 
> > > > > > > >  generous to the Maharishi and his movement because it 
> > > > > > > >  supports world peace and other high ideals. But none of 
> > > > > > > >  these ideals could possibly be realized within the 
> > > > > > > >  framework of a philosophy that so willfully distorts 
> > > > > > > >  scientific truth (Pagels).
> > > > > > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his 
> > > > > > > > opinion? It is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum 
> > > > > > > > mechanics. This was based on things Larry Domash had written. 
> > > > > > > > As I recall, Domash used the vacuum state of quantum mechanics 
> > > > > > > > as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way one might use an 
> > > > > > > > orange and a golf ball to create an analogy describing how the 
> > > > > > > > Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am 
> > > > > > > > not acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed 
> > > > > > > > into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently 
> > > > > > > > morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we see today 
> > > > > > > > under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I 
> > > > > > > > do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak 
> > > > > > > > Chopra, neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and 
> > > > > > > > scholar Jean Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is 
> > > > > > > > not in the movement any more, he does hew to the new age 
> > > > > > > > quantum nonsense that many, including the TMO, make their stock 
> > > > > > > > in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked Chopra over the 
> > > > > > > > hot coals repeatedly for this. What was really interesting 
> > > > > > > > about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist Leonard 
> > > > > > > > Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered Chopra a 
> > > > > > > > short course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse 
> > > > > > > > of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical 
> > > > > > > > physics, recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand 
> > > > > > > > Design). Mlodinaw said he had never come across a definition of 
> > > > > > > > conscious

[FairfieldLife] Indra and Northern Mesopotamia!


[...] our earliest record of them [the Aryan tribes -- card] comes [...] from 
south of the Caucasus, from the Mitanni kingdom of Northern
Mesopotamia, where a ruling dynasty bearing Aryan names and worshipping
Aryan gods such as Indra has established itself in the first half of
the second millennium BC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitanni

[FairfieldLife] Re: Message from Dr. Steven Greer - Most UFO phenomena are manmade for ulterior piuposes by Masters of the Universe (MOTUs)!



Highly advanced alien civilisations begin to use their 
energy more and more efficiently and their 'energy signature' 
becomes smaller and smaller.  Eventually, they become 
completely invisible and it's very difficult to detect their 
presence.

Advance alien civilisations also would have evolved beyond 
their biological bodies and maybe also their silicon bodies.

In all probablity when you meet them, they would not be 
biological entities.  Their ideology also would have evolved 
and might be more refined than ours.



---  Duveyoung  wrote:
>
> If there are aliens and they're in cahoots with the Illuminati, then FUCK THE 
> ALIENS
> 
> One of them lands, the first thing I do is push their tentacled noses into 
> their evil-by-omission.
> 
> Same goes for God appearing out of a cloud and expecting to be worshiped.  
> 
> Only enlightenment can possibly make this Kali Yuga worth it, and we all know 
> how many enlightened people there are out there walking on water etc. to 
> inspire the peoples.riiight.
> 
> BAH!
> 
> Edg
> 
> ---  "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > Invasion of the MOTUs! (Or the 0.001%)
> > 
> > Published May 16, 2012 | By drgreer
> > 
> > Hollywood and the pop culture is enthralled with the idea of " Alien
> > Invasion" . But why would they bother?
> > 
> > There are billions of planets with life, water and minerals in the cosmos-
> > why invade one that has billions of people warring over ideologies and armed
> > with thousands of thermonuclear weapons?!
> > 
> > The truth is ET civilizations are concerned with our hostility and potential
> > threat to the cosmos- not the other way around.
> > 
> > There is a proven track record of humans killing hundreds of millions of our
> > own people- and now classified programs have not only nuclear weapons, but
> > so-called scalar or longitudinal electromagnetic weapons that go faster than
> > the speed of light. And they have been used to track and target ET craft.
> > 
> > The secret world of real power (not in Congress or the White House) is the
> > domain of the Masters of the Universe- MOTUs- who crave absolute power and
> > control above all things.
> > 
> > Money is only a symbol and means to project that power.
> > 
> > And as Henry Kissinger said- and he would know- Power is the ultimate
> > aphrodisiac.
> > 
> > There is much talk about the 1%, and that is fine. But the real problem is
> > with the 0.001%  the 200-300 people and families and their corporations
> > that now control over 50% of the net worth of the entire world.
> > 
> > This military/industrial/laboratory/corporate/financial/energy complex is
> > the tail wagging the dog of Washington DC and every other world capitol 
> > and it is  unlikely that the politicians are going to bite the hand that
> > feeds them.
> > 
> > The reason UFO secrecy and the National Security State are so intertwined is
> > that these MOTUs simply cannot acknowledge that UFOs are real without
> > opening the lid on the pandora's box of advanced energy, propulsion and
> > physics that would make big oil, king coal and nuclear power completely
> > obsolete. For the word UFO is merely an obfuscating way to say New Physics.
> >  They are not Unidentified, they do not "Fly" in any conventional
> > aerodynamic manner- but they are Objects. Some UFO sightings are of ET
> > craft. But many- perhaps most- are of manmade anti-gravity devices that have
> > been in development since the 1940s.
> > 
> > So here is the $500 trillion dilemma:  If the MOTUs and their lackeys in the
> > media allow the masses to know this, the people will demand that they be
> > released from the macro-economic slavery in which they find themselves. And
> > then the relative control and power possessed by these MOTUs will be
> > dispersed to- well, the people!
> > 
> > Imagine every village in India, Latin America and Asia with an energy device
> > that allows the extraction of energy from the zero point energy field,
> > quantum vacuum or Dirac sea- or whatever you wish to call it.  The entire
> > world would blossom- but organically, without pollution and poverty- and
> > without the centralized control of the petrodollar system, Big Oil,
> > centralized utilities  without the MOTUs!
> > 
> > So the world is being consumed and invaded not by "Aliens" but by these
> > sociopaths, by the misanthropic proclivities of the MOTUs.
> > 
> > As I said to the senior officers at Wright-Patterson Air Force some years
> > ago,  IF the ETs wanted to take the earth, it would have all been over
> > around 1945 when we detonated the first A-bomb. For if you can travel faster
> > than the speed of light, you could easily take over our little corner of the
> > cosmos. But the ET's have no interest, intent or need to do so. It is utter
> > nonsense. All they need from us is our peace and cooperation.
> > 
> > So don't worry about the ETs: Hollywood, the CIA and Lockheed Martin may
> > want you to fear them. They may soon ev

Re: [FairfieldLife] I learned how compassionate I am today, by trying to do my best (laugh)

On 05/22/2012 11:48 AM, shainm307 wrote:
> I decided someone needed my car more than me! so give it away as I have 
> everything I need, but I don't trust myself too much as I called my parents 
> and asked them. They were negative and told me not to do it! This is a true 
> story from me. Call it god support because he's being honest to me. Honestly 
> I just saw it as perfect knowing that;s THE THING TO DO! so I gave in. and 
> guess what I learned from my parents or my beliefs in life not to do that. So 
> go figure, this is life saying I screwed up trying to help as they don't need 
> to to help them, i guess. So byby fairfieldlife it was fun. No more help from 
> me!

Sounds like you need to ground out.  High vata is not good for making 
decisions.  Be practical because tough times are ahead.  Some of us 
learned this the hard way back in the 1970s.

Having a car is practically a necessity like in transit deficient 
regions of Kalifornia. ;-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Message from Dr. Steven Greer - Most UFO phenomena are manmade for ulterior piuposes by Masters of the Universe (MOTUs)!

Of course there is the possibility that you might wake up tomorrow 
morning and discover you are an alien. :-D

I'm guessing the desperation trend I've been witnessing on FFL means 
that people got to get going on moksha because they sure as hell don't 
want to be reborn in this world again. Especially the way things are 
looking for the future. Like I say some of the deaths reported on FFL 
may well be people gettin' while the gettin's good. ;-)

On 05/22/2012 11:45 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> If there are aliens and they're in cahoots with the Illuminati, then FUCK THE 
> ALIENS
>
> One of them lands, the first thing I do is push their tentacled noses into 
> their evil-by-omission.
>
> Same goes for God appearing out of a cloud and expecting to be worshiped.
>
> Only enlightenment can possibly make this Kali Yuga worth it, and we all know 
> how many enlightened people there are out there walking on water etc. to 
> inspire the peoples.riiight.
>
> BAH!
>
> Edg
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>> Invasion of the MOTUs! (Or the 0.001%)
>>
>> Published May 16, 2012 | By drgreer
>>
>> Hollywood and the pop culture is enthralled with the idea of " Alien
>> Invasion" . But why would they bother?
>>
>> There are billions of planets with life, water and minerals in the cosmos-
>> why invade one that has billions of people warring over ideologies and armed
>> with thousands of thermonuclear weapons?!
>>
>> The truth is ET civilizations are concerned with our hostility and potential
>> threat to the cosmos- not the other way around.
>>
>> There is a proven track record of humans killing hundreds of millions of our
>> own people- and now classified programs have not only nuclear weapons, but
>> so-called scalar or longitudinal electromagnetic weapons that go faster than
>> the speed of light. And they have been used to track and target ET craft.
>>
>> The secret world of real power (not in Congress or the White House) is the
>> domain of the Masters of the Universe- MOTUs- who crave absolute power and
>> control above all things.
>>
>> Money is only a symbol and means to project that power.
>>
>> And as Henry Kissinger said- and he would know- Power is the ultimate
>> aphrodisiac.
>>
>> There is much talk about the 1%, and that is fine. But the real problem is
>> with the 0.001% – the 200-300 people and families and their corporations
>> that now control over 50% of the net worth of the entire world.
>>
>> This military/industrial/laboratory/corporate/financial/energy complex is
>> the tail wagging the dog of Washington DC and every other world capitol –
>> and it is  unlikely that the politicians are going to bite the hand that
>> feeds them.
>>
>> The reason UFO secrecy and the National Security State are so intertwined is
>> that these MOTUs simply cannot acknowledge that UFOs are real without
>> opening the lid on the pandora's box of advanced energy, propulsion and
>> physics that would make big oil, king coal and nuclear power completely
>> obsolete. For the word UFO is merely an obfuscating way to say New Physics.
>>   They are not Unidentified, they do not "Fly" in any conventional
>> aerodynamic manner- but they are Objects. Some UFO sightings are of ET
>> craft. But many- perhaps most- are of manmade anti-gravity devices that have
>> been in development since the 1940s.
>>
>> So here is the $500 trillion dilemma:  If the MOTUs and their lackeys in the
>> media allow the masses to know this, the people will demand that they be
>> released from the macro-economic slavery in which they find themselves. And
>> then the relative control and power possessed by these MOTUs will be
>> dispersed to- well, the people!
>>
>> Imagine every village in India, Latin America and Asia with an energy device
>> that allows the extraction of energy from the zero point energy field,
>> quantum vacuum or Dirac sea- or whatever you wish to call it.  The entire
>> world would blossom- but organically, without pollution and poverty- and
>> without the centralized control of the petrodollar system, Big Oil,
>> centralized utilities – without the MOTUs!
>>
>> So the world is being consumed and invaded not by "Aliens" but by these
>> sociopaths, by the misanthropic proclivities of the MOTUs.
>>
>> As I said to the senior officers at Wright-Patterson Air Force some years
>> ago,  IF the ETs wanted to take the earth, it would have all been over
>> around 1945 when we detonated the first A-bomb. For if you can travel faster
>> than the speed of light, you could easily take over our little corner of the
>> cosmos. But the ET's have no interest, intent or need to do so. It is utter
>> nonsense. All they need from us is our peace and cooperation.
>>
>> So don't worry about the ETs: Hollywood, the CIA and Lockheed Martin may
>> want you to fear them. They may soon even launch a false flag operation
>> "proving" we should fear them. But in reality it is the MOTUs who have
>> invaded the world,

[FairfieldLife] Re: I learned how compassionate I am today, by trying to do my best (laugh)

Yet another potential addition to the wonderful mix that
FFL *should* be driven off by Barry's vicious intolerance
of perspectives that differ from his own.

shain, it was nice having you here even briefly; sorry
you were made to feel unwelcome. It wasn't you who
screwed up.




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> I decided someone needed my car more than me! so give it away as I have 
> everything I need, but I don't trust myself too much as I called my parents 
> and asked them. They were negative and told me not to do it! This is a true 
> story from me. Call it god support because he's being honest to me. Honestly 
> I just saw it as perfect knowing that;s THE THING TO DO! so I gave in. and 
> guess what I learned from my parents or my beliefs in life not to do that. So 
> go figure, this is life saying I screwed up trying to help as they don't need 
> to to help them, i guess. So byby fairfieldlife it was fun. No more help from 
> me!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish


> > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Barry,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > > > > >  ...
> > > > > > >  "
> > > > > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to 
> > > > > > >  do with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion 
> > > > > > >  that what physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to 
> > > > > > >  do with consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large 
> > > > > > >  numbers of people meditating helps reduce crime and war by 
> > > > > > >  creating a unified field of consciousness is foolishness of 
> > > > > > >  a high order. The presentation of the ideas of modern 
> > > > > > >  physics side by side, and apparently supportive of, the 
> > > > > > >  ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness can only be 
> > > > > > >  intended to deceive those who might not know any better.
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes 
> > > > > > >  me distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see 
> > > > > > >  the beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the 
> > > > > > >  labor of generations of scientists, so willfully perverted 
> > > > > > >  provokes a feeling of compassion for those who might be 
> > > > > > >  taken in by these distortions. I would like to be generous 
> > > > > > >  to the Maharishi and his movement because it supports world 
> > > > > > >  peace and other high ideals. But none of these ideals could 
> > > > > > >  possibly be realized within the framework of a philosophy 
> > > > > > >  that so willfully distorts scientific truth (Pagels).
> > > > > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his 
> > > > > > > opinion? It is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum 
> > > > > > > mechanics. This was based on things Larry Domash had written. As 
> > > > > > > I recall, Domash used the vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an 
> > > > > > > analogy to explain TM, much in the way one might use an orange 
> > > > > > > and a golf ball to create an analogy describing how the Moon and 
> > > > > > > Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am not acutally 
> > > > > > > aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the 
> > > > > > > quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently morphed into the Unified 
> > > > > > > Field equivalency that we see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is 
> > > > > > > still of course talking about this. I do not know what Domash's 
> > > > > > > view would be today. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak 
> > > > > > > Chopra, neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and 
> > > > > > > scholar Jean Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is 
> > > > > > > not in the movement any more, he does hew to the new age quantum 
> > > > > > > nonsense that many, including the TMO, make their stock in trade. 
> > > > > > > In this debate, the skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals 
> > > > > > > repeatedly for this. What was really interesting about this 
> > > > > > > debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was 
> > > > > > > in the audience stood up and offered Chopra a short course of 
> > > > > > > quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse of quantum 
> > > > > > > notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, recently 
> > > > > > > wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw 
> > > > > > > said he had never come across a definition of consciousness that 
> > > > > > > made any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations 
> > > > > > > between consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was 
> > > > > > > presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2

[FairfieldLife] I learned how compassionate I am today, by trying to do my best (laugh)

I decided someone needed my car more than me! so give it away as I have 
everything I need, but I don't trust myself too much as I called my parents and 
asked them. They were negative and told me not to do it! This is a true story 
from me. Call it god support because he's being honest to me. Honestly I just 
saw it as perfect knowing that;s THE THING TO DO! so I gave in. and guess what 
I learned from my parents or my beliefs in life not to do that. So go figure, 
this is life saying I screwed up trying to help as they don't need to to help 
them, i guess. So byby fairfieldlife it was fun. No more help from me!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Message from Dr. Steven Greer - Most UFO phenomena are manmade for ulterior piuposes by Masters of the Universe (MOTUs)!

2012-05-22 Thread Duveyoung

If there are aliens and they're in cahoots with the Illuminati, then FUCK THE 
ALIENS

One of them lands, the first thing I do is push their tentacled noses into 
their evil-by-omission.

Same goes for God appearing out of a cloud and expecting to be worshiped.  

Only enlightenment can possibly make this Kali Yuga worth it, and we all know 
how many enlightened people there are out there walking on water etc. to 
inspire the peoples.riiight.

BAH!

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> Invasion of the MOTUs! (Or the 0.001%)
> 
> Published May 16, 2012 | By drgreer
> 
> Hollywood and the pop culture is enthralled with the idea of " Alien
> Invasion" . But why would they bother?
> 
> There are billions of planets with life, water and minerals in the cosmos-
> why invade one that has billions of people warring over ideologies and armed
> with thousands of thermonuclear weapons?!
> 
> The truth is ET civilizations are concerned with our hostility and potential
> threat to the cosmos- not the other way around.
> 
> There is a proven track record of humans killing hundreds of millions of our
> own people- and now classified programs have not only nuclear weapons, but
> so-called scalar or longitudinal electromagnetic weapons that go faster than
> the speed of light. And they have been used to track and target ET craft.
> 
> The secret world of real power (not in Congress or the White House) is the
> domain of the Masters of the Universe- MOTUs- who crave absolute power and
> control above all things.
> 
> Money is only a symbol and means to project that power.
> 
> And as Henry Kissinger said- and he would know- Power is the ultimate
> aphrodisiac.
> 
> There is much talk about the 1%, and that is fine. But the real problem is
> with the 0.001%  the 200-300 people and families and their corporations
> that now control over 50% of the net worth of the entire world.
> 
> This military/industrial/laboratory/corporate/financial/energy complex is
> the tail wagging the dog of Washington DC and every other world capitol 
> and it is  unlikely that the politicians are going to bite the hand that
> feeds them.
> 
> The reason UFO secrecy and the National Security State are so intertwined is
> that these MOTUs simply cannot acknowledge that UFOs are real without
> opening the lid on the pandora's box of advanced energy, propulsion and
> physics that would make big oil, king coal and nuclear power completely
> obsolete. For the word UFO is merely an obfuscating way to say New Physics.
>  They are not Unidentified, they do not "Fly" in any conventional
> aerodynamic manner- but they are Objects. Some UFO sightings are of ET
> craft. But many- perhaps most- are of manmade anti-gravity devices that have
> been in development since the 1940s.
> 
> So here is the $500 trillion dilemma:  If the MOTUs and their lackeys in the
> media allow the masses to know this, the people will demand that they be
> released from the macro-economic slavery in which they find themselves. And
> then the relative control and power possessed by these MOTUs will be
> dispersed to- well, the people!
> 
> Imagine every village in India, Latin America and Asia with an energy device
> that allows the extraction of energy from the zero point energy field,
> quantum vacuum or Dirac sea- or whatever you wish to call it.  The entire
> world would blossom- but organically, without pollution and poverty- and
> without the centralized control of the petrodollar system, Big Oil,
> centralized utilities  without the MOTUs!
> 
> So the world is being consumed and invaded not by "Aliens" but by these
> sociopaths, by the misanthropic proclivities of the MOTUs.
> 
> As I said to the senior officers at Wright-Patterson Air Force some years
> ago,  IF the ETs wanted to take the earth, it would have all been over
> around 1945 when we detonated the first A-bomb. For if you can travel faster
> than the speed of light, you could easily take over our little corner of the
> cosmos. But the ET's have no interest, intent or need to do so. It is utter
> nonsense. All they need from us is our peace and cooperation.
> 
> So don't worry about the ETs: Hollywood, the CIA and Lockheed Martin may
> want you to fear them. They may soon even launch a false flag operation
> "proving" we should fear them. But in reality it is the MOTUs who have
> invaded the world, corrupted Washington, ruthlessly enforced UFO secrecy and
> hidden the truth about these earth-saving new energy and propulsion
> technologies.
> 
> By all of us pulling together, disclosing the truth and bringing forth these
> new sciences, we can create a new civilization on earth. The MOTUs only rule
> by deception, corruption, ruthlessness and the apathy and complicity of the
> masses. But once we awaken globally, it is a new day indeed. 
> 
> 
> 
>  www.DisclosureProject.org
> 
> www.TheOrionProject.org
> 
> www.cseti.org
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > > 
> > > > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Barry,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > > > >  ...
> > > > > >  "
> > > > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to 
> > > > > >  do with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that 
> > > > > >  what physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do 
> > > > > >  with consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers 
> > > > > >  of people meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a 
> > > > > >  unified field of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. 
> > > > > >  The presentation of the ideas of modern physics side by side, 
> > > > > >  and apparently supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about 
> > > > > >  pure consciousness can only be intended to deceive those who 
> > > > > >  might not know any better.
> > > > > >  
> > > > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > > > > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > > > > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > > > > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a 
> > > > > >  feeling of compassion for those who might be taken in by these 
> > > > > >  distortions. I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and 
> > > > > >  his movement because it supports world peace and other high 
> > > > > >  ideals. But none of these ideals could possibly be realized 
> > > > > >  within the framework of a philosophy that so willfully 
> > > > > >  distorts scientific truth (Pagels).
> > > > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? 
> > > > > > It is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This 
> > > > > > was based on things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash 
> > > > > > used the vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain 
> > > > > > TM, much in the way one might use an orange and a golf ball to 
> > > > > > create an analogy describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a 
> > > > > > common centre of gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the 
> > > > > > quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or 
> > > > > > how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field equivalency 
> > > > > > that we see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking 
> > > > > > about this. I do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > > > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar 
> > > > > > Jean Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the 
> > > > > > movement any more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that 
> > > > > > many, including the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, 
> > > > > > the skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. 
> > > > > > What was really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal 
> > > > > > Tech, and physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up 
> > > > > > and offered Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to 
> > > > > > straighten out his misuse of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose 
> > > > > > field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a book with Stephen 
> > > > > > Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw said he had never come across 
> > > > > > a definition of consciousness that made any sense. It was clear 
> > > > > > that for Mlodinaw the correlations between consciouness and quantum 
> > > > > > mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no sense whatsoever, that 
> > > > > > is, it was nonsense.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > > > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of 
> > > > > > spiritual nomenclature and physic

[FairfieldLife] Message from Dr. Steven Greer - Most UFO phenomena are manmade for ulterior piuposes by Masters of the Universe (MOTUs)!

2012-05-22 Thread Rick Archer

Invasion of the MOTUs! (Or the 0.001%)

Published May 16, 2012 | By drgreer

Hollywood and the pop culture is enthralled with the idea of  Alien
Invasion . But why would they bother?

There are billions of planets with life, water and minerals in the cosmos-
why invade one that has billions of people warring over ideologies and armed
with thousands of thermonuclear weapons?!

The truth is ET civilizations are concerned with our hostility and potential
threat to the cosmos- not the other way around.

There is a proven track record of humans killing hundreds of millions of our
own people- and now classified programs have not only nuclear weapons, but
so-called scalar or longitudinal electromagnetic weapons that go faster than
the speed of light. And they have been used to track and target ET craft.

The secret world of real power (not in Congress or the White House) is the
domain of the Masters of the Universe- MOTUs- who crave absolute power and
control above all things.

Money is only a symbol and means to project that power.

And as Henry Kissinger said- and he would know- Power is the ultimate
aphrodisiac.

There is much talk about the 1%, and that is fine. But the real problem is
with the 0.001%  the 200-300 people and families and their corporations
that now control over 50% of the net worth of the entire world.

This military/industrial/laboratory/corporate/financial/energy complex is
the tail wagging the dog of Washington DC and every other world capitol 
and it is  unlikely that the politicians are going to bite the hand that
feeds them.

The reason UFO secrecy and the National Security State are so intertwined is
that these MOTUs simply cannot acknowledge that UFOs are real without
opening the lid on the pandoras box of advanced energy, propulsion and
physics that would make big oil, king coal and nuclear power completely
obsolete. For the word UFO is merely an obfuscating way to say New Physics.
 They are not Unidentified, they do not Fly in any conventional
aerodynamic manner- but they are Objects. Some UFO sightings are of ET
craft. But many- perhaps most- are of manmade anti-gravity devices that have
been in development since the 1940s.

So here is the $500 trillion dilemma:  If the MOTUs and their lackeys in the
media allow the masses to know this, the people will demand that they be
released from the macro-economic slavery in which they find themselves. And
then the relative control and power possessed by these MOTUs will be
dispersed to- well, the people!

Imagine every village in India, Latin America and Asia with an energy device
that allows the extraction of energy from the zero point energy field,
quantum vacuum or Dirac sea- or whatever you wish to call it.  The entire
world would blossom- but organically, without pollution and poverty- and
without the centralized control of the petrodollar system, Big Oil,
centralized utilities  without the MOTUs!

So the world is being consumed and invaded not by Aliens but by these
sociopaths, by the misanthropic proclivities of the MOTUs.

As I said to the senior officers at Wright-Patterson Air Force some years
ago,  IF the ETs wanted to take the earth, it would have all been over
around 1945 when we detonated the first A-bomb. For if you can travel faster
than the speed of light, you could easily take over our little corner of the
cosmos. But the ETs have no interest, intent or need to do so. It is utter
nonsense. All they need from us is our peace and cooperation.

So dont worry about the ETs: Hollywood, the CIA and Lockheed Martin may
want you to fear them. They may soon even launch a false flag operation
proving we should fear them. But in reality it is the MOTUs who have
invaded the world, corrupted Washington, ruthlessly enforced UFO secrecy and
hidden the truth about these earth-saving new energy and propulsion
technologies.

By all of us pulling together, disclosing the truth and bringing forth these
new sciences, we can create a new civilization on earth. The MOTUs only rule
by deception, corruption, ruthlessness and the apathy and complicity of the
masses. But once we awaken globally, it is a new day indeed. 



 www.DisclosureProject.org

www.TheOrionProject.org

www.cseti.org

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> >
> > They shouldn't be allowed to teach religious concepts at school
> > as though they were facts. This is what worries me about the
> > TMO, I heard one kid telling me he was doing well at jyotish at
> > school. WTF? What possible excuse is there for taking a young
> > mind and filling it full of garbage? 
> 
> Here's a relevant article. Bill Maher comments on Mitt
> Romney giving the commencement address at Liberty Uni-
> versity in Virginia. This is a "university" that teaches
> "creation science," and that the Earth was created 5000
> years ago. As Maher puts it so well, "This is a school 
> you flunk out of when you get the answers right." 
> 
> Bill Maher: Liberty University Is Not A Real School:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/19/bill-maher-new-rule-liberty-university_n_1530400.html

"Liberty's diploma may look real, Maher said, but "when you confuse a church 
with a school, Maher went on, "it mixes up the things you believe  religion  
with the things we know  education. Then you start thinking that creationism 
is science, and gay aversion is psychology, and praying away hurricanes is 
meteorology.""

- Well said.


 
> I think his argument extends equally to MUM. It's not 
> real school. Real schools don't teach students to believe
> in astrology and that chanting to gods and goddesses and
> waving candles and rice at them (yagyas) are "scientific."
> Real schools don't ban students from one of its supposedly
> most important functions for going to see a teacher from
> another school (of thought, if not of academia). 
> 
> > It's a shame because in
> > other ways they clearly benefit a lot from being in a school
> > like this, a positive atmosphere, stress free (compared to the
> > state equivalent). 
> 
> I would agree if the "positive atmosphere" were 1) based
> on reality instead of fantasy, and 2) actually present.
> It's not, after all, as if MIU/MUM hasn't had almost 
> exactly the same percentage of suicides and crimes over
> the years as other schools its size. If the ME hasn't
> demonstrated its effectiveness in one podunk town in
> Iowa, it certainly isn't going to demonstrate it on
> a grander scale.
> 
> > If only they would stick to teaching what is known 
> > or at least speculated to be true rather than dogma. 
> 
> I see *no problem* with them teaching fantasies about what 
> they believe *as long as they present them that way*. I 
> similarly have no problem with Liberty University teaching 
> "creation science" as long as they present it not only as 
> what it is (a belief based on a book of dubious authority), 
> and that this belief conflicts strongly with what science 
> tells us. Presenting it as truth is...uh...a lie.
> 
> > I propose all religious teachings be included in a lesson 
> > called: History of Human beliefs, that way you could keep 
> > it seperate and kids would learn how to think objectively 
> > and accept that mankind has gone through many strange belief 
> > systems and that there are unknowns and perhaps even 
> > unknowables and be happy with that but keen to find out 
> > for sure. 
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> > Telling people something is done and dusted does them no 
> > favours. We need the will to find out not the wish to believe!
> 
> Exactly. Emphasis on the "we." 
> 
> You and I are driven by the wish to find out. We (I'm 
> assuming here, based on many of the things you've written)
> dive into mysteries not seeking "pat answers" to them, 
> but well aware that they may expand into ever-deepening 
> mysteries. That's just NOT A PROBLEM. It may, in 
> fact, be a plus. How BORING it would be to feel as if 
> one had "all the answers."

I think that's about the size of it, I used to be into
all sorts of esoteric stuff but if you actually look
at it objectively it tends to disappear. Not much left
but I live in hope that some sort of supernormal power
is discovered, especially levitation via yogic flying
coz I already know how to do that! Not going to hold
my breath though, no sir
 
> For others, however, their fear of mystery and their need to
> "know the truth," even if that "truth" is just a bunch of 
> dogma spouted at them by someone *claiming* it's "truth," is
> so strong that they glom onto the pat answers given to them
> as if now that they've heard them they can relax, and stop
> thinking. It's as if you can hear them sighing mentally 
> and saying "Whew! I'm sure glad all that uncertainty is gone
> and I 'know' How Things Really Work now." 
> 
> For such people, it's probably a good thing that "schools"
> such as Liberty University and MUM exist. It gives these 
> people a place to hide from uncertainty, among peers who
> share their desire to hide.

Pat Yuga?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



> > > 
> > > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > > >>> 
> > > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > > >>> 
> > > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Barry,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > > >  ...
> > > > >  "
> > > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do 
> > > > >  with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what 
> > > > >  physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with 
> > > > >  consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of 
> > > > >  people meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a 
> > > > >  unified field of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. 
> > > > >  The presentation of the ideas of modern physics side by side, 
> > > > >  and apparently supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about 
> > > > >  pure consciousness can only be intended to deceive those who 
> > > > >  might not know any better.
> > > > >  
> > > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > > > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > > > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > > > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a 
> > > > >  feeling of compassion for those who might be taken in by these 
> > > > >  distortions. I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and 
> > > > >  his movement because it supports world peace and other high 
> > > > >  ideals. But none of these ideals could possibly be realized 
> > > > >  within the framework of a philosophy that so willfully distorts 
> > > > >  scientific truth (Pagels).
> > > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > > 
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It 
> > > > > is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was 
> > > > > based on things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used 
> > > > > the vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, 
> > > > > much in the way one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an 
> > > > > analogy describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common 
> > > > > centre of gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum 
> > > > > analogy morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or how this 
> > > > > subsequently morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we see 
> > > > > today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I 
> > > > > do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement 
> > > > > any more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, 
> > > > > including the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the 
> > > > > skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What 
> > > > > was really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and 
> > > > > physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered 
> > > > > Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his 
> > > > > misuse of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical 
> > > > > physics, recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand 
> > > > > Design). Mlodinaw said he had never come across a definition of 
> > > > > consciousness that made any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the 
> > > > > correlations between consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra 
> > > > > was presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > > > > nomenclature and physics.
> > > > >
> > > > Xeno,
> > > > 
> > > ---  "John"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It appears that Mlodinaw is just as confused as Hawking is about the 
> > > > importance of consciousness in the field of quantum physics.  Let me 
> > > > present you a

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > > >> 
> > > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > > 
> > > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Barry,
> > > > > 
> > > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > > >  ...
> > > >  "
> > > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do 
> > > >  with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what 
> > > >  physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with 
> > > >  consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people 
> > > >  meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a unified field 
> > > >  of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. The presentation 
> > > >  of the ideas of modern physics side by side, and apparently 
> > > >  supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness 
> > > >  can only be intended to deceive those who might not know any 
> > > >  better.
> > > >  
> > > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a 
> > > >  feeling of compassion for those who might be taken in by these 
> > > >  distortions. I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and his 
> > > >  movement because it supports world peace and other high ideals. 
> > > >  But none of these ideals could possibly be realized within the 
> > > >  framework of a philosophy that so willfully distorts scientific 
> > > >  truth (Pagels).
> > > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > > 
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It 
> > > > is true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was 
> > > > based on things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the 
> > > > vacuum state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in 
> > > > the way one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy 
> > > > describing how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of 
> > > > gravity. I am not acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy 
> > > > morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently 
> > > > morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we see today under 
> > > > Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I do not know 
> > > > what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > > 
> > > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement 
> > > > any more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, 
> > > > including the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the 
> > > > skeptics raked Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was 
> > > > really interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and 
> > > > physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered 
> > > > Chopra a short course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse 
> > > > of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, 
> > > > recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw 
> > > > said he had never come across a definition of consciousness that made 
> > > > any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations between 
> > > > consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no 
> > > > sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > > > 
> > > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > > > nomenclature and physics.
> > > >
> > > Xeno,
> > > 
> > ---  "John"  wrote:
> > >
> > > It appears that Mlodinaw is just as confused as Hawking is about the 
> > > importance of consciousness in the field of quantum physics.  Let me 
> > > present you a simple thought experiment:  If you were the only sentient 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish

2012-05-22 Thread John



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411"  wrote:
>
>  
> > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It is 
> > true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was based on 
> > things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the vacuum state 
> > of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way one might 
> > use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy describing how the Moon 
> > and Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am not acutally aware 
> > of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, 
> > or how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we 
> > see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I 
> > do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > 
> > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement any 
> > more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, including the 
> > TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked Chopra 
> > over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was really interesting about 
> > this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in 
> > the audience stood up and offered Chopra a short course of quantum 
> > mechanics to straighten out his misuse of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose 
> > field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking 
> > (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw said he had never come across a definition of 
> > consciousness that made any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the 
> > correlations between consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was 
> > presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > 
> > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > nomenclature and physics.
> >
> 
> 
> Science is based on materialism. All scientific theories are likewise based 
> on materialism.Obviously that would include quantum mechanics.
> Materialism proposes that consciousness is an epiphenomenon and has no 
> existence independent of matter( i.e. consciousness is an emergent property 
> of matter e.g the human nervous system). Given the latter it would seem 
> illogical to assert that "pure consciousness" is the same as the vacuum 
> state.The real question is whether consciousness is of a completely different 
> order of reality then matter/energy. IMHO that
> question can't be answered by science which is grounded in materialism.Chopra 
> et al are making a fundamental error in attempting to describe the nature of 
> consciousness using constructs taken from a materialistic/scientific 
> framework.
>
Shanti,

Based on MMY's teachings, Hagelin is stating that there is a grand unification 
between consciousness and matter.  He believes that this can be done through 
the superstring theory.  If he is right, he might have found the formula for 
the Grand Unification, which has been the holy grail since Einstein's theories.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish

2012-05-22 Thread John



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > > >> 
> > > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > > 
> > > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Barry,
> > > > 
> > > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > > >> 
> > > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > > 
> > >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> > >  ...
> > >  "
> > >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do with 
> > >  the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what 
> > >  physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with 
> > >  consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people 
> > >  meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a unified field of 
> > >  consciousness is foolishness of a high order. The presentation of 
> > >  the ideas of modern physics side by side, and apparently supportive 
> > >  of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness can only be 
> > >  intended to deceive those who might not know any better.
> > >  
> > >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me 
> > >  distress because I am a man who values the truth. To see the 
> > >  beautiful and profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of 
> > >  generations of scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a feeling 
> > >  of compassion for those who might be taken in by these distortions. 
> > >  I would like to be generous to the Maharishi and his movement 
> > >  because it supports world peace and other high ideals. But none of 
> > >  these ideals could possibly be realized within the framework of a 
> > >  philosophy that so willfully distorts scientific truth (Pagels).
> > >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > > 
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> > >
> > > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It is 
> > > true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was based on 
> > > things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the vacuum 
> > > state of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way 
> > > one might use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy describing 
> > > how the Moon and Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am not 
> > > acutally aware of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the 
> > > quantum vacuum, or how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field 
> > > equivalency that we see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course 
> > > talking about this. I do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > > 
> > > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement any 
> > > more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, including 
> > > the TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked 
> > > Chopra over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was really 
> > > interesting about this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist 
> > > Leonard Mlodinaw was in the audience stood up and offered Chopra a short 
> > > course of quantum mechanics to straighten out his misuse of quantum 
> > > notation. Mlodinaw, whose field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a 
> > > book with Stephen Hawking (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw said he had never 
> > > come across a definition of consciousness that made any sense. It was 
> > > clear that for Mlodinaw the correlations between consciouness and quantum 
> > > mechanics that Chopra was presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, 
> > > it was nonsense.
> > > 
> > > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > > nomenclature and physics.
> > >
> > Xeno,
> > 
> ---  "John"  wrote:
> >
> > It appears that Mlodinaw is just as confused as Hawking is about the 
> > importance of consciousness in the field of quantum physics.  Let me 
> > present you a simple thought experiment:  If you were the only sentient 
> > being in a given universe, and you died, would the universe still exist?  
> > The answer is NO.  The universe will disappear to nothingness.  Why?  
> > Because you are the only person who is capable of conceiving the dimensions 
> > of space and time.  Without your presence, how is

Re: [FairfieldLife] This is what I've learned from the conversation so far

On 05/22/2012 06:11 AM, shainm307 wrote:
> I've learned that emotions matter. Essentially the kundalini and chakras. It 
> matters a lot! That's the only I can see out of this conversation. Maybe it 
> would hurt Maharishi if they knew the truth, that they were vital for life. 
> If he knew that he could change his knowldge around and try to teach them. 
> Maybe he was scared he was wrong.  We can only teach positivity is your being 
> positive in life rather than just being happy (which from my mind comes from 
> the vedic texts as there was some type of emotional guidence scale around, 
> although I don't know where I leanred it.) If your in bliss and your 
> kundalini and chakras are right you'll be right in action and try to do the 
> best for people. Maybe people first need to learn they matter, then that 
> opens up, then they learn the rest? maybe?
>
> The kundalini and Chakras are important! Being that is the best thing you can 
> be? maybe?
>
> Learned a lot from my dad about this, but I think he's wrong. You have to 
> adjust them everyday through intention to be right? Idk maybe. I don't think 
> so though. Last time I tried that, I got into a car accident, right after I 
> did it. Maybe a sign from the universe? But I do think being right in your 
> action is important, as I'm seeing it, better your kundalini and chakras are, 
> the better your action. So maybe the movement is right on right action, but 
> it's not perfect loving truth. So they're right, but it's not what they're 
> really after as they could be more loving, and this probally goes until 
> you're pure love in heart.
>
>

If you want to learn about kundalini and chakras you'll have to move 
away from the TMO.  I gave up on it 25 years ago.  And 12 years ago I 
started learning from an Indian tantrik who now resides in the US.  He 
teaches all the stuff that TM should have but didn't because it is just 
"yoga lite" for the masses.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Out of Africa. Twice.

---  "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1212060/Ancient-skeletons-discovered-Georgia-threaten-overturn-theory-human-evolution.html
> 
> (Apologies for the slightly hysterical and misleading headline)
>

Many sub-types came out of africa before we did.  The 
Denisovan man was the asian counterpart of the Neandrathals 
in europe.  Some scientists think they might have even 
interbred with humans.

The DNA of the 60,000 year old mungo man in lake mungo 
australia is completely unlike anything seen in humans.

The human evolution is not linear and is more like a thick 
bush with many branches and many dead-ends.

www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2001/01/01/2813404.htm

[FairfieldLife] Out of Africa. Twice.





http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1212060/Ancient-skeletons-discovered-Georgia-threaten-overturn-theory-human-evolution.html

(Apologies for the slightly hysterical and misleading headline)

[FairfieldLife] Strange hammer!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf1fRu9YgfE

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!

Okay this is going to sound really stupid to you, but I think he was just a 
really bright guy. I mean from what I've gone through (which is dealing with 
schizophrenia, a little) I think guy is just really bright. He probably saw 
things that no one else saw and that matters. Because I sometimes see 
"nonsense"(um quantum mechanical gibberish, like pointed out earlier) and I 
also see perfection. I see a lot of stuff that would not make sense to people. 
Maybe Maharishi was a little bad at things because he was a perfectionist, 
nothing wrong with that. If he let go and let a little grey into the movement, 
everything would suck, a lot. People want perfection and personally I need to 
let the "grey" or "love" into my life. Personally I think this is all leading 
to he did not want the distortions of "negative emotions" get in the way, as 
that's what the kundalini and chakras say. I mean grounding color is staying 
true to who you are and being right in your belief. You have to be a little 
crazy and a little negative to do that, like most people I know. So stay true 
to your nature and grow!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
> > >
> > > ... Essentially I said It's not proven[but that doesn't 
> > > mean we should lie and say it's not true as it works; 
> > > plus considering it came from Maharishi it could be true]...
> > 
> > Good for you for speaking your mind, keep at it and challenge 
> > everything (even the idea that if it comes from Maharishi
> > it's more likely to be true)...
> 
> *Especially* the idea that if it came from Maharishi
> it's more likely to be true. While I still value the
> occasional thing he said, I have to also recognize 
> that he was one of the most irrational, superstitious 
> people I've ever met on this planet.
> 
> Case in point. One day at Squaw Valley in 1968, I got
> to see Maharishi start to walk into the big meeting
> hall, only to stop in his tracks one step into the
> room. His face turned white ( which if you think about
> it is not easy for a guy with his complexion ) and he
> turned around and almost ran away from the room. He 
> was in such a panic that people found a bench for him
> to sit down on until he could settle down a little and
> explain what it was that set him off. 
> 
> Turns out that he was a bit early for the meeting, and
> the cleanup crew had not finished setting up the room.
> As a result, most of the chairs in the room were sit-
> ting upside down on tables, I assume because the crew 
> had to get them out of the way while they mopped the
> floors. 
> 
> When Maharishi could finally talk, he explained to 
> Jerry and the others with him that upside-down chairs
> were considered to be one of the worst possible omens 
> in India. In his words at the time, their presence in
> a room allowed demons and rakshasas to invade the space.
> He refused to enter the room until the situation had
> been rectified, and even then didn't trust the crew at
> the hotel; he insisted on sending in a few of his own
> people to verify that the room had been rendered 
> "rakshasa-free." 
> 
> Now, was all of this either "likely to be true" because
> Maharishi believed it, or even *possibly* true? I'll wait.
> 
> My position is that over the years people in the TMO 
> developed a remarkably *unhealthy* regard for Maharishi's
> beliefs ( [being gay] "Better to be dead!" ) and super-
> stitions ( an icicle clearly formed by water dripping 
> from a roof onto a balcony was a "manifestation of Shiva" )
> being somehow "true" just because he expressed them. 
> 
> Need I mention the numerous things he was "sure" about
> over the years, such as the inevitable success of Vedaland,
> England being a "scorpion nation," and exercise being BAD 
> for people because each person has only a predetermined 
> number of breaths in their lifetime and thus raising one's
> breath rate with exercise would shorten their lives? Does
> anyone remember the lectures and brochures that promised
> ( in so many words ) CC in 5-8 years? Need we mention that
> back in Squaw Valley on that 1968 course he warned his 
> students over and over against *ever* getting involved in
> any way with the siddhis, and that they were *dangerous*?
> 
> The guy was just a guy. He was in my considered opinion
> a mix of well-meaning and charlatan. During his earlier
> years of teaching, I suspect that he leaned more towards
> the well-meaning side; in the latter years he devolved
> into almost pure charlatanry. 
> 
> I simply cannot *comprehend* anyone who actually believes
> that because he said something -- ANYTHING -- that makes
> it "more likely to be true."
>

[FairfieldLife] This is what I've learned about the conversation so far

I've learned that emotions matter. Essentially the kundalini and chakras. It 
matters a lot! That's the only I can see out of this conversation. Maybe it 
would hurt Maharishi if they knew the truth, that they were vital for life. If 
he knew that he could change his knowledge around and try to teach them. Maybe 
he was scared he was wrong. We can only teach positivity is your being positive 
in life rather than just being happy (which from my mind comes from the Vedic 
texts as there was some type of emotional guidance scale around, although I 
don't know where I learned it.) If your in bliss and your kundalini and chakras 
are right you'll be right in action and try to do the best for people. Maybe 
people first need to learn they matter, then that opens up, then they learn the 
rest? maybe?

The kundalini and Chakras are important! Being that is the best thing you can 
be? maybe?

Learned a lot from my dad about this, but I think he's wrong. You have to 
adjust them everyday through intention to be right? Idk maybe. I don't think so 
though. Last time I tried that, I got into a car accident, right after I did 
it. Maybe a sign from the universe? But I do think being right in your action 
is important, as I'm seeing it, better your kundalini and chakras are, the 
better your action. So maybe the movement is right on right action, but it's 
not perfect loving truth. So they're right, but it's not what they're really 
after as they could be more loving, and this probably goes until you're pure 
love in heart.

[FairfieldLife] New York Mining disaster 1941, drops body, Mahasamadhi

Robin Gibb: Bee Gees singer dies after long cancer battle
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/21/robin-gibb-bee-gees-singer-dies-after-long-cancer-/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&v=fLnuYFx1gIs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz1YihpalAM&feature=related
LONDON (AP) — With his carefully tended hair, tight trousers
and perfect harmonies, Robin Gibb, along with his brothers
Maurice and Barry, defined the disco era. As part of the Bee
Gees — short for the Brothers Gibb — they created
dance-floor classics such as “Stayin’ Alive,” ”Jive Talkin’”
and “Night Fever” that still can get crowds onto a dance
floor.

The catchy songs, with their falsetto vocals and relentless
beat, are familiar pop culture mainstays. There are more
than 6,000 cover versions of the Bee Gees’ hits, and they
are still heard on dance floors and at wedding receptions,
birthday parties and other festive occasions.

Robin Gibb, 62, died Sunday “following his long battle with
cancer and intestinal surgery,” his family announced in a
statement released by Mr. Gibb’s representative, Doug
Wright.

Mr. Gibb was the second disco-era star to die this week.
Donna Summer — who earned the “Queen of Disco” title by
singing “Last Dance” and “I Feel Love” — died of cancer in
Florida on Thursday.

The Bee Gees, born in England but raised in Australia, began
their career in the musically rich 1960s, but it was their
soundtrack for the 1977 movie “Saturday Night Fever” that
sealed their success. The album’s signature sound — some
called it “blue-eyed soul” — remains instantly recognizable
more than 40 years after its release.
The album remains a turning point in popular music history,
ending the hard-rock era and ushering in a time when dance
music ruled supreme. It became one of the fastest-selling
albums of all time with its innovative fusion of harmony and
pulsing beats. The movie launched the career of a young John
Travolta, whose snake-hipped moves to the sounds of “You
Should Be Dancing” established his reputation as a dancer
and forever linked his image to that of the Bee Gees.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!

2012-05-22 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
> >
> > ... Essentially I said It's not proven[but that doesn't 
> > mean we should lie and say it's not true as it works; 
> > plus considering it came from Maharishi it could be true]...
> 
> Good for you for speaking your mind, keep at it and challenge 
> everything (even the idea that if it comes from Maharishi
> it's more likely to be true)...

*Especially* the idea that if it came from Maharishi
it's more likely to be true. While I still value the
occasional thing he said, I have to also recognize 
that he was one of the most irrational, superstitious 
people I've ever met on this planet.

Case in point. One day at Squaw Valley in 1968, I got
to see Maharishi start to walk into the big meeting
hall, only to stop in his tracks one step into the
room. His face turned white ( which if you think about
it is not easy for a guy with his complexion ) and he
turned around and almost ran away from the room. He 
was in such a panic that people found a bench for him
to sit down on until he could settle down a little and
explain what it was that set him off. 

Turns out that he was a bit early for the meeting, and
the cleanup crew had not finished setting up the room.
As a result, most of the chairs in the room were sit-
ting upside down on tables, I assume because the crew 
had to get them out of the way while they mopped the
floors. 

When Maharishi could finally talk, he explained to 
Jerry and the others with him that upside-down chairs
were considered to be one of the worst possible omens 
in India. In his words at the time, their presence in
a room allowed demons and rakshasas to invade the space.
He refused to enter the room until the situation had
been rectified, and even then didn't trust the crew at
the hotel; he insisted on sending in a few of his own
people to verify that the room had been rendered 
"rakshasa-free." 

Now, was all of this either "likely to be true" because
Maharishi believed it, or even *possibly* true? I'll wait.

My position is that over the years people in the TMO 
developed a remarkably *unhealthy* regard for Maharishi's
beliefs ( [being gay] "Better to be dead!" ) and super-
stitions ( an icicle clearly formed by water dripping 
from a roof onto a balcony was a "manifestation of Shiva" )
being somehow "true" just because he expressed them. 

Need I mention the numerous things he was "sure" about
over the years, such as the inevitable success of Vedaland,
England being a "scorpion nation," and exercise being BAD 
for people because each person has only a predetermined 
number of breaths in their lifetime and thus raising one's
breath rate with exercise would shorten their lives? Does
anyone remember the lectures and brochures that promised
( in so many words ) CC in 5-8 years? Need we mention that
back in Squaw Valley on that 1968 course he warned his 
students over and over against *ever* getting involved in
any way with the siddhis, and that they were *dangerous*?

The guy was just a guy. He was in my considered opinion
a mix of well-meaning and charlatan. During his earlier
years of teaching, I suspect that he leaned more towards
the well-meaning side; in the latter years he devolved
into almost pure charlatanry. 

I simply cannot *comprehend* anyone who actually believes
that because he said something -- ANYTHING -- that makes
it "more likely to be true."

[FairfieldLife] This is what I've learned from the conversation so far

I've learned that emotions matter. Essentially the kundalini and chakras. It 
matters a lot! That's the only I can see out of this conversation. Maybe it 
would hurt Maharishi if they knew the truth, that they were vital for life. If 
he knew that he could change his knowldge around and try to teach them. Maybe 
he was scared he was wrong.  We can only teach positivity is your being 
positive in life rather than just being happy (which from my mind comes from 
the vedic texts as there was some type of emotional guidence scale around, 
although I don't know where I leanred it.) If your in bliss and your kundalini 
and chakras are right you'll be right in action and try to do the best for 
people. Maybe people first need to learn they matter, then that opens up, then 
they learn the rest? maybe?

The kundalini and Chakras are important! Being that is the best thing you can 
be? maybe? 

Learned a lot from my dad about this, but I think he's wrong. You have to 
adjust them everyday through intention to be right? Idk maybe. I don't think so 
though. Last time I tried that, I got into a car accident, right after I did 
it. Maybe a sign from the universe? But I do think being right in your action 
is important, as I'm seeing it, better your kundalini and chakras are, the 
better your action. So maybe the movement is right on right action, but it's 
not perfect loving truth. So they're right, but it's not what they're really 
after as they could be more loving, and this probally goes until you're pure 
love in heart.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

2012-05-22 Thread Shain McVay

 
Because "something bad is happening"?

I don't know, as I only learned positive things about TM. Um, It only worked 
for me because I was positive about it? I tried hard at it and it came back in 
a moderatly good way as almost all my anxiety went away, which is huge for me. 
But being modest in life is always good, rather than being agressive and angry.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > They shouldn't be allowed to teach religious concepts at school
> > > as though they were facts. This is what worries me about the
> > > TMO, I heard one kid telling me he was doing well at jyotish at
> > > school. WTF? What possible excuse is there for taking a young
> > > mind and filling it full of garbage? 
> > 
> > Here's a relevant article. Bill Maher comments on Mitt
> > Romney giving the commencement address at Liberty Uni-
> > versity in Virginia. This is a "university" that teaches
> > "creation science," and that the Earth was created 5000
> > years ago. As Maher puts it so well, "This is a school 
> > you flunk out of when you get the answers right." 
> > 
> > Bill Maher: Liberty University Is Not A Real School:
> > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/19/bill-maher-new-rule-liberty-university_n_1530400.html
> > 
> > I think his argument extends equally to MUM. It's not 
> > real school. Real schools don't teach students to believe
> > in astrology and that chanting to gods and goddesses and
> > waving candles and rice at them (yagyas) are "scientific."
> > Real schools don't ban students from one of its supposedly
> > most important functions for going to see a teacher from
> > another school (of thought, if not of academia). 
> 
> This is what I learned about that from Fred Travis: apparently the provide 
> you with a "current" model and the model can of course change (provided they 
> listen to their students good points, since I had a few. Essentially I said 
> It's not proven[but that doesn't mean we should lie and say it's not true as 
> it works; plus considering it came from Maharishi it could be true]. Also I 
> showed them potatoes are not slow digesting as the glycemic index says they 
> are moderate to fast digesting. Also I said Lactose intolerance doesn't come 
> from a misuse of lactose, it inherent[they could be kind of right though as I 
> never did the research fully] as 99% of Native Americans are lactose 
> intolerant and only 1% of [I think] Sweden is lactose intolerant). The model 
> is important however as it shows us we can never be certain, but according to 
> science it's the best thing we have is a current model of how we look at 
> things. So prove it wrong if you want and HOPEFULLY they will change it.

Good for you for speaking your mind, keep at it and challenge everything (even 
the idea that if it comes from Maharishi
it's more likely to be true) one day you might go through the
whole teaching and dismiss all of it except that you like TM
and it seems to do you good though nothing like as much as
promised.

The lactose thing is typical, I pointed this out myself.
Just because ayurveda says Indians are intolerant doesn't
mean everyone is. It's part of TM doctrine that if it's 
good for iron age India it's good for the whole world at
all times so they transplant the whole thing to today
without considering embarrassing facts like the type of
astrology they use to decide when is the most auspicious
time to do things doesn't use planets the people who
thought of it couldn't see. So much for perfect knowledge!
One example from many I can give. Keep asking questions,
there's nothing wrong with a mind of your own.

 
> > > It's a shame because in
> > > other ways they clearly benefit a lot from being in a school
> > > like this, a positive atmosphere, stress free (compared to the
> > > state equivalent). 
> > 
> > I would agree if the "positive atmosphere" were 1) based
> > on reality instead of fantasy, and 2) actually present.
> > It's not, after all, as if MIU/MUM hasn't had almost 
> > exactly the same percentage of suicides and crimes over
> > the years as other schools its size. If the ME hasn't
> > demonstrated its effectiveness in one podunk town in
> > Iowa, it certainly isn't going to demonstrate it on
> > a grander scale.
> 
> I have no idea the research on this however I heard from Craig Pearson that 
> Fairfield's crime rate is dramatically lower. Also I heard from (I think) the 
> governor of Fairfield that the businesses are blooming very well. So maybe we 
> see it maybe we don't.
> 
> 
> > > If only they would stick to teaching what is known 
> > > or at least speculated to be true rather than dogma. 
> > 
> > I see *no problem* with them teaching fantasies about what 
> > they believe *as long as they present them that way*. I 
> > similarly have no problem with Liberty University teaching 
> > "creation science" as long as they present it not only as 
> > what it is (a belief based on a book of dubious authority), 
> > and that this belief conflicts strongly with what science 
> > tells us. Presenting it as truth is...uh...a lie.
> > 
> > > I propose all religious teachings be included in a lesson 
> > > called: History of Human beliefs, tha

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

On May 22, 2012, at 8:17 AM, shainm307 wrote:

Try to do your research and see all (from what I've seen) people's  
negative research saying it's just relaxing or the negatives to are  
are full of shit. They don't do their research, their out to fuck it.

It's hard to know what or who you're talking of, but independent  
research has actually clarified the real nature of this relaxation  
response meditation form, and shown that many of the theories  
associated with TM are/were false. In that sense the truth sets you  
free - TMO indoctrination conversely is a form of mental delusion.

I agree that Maharishi and some people are probally negative in  
life and do negative things but If you're trying your best to be  
positive and honest in your nature then I'm sure these things  
wouldn't happen. Probally a build up of stress (go figure).

> aging monks, etc., etc.? Which is negative, the ones having people
> meditate till the point of mental illness or the ones pointing it  
out?

Since millions of people practice the technique I can hardly see  
why it would hurt people as there are (once again, from what I've  
seen and read about, you're not the only skeptic) very rare cases  
of these people. However, this should be studies more; why are  
people getting hurt?

Because "something bad is happening"?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On May 21, 2012, at 8:16 PM, shanti2218411 wrote:
> 
> >  IMHO that
> > question can't be answered by science which is grounded in  
> > materialism.Chopra et al are making a fundamental error in  
> > attempting to describe the nature of consciousness using constructs  
> > taken from a materialistic/scientific framework.
> 
> 
> Yeah, it would be much better if they used fairy tales from the Vedic  
> soma cult than this crazy science stuff!
>


There is a lot of truth in that cult! I'll be learning from them soon! And yes 
I know, it is a cult. But that's okay once they, hopefully, support 
individualistic thinking, it will all come together.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On May 22, 2012, at 2:05 AM, shainm307 wrote:
> 
> > Look at all the positives behind TM and what it has done for the  
> > world, yet people will try to tear it down for no apparent reason.
> 
> Uh, maybe because of the faked and dubious marketing research, TM  
> psychosis, the negative side effects, the lack of convincing  
> physiological evidence beyond relaxation, molesting of young women by  

Try to do your research and see all (from what I've seen) people's negative 
research saying it's just relaxing or the negatives to are are full of shit. 
They don't do their research, their out to fuck it. I agree that Maharishi and 
some people are probally negative in life and do negative things but If you're 
trying your best to be positive and honest in your nature then I'm sure these 
things wouldn't happen. Probally a build up of stress (go figure).

> aging monks, etc., etc.? Which is negative, the ones having people  
> meditate till the point of mental illness or the ones pointing it out?

Since millions of people practice the technique I can hardly see why it would 
hurt people as there are (once again, from what I've seen and read about, 
you're not the only skeptic) very rare cases of these people. However, this 
should be studies more; why are people getting hurt?

> Actually you come across like a cult zombie, so maybe you're the  
> negative one, you're just so deluded you cannot see it? Why on earth  
> would anyone want to support the meditation technique responsible for  
> more deaths, suicides, psychotic breaks than any other meditation  
> technique in human history and a patriarchal org loosely based on the  
> caste system?

Intersting I'll look into it. My guess is people are taught that it's not okay 
to be negative, and that alone is stressfull as you're not getting rid of 
you're negativity. As I learned in physcology, there are two fundemental 
motivators in life: agressiveness and sex. Maybe repressing this to the expreme 
is bad. That's my guess. I'll definately look into that more and ask the PHDs 
around campus what they know about that (pun intended).

> Perhaps you're right and TM should be banned from human nervous  
> systems...

I don't think so as it helped me out, truly. With me being content all the 
time, which sometimes get a little non-emotional. Maybe those Kundalini and 
chakras mattered after all!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!



On May 22, 2012, at 6:58 AM, turquoiseb wrote:


I think his argument extends equally to MUM. It's not
real school.


It's a Vedic madrassa - unconvincingly disguised behind a veneer of  
pseudoscience. Really, it's not all that different from Liberty, Oral  
Roberts U. and other similar level of consciousness diploma mills.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

2012-05-22 Thread Share Long

EVERY group, including this one, will present itself in such a way that 
Life/Universe/God is helping us live the 
Reality/Love/Beingness/Truth/Beauty/Silence that we are.

Another way to say?  Most groups are reflections of our internal dysfunctional 
family.  The outer group is an invitation to do the inner work and heal.  If 
there's a lot to heal, a person will probably need more than meditation.  This 
has been my experience.  Grateful for all the amazing grace on this journey 
including practicing TM for over 37 years.




 From: shainm307 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 1:05 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Do you want to help the world or fuck it?
 

  
What I've found in this reading is there are two types of people in the 
world:the people who try to help the world and the people who try to fuck the 
world. However some of you are positive in your motives for standing up for 
what is apparently and obviously right. I mean I try to stand up for what is 
right for the world because it is the best thing I can possibly do for people. 
However no matter how much evidence there is behind a topic people will 
deliberately try to fuck it just for a negative reason because the world 
possibly couldn't exist with something completely positive in it. It has to be 
wrong or negative to be right. I highly doubt this is the case in the world. 
Look at all the positives behind TM and what it has done for the world, yet 
people will try to tear it down for no apparent reason. Why? If everyone got 
together and tried to figure out what is good with it, it wouldn't work because 
some people would just be way too negative to ever
 believe it. If the negative people are out to fuck things what are they out to 
fuck? A small distortion in the knowledge? I imagine the best thing for us all 
to do is "give in" to positivity. I mean what is better than TM? Nothing in my 
mind. We have to do something right, not just tear it all down. If you want to 
tear this down, why? What is better than TM? Personally I think people are 
trying to find that one thing that exists in reality: the nonexstience, as I 
think technically everything is not right with the world. Do you want to find 
the small things that are wrong with it, or do you want to find the things that 
are right with it?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> >
> > They shouldn't be allowed to teach religious concepts at school
> > as though they were facts. This is what worries me about the
> > TMO, I heard one kid telling me he was doing well at jyotish at
> > school. WTF? What possible excuse is there for taking a young
> > mind and filling it full of garbage? 
> 
> Here's a relevant article. Bill Maher comments on Mitt
> Romney giving the commencement address at Liberty Uni-
> versity in Virginia. This is a "university" that teaches
> "creation science," and that the Earth was created 5000
> years ago. As Maher puts it so well, "This is a school 
> you flunk out of when you get the answers right." 
> 
> Bill Maher: Liberty University Is Not A Real School:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/19/bill-maher-new-rule-liberty-university_n_1530400.html
> 
> I think his argument extends equally to MUM. It's not 
> real school. Real schools don't teach students to believe
> in astrology and that chanting to gods and goddesses and
> waving candles and rice at them (yagyas) are "scientific."
> Real schools don't ban students from one of its supposedly
> most important functions for going to see a teacher from
> another school (of thought, if not of academia). 

This is what I learned about that from Fred Travis: apparently the provide you 
with a "current" model and the model can of course change (provided they listen 
to their students good points, since I had a few. Essentially I said It's not 
proven[but that doesn't mean we should lie and say it's not true as it works; 
plus considering it came from Maharishi it could be true]. Also I showed them 
potatoes are not slow digesting as the glycemic index says they are moderate to 
fast digesting. Also I said Lactose intolerance doesn't come from a misuse of 
lactose, it inherent[they could be kind of right though as I never did the 
research fully] as 99% of Native Americans are lactose intolerant and only 1% 
of [I think] Sweden is lactose intolerant). The model is important however as 
it shows us we can never be certain, but according to science it's the best 
thing we have is a current model of how we look at things. So prove it wrong if 
you want and HOPEFULLY they will change it.

> > It's a shame because in
> > other ways they clearly benefit a lot from being in a school
> > like this, a positive atmosphere, stress free (compared to the
> > state equivalent). 
> 
> I would agree if the "positive atmosphere" were 1) based
> on reality instead of fantasy, and 2) actually present.
> It's not, after all, as if MIU/MUM hasn't had almost 
> exactly the same percentage of suicides and crimes over
> the years as other schools its size. If the ME hasn't
> demonstrated its effectiveness in one podunk town in
> Iowa, it certainly isn't going to demonstrate it on
> a grander scale.

I have no idea the research on this however I heard from Craig Pearson that 
Fairfield's crime rate is dramatically lower. Also I heard from (I think) the 
governor of Fairfield that the businesses are blooming very well. So maybe we 
see it maybe we don't.


> > If only they would stick to teaching what is known 
> > or at least speculated to be true rather than dogma. 
> 
> I see *no problem* with them teaching fantasies about what 
> they believe *as long as they present them that way*. I 
> similarly have no problem with Liberty University teaching 
> "creation science" as long as they present it not only as 
> what it is (a belief based on a book of dubious authority), 
> and that this belief conflicts strongly with what science 
> tells us. Presenting it as truth is...uh...a lie.
> 
> > I propose all religious teachings be included in a lesson 
> > called: History of Human beliefs, that way you could keep 
> > it seperate and kids would learn how to think objectively 
> > and accept that mankind has gone through many strange belief 
> > systems and that there are unknowns and perhaps even 
> > unknowables and be happy with that but keen to find out 
> > for sure. 

The only problem I have with teaching people's religions are not absolute truth 
is it may go against their hearts and of course, being me, I think the heart is 
highest communicator of truth.

> Exactly.
> 
> > Telling people something is done and dusted does them no 
> > favours. We need the will to find out not the wish to believe!
> 
> Exactly. Emphasis on the "we." 
> 
> You and I are driven by the wish to find out. We (I'm 
> assuming here, based on many of the things you've written)
> dive into mysteries not seeking "pat answers" to them, 
> but well aware that they may expand into ever-deepening 
> mysteries. That's just NOT A PROBLEM. It may, in 
> fact, be a plus. How BORING it would be to feel as if 
> one had "all the answers."
> 
> For others, however, their fear of mystery and their need to
> "know the truth," even if that "truth" is ju

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



On May 21, 2012, at 8:16 PM, shanti2218411 wrote:


 IMHO that
question can't be answered by science which is grounded in  
materialism.Chopra et al are making a fundamental error in  
attempting to describe the nature of consciousness using constructs  
taken from a materialistic/scientific framework.



Yeah, it would be much better if they used fairy tales from the Vedic  
soma cult than this crazy science stuff!

[FairfieldLife] Re: 100 top events since the Big Bang

This is a good post. I disagree with it somewhat as the people on the moon 
don't matter that much. Industrial revolution mattered more to us, also imo 
American Revolution was a huge thing for America at least, rather than just 
being a not so relevant point. Also I agree with, and phycology agrees with, 
mass consciousness being aware somehow of others, as it teaches that people 
started to similar things at the same time rather than sporadically. This 
apparently is a hug point in phycology.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> http://www.fromthebigbang.org
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Do you want to help the world or fuck it?



On May 22, 2012, at 2:05 AM, shainm307 wrote:

Look at all the positives behind TM and what it has done for the  
world, yet people will try to tear it down for no apparent reason.


Uh, maybe because of the faked and dubious marketing research, TM  
psychosis, the negative side effects, the lack of convincing  
physiological evidence beyond relaxation, molesting of young women by  
aging monks, etc., etc.? Which is negative, the ones having people  
meditate till the point of mental illness or the ones pointing it out?


Actually you come across like a cult zombie, so maybe you're the  
negative one, you're just so deluded you cannot see it? Why on earth  
would anyone want to support the meditation technique responsible for  
more deaths, suicides, psychotic breaks than any other meditation  
technique in human history and a patriarchal org loosely based on the  
caste system?


Perhaps you're right and TM should be banned from human nervous  
systems...

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



On May 21, 2012, at 5:36 PM, salyavin808 wrote:


I don't know where you get that idea from, any theory can be
shown to be a false trail by lack of evidence.



As in the independent study of Vlodrop, Holland which showed that  
crime was actually higher in this area which has very large  
percentage of TM mantra cogitators.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Consciousness and Quantum Gibberish



> > >> --- "John"  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Yifu and FFL readers,
> > >>> 
> > >>> For your information, Dr. Pagels died in 1988. Any statements 
> > >>> that he made while alive has been superceded by discoveries 
> > >>> made in recent years in quantum physics. If he was alive 
> > >>> today, he would have changed his position.
> > >>> 
> > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Pagels
> > >> 
> > >  ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I rest my case. Quantum Idiots.
> > > 
> > --- "John"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Barry,
> > > 
> > > You haven't had a case here for a very long time.
> > >> 
> > >>> ---  "Yifu"  wrote:
> > 
> >  from Skeptic.com, by Dr. Heinz Pagels, physicist.:
> >  ...
> >  "
> >  The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do with 
> >  the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what physicists 
> >  call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with consciousness is 
> >  nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people meditating helps 
> >  reduce crime and war by creating a unified field of consciousness is 
> >  foolishness of a high order. The presentation of the ideas of modern 
> >  physics side by side, and apparently supportive of, the ideas of the 
> >  Maharishi about pure consciousness can only be intended to deceive 
> >  those who might not know any better.
> >  
> >  Reading these materials authorized by the Maharishi causes me distress 
> >  because I am a man who values the truth. To see the beautiful and 
> >  profound ideas of modern physics, the labor of generations of 
> >  scientists, so willfully perverted provokes a feeling of compassion 
> >  for those who might be taken in by these distortions. I would like to 
> >  be generous to the Maharishi and his movement because it supports 
> >  world peace and other high ideals. But none of these ideals could 
> >  possibly be realized within the framework of a philosophy that so 
> >  willfully distorts scientific truth (Pagels).
> >  What Chopra is peddling is quantum gibberish."
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
> >
> > First of all, on what basis would Pagels have changed his opinion? It is 
> > true Pagels trashed the TM theory of quantum mechanics. This was based on 
> > things Larry Domash had written. As I recall, Domash used the vacuum state 
> > of quantum mechanics as an analogy to explain TM, much in the way one might 
> > use an orange and a golf ball to create an analogy describing how the Moon 
> > and Earth, orbit around a common centre of gravity. I am not acutally aware 
> > of how the quantum vacuum analogy morphed into TC *is* the quantum vacuum, 
> > or how this subsequently morphed into the Unified Field equivalency that we 
> > see today under Hagelin. Hagelin is still of course talking about this. I 
> > do not know what Domash's view would be today. 
> > 
> > I recently re-listened to a debate with woo meister Deepak Chopra, 
> > neuroscientist Sam Harris, skeptic Michael Shermer, and scholar Jean 
> > Houston that took place in 2010. Though Chopra is not in the movement any 
> > more, he does hew to the new age quantum nonsense that many, including the 
> > TMO, make their stock in trade. In this debate, the skeptics raked Chopra 
> > over the hot coals repeatedly for this. What was really interesting about 
> > this debate was it was a Cal Tech, and physicist Leonard Mlodinaw was in 
> > the audience stood up and offered Chopra a short course of quantum 
> > mechanics to straighten out his misuse of quantum notation. Mlodinaw, whose 
> > field is mathematical physics, recently wrote a book with Stephen Hawking 
> > (The Grand Design). Mlodinaw said he had never come across a definition of 
> > consciousness that made any sense. It was clear that for Mlodinaw the 
> > correlations between consciouness and quantum mechanics that Chopra was 
> > presenting made no sense whatsoever, that is, it was nonsense.
> > 
> > The full debate: http://youtu.be/wi2IC6e5DUY
> > The debate covers much more ground than just this aspect of spiritual 
> > nomenclature and physics.
> >
> Xeno,
> 
---  "John"  wrote:
>
> It appears that Mlodinaw is just as confused as Hawking is about the 
> importance of consciousness in the field of quantum physics.  Let me present 
> you a simple thought experiment:  If you were the only sentient being in a 
> given universe, and you died, would the universe still exist?  The answer is 
> NO.  The universe will disappear to nothingness.  Why?  Because you are the 
> only person who is capable of conceiving the dimensions of space and time.  
> Without your presence, how is it possible for the universe to exist?
>

For the first 30 or 40 million years after the big-bang 
there was no life, not even bacteria in the universe.

The first generation stars made of pure hydrogen had to 
create other elements and explode.  Most of

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:

> And interestingly enough, you'll probably find a few of them
> here, and even more in Fairfield. Here on Fairfield Life,
> you are going to occasionally run into people who tell you
> the truth -- that, according to a consensus among people
> generally considered to be sane and rational in the world,
> you're not. You believe things that most consider silly. 
> You're free to believe these silly things all you want, but
> don't expect us not to point out that they're silly.

Thus speaks an old man on his way out of circulation. Has it ever occurred to 
you Turq that you are hopelessly conservative and stuck in a thinking about to 
be forced into the scrapyard of history ? You missed everything Maharishi 
taught about the world and it's future, and it shows. 
Although you consider yourself progressive you're actually the opposite; you're 
an old man stuck in a traditional way of seeing the world. A world about to 
vanish before our very eyes while you are gargelig nonsense and being "silly".

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!

2012-05-22 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> They shouldn't be allowed to teach religious concepts at school
> as though they were facts. This is what worries me about the
> TMO, I heard one kid telling me he was doing well at jyotish at
> school. WTF? What possible excuse is there for taking a young
> mind and filling it full of garbage? 

Here's a relevant article. Bill Maher comments on Mitt
Romney giving the commencement address at Liberty Uni-
versity in Virginia. This is a "university" that teaches
"creation science," and that the Earth was created 5000
years ago. As Maher puts it so well, "This is a school 
you flunk out of when you get the answers right." 

Bill Maher: Liberty University Is Not A Real School:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/19/bill-maher-new-rule-liberty-university_n_1530400.html

I think his argument extends equally to MUM. It's not 
real school. Real schools don't teach students to believe
in astrology and that chanting to gods and goddesses and
waving candles and rice at them (yagyas) are "scientific."
Real schools don't ban students from one of its supposedly
most important functions for going to see a teacher from
another school (of thought, if not of academia). 

> It's a shame because in
> other ways they clearly benefit a lot from being in a school
> like this, a positive atmosphere, stress free (compared to the
> state equivalent). 

I would agree if the "positive atmosphere" were 1) based
on reality instead of fantasy, and 2) actually present.
It's not, after all, as if MIU/MUM hasn't had almost 
exactly the same percentage of suicides and crimes over
the years as other schools its size. If the ME hasn't
demonstrated its effectiveness in one podunk town in
Iowa, it certainly isn't going to demonstrate it on
a grander scale.

> If only they would stick to teaching what is known 
> or at least speculated to be true rather than dogma. 

I see *no problem* with them teaching fantasies about what 
they believe *as long as they present them that way*. I 
similarly have no problem with Liberty University teaching 
"creation science" as long as they present it not only as 
what it is (a belief based on a book of dubious authority), 
and that this belief conflicts strongly with what science 
tells us. Presenting it as truth is...uh...a lie.

> I propose all religious teachings be included in a lesson 
> called: History of Human beliefs, that way you could keep 
> it seperate and kids would learn how to think objectively 
> and accept that mankind has gone through many strange belief 
> systems and that there are unknowns and perhaps even 
> unknowables and be happy with that but keen to find out 
> for sure. 

Exactly.

> Telling people something is done and dusted does them no 
> favours. We need the will to find out not the wish to believe!

Exactly. Emphasis on the "we." 

You and I are driven by the wish to find out. We (I'm 
assuming here, based on many of the things you've written)
dive into mysteries not seeking "pat answers" to them, 
but well aware that they may expand into ever-deepening 
mysteries. That's just NOT A PROBLEM. It may, in 
fact, be a plus. How BORING it would be to feel as if 
one had "all the answers."

For others, however, their fear of mystery and their need to
"know the truth," even if that "truth" is just a bunch of 
dogma spouted at them by someone *claiming* it's "truth," is
so strong that they glom onto the pat answers given to them
as if now that they've heard them they can relax, and stop
thinking. It's as if you can hear them sighing mentally 
and saying "Whew! I'm sure glad all that uncertainty is gone
and I 'know' How Things Really Work now." 

For such people, it's probably a good thing that "schools"
such as Liberty University and MUM exist. It gives these 
people a place to hide from uncertainty, among peers who
share their desire to hide.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> I'll respond to my last message as something popped up in my mind. Maybe 
> people who exist to fuck are there to refine the knowledge so I shouldn't 
> tear into you completely. However as I see us in an evolved society I highly 
> doubt there would be much fucking. I don't know if people should change or 
> whether we should allow them to try to do what is obviously BS. What are you 
> trying to do help them or hurt them? I mean does BS have a purpose, or is it 
> just a way to express you're hurting somehow. The studies on TM are obviously 
> right. I don't know how else to express that. If you do the research, or in 
> other words "sense" you will see that it is obviously right. The only way I 
> can see you disagree is because your experience doesn't agree with it. And If 
> you don't then why aren't you trying harder to make more of a legitimate 
> science by at least telling people what your feelings are to the people who 
> do the research so we all can benefit. Don't sit around here moping about it. 
> Try to make sense of what's happening. As from what I've seen if you're 
> putting forth what you believe, it will come back to show you what you're 
> missing. Try to express yourself to Dr.Hagelin or Dr.Fred Travis or Dr.Craig 
> Pearson they will help you as much as they can as long as they see you 
> striving and trying to accomplish good things. Now that brings us back to 
> what I said: are you trying to help or hurt? If you strive towards rightness, 
> nature support will guide you in the right direction.


Well said !

[FairfieldLife] Re: Common sense according to Albert!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Shain McVay  wrote:
>
> I agree with both the two previous posts and it used to drive me crazy that 
> people didn't listen to what I had to say at the movement, however some of 
> the did listen it changed, a little. I don't know what to say, maybe we 
> should be the example in the movement and at least try to come out with what 
> we think. I tried to explain it to them that they weren't listening but they 
> wouldn't, so I agree. I should be honest and say I question a lot of it. 
> However, I know I should give into what I know is right. Trying to do my best 
> is what I'm currently doing as I thought to myself, I just keep getting 
> fucked maybe I'm doing it all wrong. Maybe I should agree with them on the 
> important points and give the rest a rest. I'm not sure if this is positive 
> or not but I try my best to be. Maybe I'm wrong on things if I keep getting 
> fucked. It felt good to me to say that I'm just trying to fuck the world 
> maybe I should give it a rest and try to help, as that resonated a
>  lot with me. Vedic Science is probally the best science I've ever learned, 
> as it tried to say we're all positive, but I'm not sure it it's all true. 
> I'll go back to school at MUM and try my best to learn what's there and I'll 
> definately post to you guys what you want to hear about it, if you guys want 
> to learn about it. I mean I want to learn it all, all the science, religion 
> texts, and philosphies or at least how it relates to these philosophies. I 
> think there is a good start there but learning other things is also a good 
> start as I'm sure they won't teach me everything. But I don't know what to 
> learn elsewhere. What's good out there? What do the aliens know? What do you 
> guys think? Maybe you guys are already enlightened and you guys don't need it 
> anymore. There are a lot of interesting experiances I've heard from young 
> people at MUM as some of the science seems very true to me, including Cosmic 
> Consciousness, Ojas and things of that nature. I'll try
>  to be as honest as I can be.

Yup, I think I'm enlightened and have transcended the need
to believe stuff. Not that I ever did really, not in my nature.

They shouldn't be allowed to teach religious concepts at school
as though they were facts. This is what worries me about the
TMO, I heard one kid telling me he was doing well at jyotish at
school. WTF? What possible excuse is there for taking a young
mind and filling it full of garbage? It's a shame because in
other ways they clearly benefit a lot from being in a school
like this, a positive atmosphere, stress free (compared to the
state equivalent) If only they would stick to teaching what is
known or at least speculated to be true rather than dogma. I 
propose all religious teachings be included in a lesson called: History of 
Human beliefs, that way you could keep it seperate 
and kids would learn how to think objectively and accept that 
mankind has gone through many strange belief systems and that 
there are unknowns and perhaps even unknowables and be happy
with that but keen to find out for sure. Telling people something
is done and dusted does them no favours. We need the will to 
find out not the wish to believe!

>  From: cardemaister 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:02 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Common sense according to Albert!
>   
> 
>  
> Â   
>  
> 
> "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
> 
> A "silly thing" Albert did not believe in (Heisenberg's Uncertainty 
> Principle?):
> 
> "God does not play dice. "

But he does and even Albert ended up being good with that knowledge.

> Read more at 
> http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/albert_einstein.html#SWppkhMOHmbMaoMy.99
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Common sense according to Albert!

2012-05-22 Thread Shain McVay

I agree with both the two previous posts and it used to drive me crazy that 
people didn't listen to what I had to say at the movement, however some of the 
did listen it changed, a little. I don't know what to say, maybe we should be 
the example in the movement and at least try to come out with what we think. I 
tried to explain it to them that they weren't listening but they wouldn't, so I 
agree. I should be honest and say I question a lot of it. However, I know I 
should give into what I know is right. Trying to do my best is what I'm 
currently doing as I thought to myself, I just keep getting fucked maybe I'm 
doing it all wrong. Maybe I should agree with them on the important points and 
give the rest a rest. I'm not sure if this is positive or not but I try my best 
to be. Maybe I'm wrong on things if I keep getting fucked. It felt good to me 
to say that I'm just trying to fuck the world maybe I should give it a rest and 
try to help, as that resonated a
 lot with me. Vedic Science is probally the best science I've ever learned, as 
it tried to say we're all positive, but I'm not sure it it's all true. I'll go 
back to school at MUM and try my best to learn what's there and I'll definately 
post to you guys what you want to hear about it, if you guys want to learn 
about it. I mean I want to learn it all, all the science, religion texts, and 
philosphies or at least how it relates to these philosophies. I think there is 
a good start there but learning other things is also a good start as I'm sure 
they won't teach me everything. But I don't know what to learn elsewhere. 
What's good out there? What do the aliens know? What do you guys think? Maybe 
you guys are already enlightened and you guys don't need it anymore. There are 
a lot of interesting experiances I've heard from young people at MUM as some of 
the science seems very true to me, including Cosmic Consciousness, Ojas and 
things of that nature. I'll try
 to be as honest as I can be.
 


 From: cardemaister 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:02 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Common sense according to Albert!
  

 
   
 

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

A "silly thing" Albert did not believe in (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?):

"God does not play dice. "

Read more at 
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/albert_einstein.html#SWppkhMOHmbMaoMy.99

[FairfieldLife] Common sense according to Albert!


"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

A "silly thing" Albert did not believe in (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?):

"God does not play dice. "

Read more at 
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/albert_einstein.html#SWppkhMOHmbMaoMy.99

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

2012-05-22 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> I would say that criticism isn't a negative thing though, not much
> point continuing to believe something if it doesn't work and it
> isn't like anyones opinion here is going to stop an actual physical
> force from working so why worry about it?
> 
> Trouble is like all the naysayers here I've been through the cult
> and rejected it, which gives me a unique perspective I think. I've
> heard more complete bollocks from the mouths of TM spokesmen than
> I could recount on a long afternoon, maybe if they didn't have so
> much BS themselves so many people wouldn't have left in disgust.
> Hmmm?

Bottom line for me is that I am grateful that a few TMers
have appeared here lately who are not afraid to demonstrate
their Class A cult mindset. The rational lurkers will listen
to what they say, and to what the more "closet" cultists 
(who IMO try to avoid stating what they actually believe, 
and focus on "shooting the messenger"), and make their 
own decisions.

In my opinion, what is going on lately is a manifestation of
what I think is more of a "Tragedy Of Knowledge" than the
one Maharishi talked about. His TOK was when an enlightenment
tradition fails to produce any enlightened teachers, and thus
the whole basis of the tradition becomes baseless, mere parrot-
ing of dogma, with no consciousness behind it. I would submit
that his theory accurately predicted the future (and the
current state in the present) of the TM movement.

My version of the Tragedy Of Knowledge is when a spiritual
tradition degenerates to the point that its followers can no
longer rationally speak to people outside the tradition. 
Instead, they create "echo chambers" in which they really
only "talk amongst themselves." They already "know" what is
true, or Truth, because they've been told these things by
some person they consider an authority. When their beliefs
get a little shaky, they search for some other lesser 
"authority" (like "scientists" who dress in long robes and
wear crowns) to parrot the things they already "know" back
to them, and thus give some pseudo-credibility to the silly
things they believe. 

You'll have to forgive me if I neither respect this nor feel
that anyone caught up on this cult merrygoround is worth my
time to interact with. You really CAN'T have a productive
discussion or "debate" with them, because the outcome of 
any discussion is, for them, a foregone conclusion. They are
"in it" to 1) declare again, parroting their chosen "authority"
figure, the things they believe in, 2) cite "subsidiary auth-
orities" to make it seem as if the things they believe in are
true, and 3) play "shoot the messenger" with anyone who fails
to agree with either the primary authority or the subsidiary
authorities.

To me, the idea of ANYONE considering John Hagelin or Tony
Nadar "scientists" is laughable. They are religious fanatics,
caught up in the hamster wheel of samskaras I describe above.
They gave up their right to be considered scientists the day
they put the cart before the horse and decided to spend their
lives desperately working for "attaboys" from Maharishi instead
of pursuing real science. Those who invoke them are the same, 
but deserving of even less respect. 

But don't get me wrong. I hope that the recent crop of TM cult
religious fanatics who have descended here not only stay, but
post a LOT. The more they do, the more they reveal how they
think, and that *they've been taught to think that way by 
Maharishi and the TM movement*. 

That doesn't mean that I feel I need to waste my time inter-
acting with them, but I am grateful they're here. Every time
one of these cultists cites a guy wearing robes and a crown
as a "scientist," in my view it reveals a little bit more of
the charlatanry charade that is the TM movement. Every time
one of them tries to demonize a TM critic and play "shoot
the messenger," it reveals a little more of the real mindset
taught by that movement. 

There is no need to "debate" these cultists, or argue with
them. THEY, and the way that they think and write, are the 
best possibly argument against the things they believe.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

We'll off the top of my head this is what I do. I help my parents a lot as they 
are getting older and I keep good humor around them and try as hard as I can to 
help them in anyway I can. Also I try to heal people, although indirectly as 
I'm way too shy to truly get in there and truly help, by a healing technique I 
learned from The Reconnection book I read(read it if you can as there is a lot 
of evidence supporting it. There's stuff about the guy also if you want to read 
about it). Also I donated which seemed to me a lot of money to a charity of 
animals although I didn't have all the money in the world to donate to them. 
Although I don't do that much in life but try to be the best I can be, I'm way 
too shy and afraid I might hurt people if I truly try to help out. Every time I 
try to do something big life tells me not to do it. This is of course all the 
TM stuff I learned as it seemed to me to be the biggest thing ever. Although I 
make mistakes because I was afraid to hurt people and their religions. Also I'm 
afraid I might do something wrong to the movement as the David Lynch Foundation 
told me not to give the TM technique to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation 
as I might present it wrong, although I would do it just like John Hagelin or 
Fred Travis would as I would get most it it from their presentations and then 
give what I think the skeptics would agree on. Even though that's positive now 
I can see why they might overblow all of it as it helps a lot of people 
including me, as it changed my life for the better as it got rid of my anxiety 
and made me a bit more social. I realized now that all I want to do is help 
people and by screwing them there's no way I can help them. So I guess in order 
to help I need more confidence in myself and try my hardest to help the people 
that need help rather than just fuck them. I'm way too scared to get hurt for 
some reason as getting out of my cage is way too hard for me and TM is teaching 
me and training me to get out of my cage and to do it right!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Shain, I hereby invite you to list for us the things you
> have actually DONE to help the world in the last year.
> 
> Hints: Meditating doesn't count. Bouncing on your butt
> in a dome doesn't count. Believing in channelers and
> beings talking to you in real time (and in English) from
> 440 light years away doesn't count. Believing in walking
> on water doesn't count. None of these things actually DO
> anything for other people. They're things you dwell on
> because they make you feel more elite and "special."
> 
> What I'm after is a list of the ACTIONS you have engaged
> in that DIRECTLY benefit other human beings, in a way 
> that anyone, anywhere would recognize these actions and 
> agree that they actually DID SOMETHING for someone,
> and weren't just a way to puff up your ego.
> 
> For example, assuming that you work for a living, how much 
> of your income did you contribute to those in need last 
> year? How many hours did you work at an organization that 
> provides help to the needy? How many of the Occupy marches 
> did you attend? These are examples of DOING SOMETHING,
> since you seem to be a but fuzzy on the concept.
> 
> I'm asking this because I get a strong feeling from the
> way you write and the things you focus on that you won't
> be able to come up with a single item for your I DID THIS
> list. You'll be able to come up with a lot of "I take 
> credit for this trend I see as positive because I thought
> about it a couple of times," and you'll probably be able
> to come up with a few "I did good for the world because 
> my all-powerful Woo Woo was added to the sum of all-
> powerful Woo Woo on the planet, and thus created magic. 
> 
> The people on this forum aren't trying to "fuck with" 
> the silly things you believe; they're just trying to point
> out that in the absence of any objective proof they're silly. 
> You don't want to hear that. You want people to praise you 
> and think that you're all "special" because you believe in 
> silly things. 
> 
> And interestingly enough, you'll probably find a few of them
> here, and even more in Fairfield. Here on Fairfield Life,
> you are going to occasionally run into people who tell you
> the truth -- that, according to a consensus among people
> generally considered to be sane and rational in the world,
> you're not. You believe things that most consider silly. 
> You're free to believe these silly things all you want, but
> don't expect us not to point out that they're silly.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
> >
> > What I've found in this reading is there are two types of people in the 
> > world:the people who try to help the world and the people who try to fuck 
> > the world. However some of you are positive in your motives for standing up 
> > for what is apparently and obviously right. I mean I try to stand up for 
> > what is ri

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> What I've found in this reading is there are two types of people in the 
> world:the people who try to help the world and the people who try to fuck the 
> world. However some of you are positive in your motives for standing up for 
> what is apparently and obviously right. I mean I try to stand up for what is 
> right for the world because it is the best thing I can possibly do for 
> people. However no matter how much evidence there is behind a topic people 
> will deliberately try to fuck it just for a negative reason because the world 
> possibly couldn't exist with something completely positive in it. It has to 
> be wrong or negative to be right. I highly doubt this is the case in the 
> world. Look at all the positives behind TM and what it has done for the 
> world, yet people will try to tear it down for no apparent reason. Why? If 
> everyone got together and tried to figure out what is good with it, it 
> wouldn't work because some people would just be way too negative to ever 
> believe it. If the negative people are out to fuck things what are they out 
> to fuck? A small distortion in the knowledge? I imagine the best thing for us 
> all to do is "give in" to positivity. I mean what is better than TM? Nothing 
> in my mind. We have to do something right, not just tear it all down. If you 
> want to tear this down, why? What is better than TM? Personally I think 
> people are trying to find that one thing that exists in reality: the 
> nonexstience, as I think technically everything is not right with the world. 
> Do you want to find the small things that are wrong with it, or do you want 
> to find the things that are right with it?

Straight from the heart dude!

I would say that criticism isn't a negative thing though, not much
point continuing to believe something if it doesn't work and it
isn't like anyones opinion here is going to stop an actual physical
force from working so why worry about it?

Trouble is like all the naysayers here I've been through the cult
and rejected it, which gives me a unique perspective I think. I've
heard more complete bollocks from the mouths of TM spokesmen than
I could recount on a long afternoon, maybe if they didn't have so
much BS themselves so many people wouldn't have left in disgust.
Hmmm?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

2012-05-22 Thread Shain McVay

We'll off the top of my head this is what I do. I help my parents a lot as they 
are getting older and I keep good humor around them and try as hard as I can to 
help them in anyway I can. Also I try to heal people, although indirectly as 
I'm way too shy to truely get in there and truely help, by a healing technique 
I learned from The Reconnection book I read(read it if you can as there is a 
lot of evidence supporting it. There's stuff about the guy also if you want to 
read about it). Also I dontated which seemed to me a lot of money to a charity 
of animals although I didn't have all the money in the world to donate to them. 
Although I don't do that much in life but try to be the best I can be, I'm way 
too shy and afraid I might hurt people if I truely try to help out. Everytime I 
try to do something big life tells me not to do it. This is of course all the 
TM stuff I learned as it seemed to me to be the biggest thing ever. Although I 
make mistakes because
 I was afraid to hurt people and their religions. Also I'm afriad I might do 
something wrong to the movement as the David Lynch Foundation told me not to 
give the TM technique to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as I might 
present it wrong, although I would do it just like John Hagelin or Fred Travis 
would as I would get most it it from their presentations and then give what I 
think the skeptics would agree on. Even though that's positive now I can see 
why they might overblow all of it as it helps a lot of people including me, as 
it changed my life for the better as it got rid of my anxiety and made me a bit 
more social. I realized now that all I want to do is help people and by 
screwing them there's no way I can help them. So I guess in order to help I 
need more confidence in myself and try my hardest to help the people that need 
help rather than just fuck them. I'm way too scared to get hurt for some reason 
as getting out of my cage is way too
 hard for me and TM is teaching me and training me to get out of my cage and to 
do it right!

 From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 12:57 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?

Shain, I hereby invite you to list for us the things you
have actually DONE to help the world in the last year.

Hints: Meditating doesn't count. Bouncing on your butt
in a dome doesn't count. Believing in channelers and
beings talking to you in real time (and in English) from
440 light years away doesn't count. Believing in walking
on water doesn't count. None of these things actually DO
anything for other people. They're things you dwell on
because they make you feel more elite and "special."

What I'm after is a list of the ACTIONS you have engaged
in that DIRECTLY benefit other human beings, in a way 
that anyone, anywhere would recognize these actions and 
agree that they actually DID SOMETHING for someone,
and weren't just a way to puff up your ego.

For example, assuming that you work for a living, how much 
of your income did you contribute to those in need last 
year? How many hours did you work at an organization that 
provides help to the needy? How many of the Occupy marches 
did you attend? These are examples of DOING SOMETHING,
since you seem to be a but fuzzy on the concept.

I'm asking this because I get a strong feeling from the
way you write and the things you focus on that you won't
be able to come up with a single item for your I DID THIS
list. You'll be able to come up with a lot of "I take 
credit for this trend I see as positive because I thought
about it a couple of times," and you'll probably be able
to come up with a few "I did good for the world because 
my all-powerful Woo Woo was added to the sum of all-
powerful Woo Woo on the planet, and thus created magic. 

The people on this forum aren't trying to "fuck with" 
the silly things you believe; they're just trying to point
out that in the absence of any objective proof they're silly. 
You don't want to hear that. You want people to praise you 
and think that you're all "special" because you believe in 
silly things. 

And interestingly enough, you'll probably find a few of them
here, and even more in Fairfield. Here on Fairfield Life,
you are going to occasionally run into people who tell you
the truth -- that, according to a consensus among people
generally considered to be sane and rational in the world,
you're not. You believe things that most consider silly. 
You're free to believe these silly things all you want, but
don't expect us not to point out that they're silly.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shainm307"  wrote:
>
> What I've found in this reading is there are two types of people in the 
> world:the people who try to help the world and the people who try to fuck the 
> world. However some of you are positive in your motives for standing up for 
> what is apparently and obviously right. I me

[FairfieldLife] Re: Do you want to help the world or fuck it?