In this short piece Dark Journalist, explains that he is exposing a plot by the intelligence communities to infiltrate, and subvert both the new age movement, and those investigating UFOs, and the secret space program.
I know that the new age movement was hijacked a very long time ago, and the government has been controlling the UFO narrative since at least 1948.
So I am wondering what took him so long to notice.
There have been plenty of heavyweight researchers who have exposed many aspects of the secret space program, and I'm sure they need to reassert some control over the narrative. Personally I don't think disclosure is on the agenda, but it does serve their purpose to pretend. It does appear they are trying to mainstream Cory Goode.
The new age community has already been dumbed down to the point of idiocy.
To them, "disclosure", is analogous to the time-tested tradition of waiting for a "savior".
It would appear to me that there's a marketing campaign going on to try to rope more people into it.
That's just a casual observation on my part.
Thanks for your reply to my post re. Entropy.
Mr.Fix's philosophy cannot function if entropy is a universal law. Entropy comes from a principle of thermodynamics dealing with energy. It refers to the idea that everything in the universe moves from order to disorder.
Entropy is defined as the measurement of that change.
Evolution is the dynamic that can defy entropy (for some time) . But Mr.Fix will not accept evolution as a component of creation.
The truth is that environmental change is the dynamo that drives life in it's myriad forms.
Of course the universe as we know it is subject to the laws of entropy.
When the sun burns out we are all history.
I am a border ruffian from the State of Missouri. I am a Connecticut Yankee by adoption. In me you have Missouri morals, Connecticut culture; this, gentlemen, is the combination which makes the perfect man.
- Mark Twain December 22, 1881
AM Edit to Twain ... the perfect man ... or woman!
Does anyone know why they work on the main site but don't work here?
Mark Twain, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry David Thoreau. If our society, was familiar with and took to heart just one of these men's commentaries about politics and the nature of man, including the nature of the political promises, society wouldn't be in the state it's in. None of the candidates would have been elected. I'll forgo reposting all the Mark Twain quotes I did pre-election. They had no impact then and likely now. And probably Jonathan Swift for his time.
And if all the pundits, including the ones I like, had just a basic understanding of the influence fo the stars and had looked at a chart while Trump was in Saudi Arabia, they would have seen that all Donald's hard aspects would ultimately spell failure for his negotiations and we'd be less under the influence of spin and propaganda to determine what happened.
The above three probably wouldn't need the stars because they all had an innate sense of human nature and could pierce through bullshit without resorting to some "experts' commentary or a chart. Most people had these capabilities when they were kids and you could immediately tell an adult who was lying or was truthful. We've replaced our own intuitive abilities and given it away to "experts" when a child before age 5 is still capable for seeing through falsehood, but afterwards all the programming comes in and starts to loose it.
...8 miles from Mark Twain''s house in CT. Annual field trips and reading Twain's work were a big part of my childhood education:
Since then, CT has become a sanctuary for libtards and corruption and I wonder if the kids in CT even learn about Twain anymore. I moved out of CT in 2010 but still have many friends and family there. 1 by 1, they are waking up and moving out of that absolute shithole. Their current governor is nothing short of retarded and has destroyed what little freedom was left there.
Oh just a few since nobody reads him anymore. I learned alot about monkey's
What is Man? Man is a noisome bacillus whom Our Heavenly Father created because he was disappointed in the monkey.
- Mark Twain in Eruption
I believe that our Heavenly Father invented man because he was disappointed in the monkey. I believe that whenever a human being, of even the highest intelligence and culture, delivers, an opinion upon a matter apart from his particular and especial line of interest, training and experience, it will always be an opinion so foolish and so valueless a sort that it can be depended upon to suggest to our Heavenly Father that the human being is another disappointment and that he is no considerable improvement upon the monkey.
Biblical based quotes
Such is the human race. Often it does seem such a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the boat.
- Christian Science, 1907
I am the only man living who understands human nature; God has put me in charge of this branch office; when I retire there will be no-one to take my place. I shall keep on doing my duty, for when I get over on the other side, I shall use my influence to have the human race drowned again, and this time drowned good, no omissions, no Ark.
- quoted in Mark Twain, J. Macy, (Doubleday, Page & co., 1913)
We are nothing but echoes. We have no thoughts of or own, no opinions of our own, we are but a compost heap made up of the decayed heredities, moral and physical.
- Mark Twain's Notebook
Concerning the difference between man and the jackass: some observers hold that there isn't any. But this wrongs the jackass.
- Mark Twain's Notebook, 1898
How could you not resonate with such brilliance!!
Okay, as you guys know I've taken the the the task of exploring the nature of consciousness, not so much the philosophy, (Not that that isn't important), but the actual science behind it.
In a synchronous universe, it just so happened that I woke up to some of the material I was looking for, which is also a compilation of the work of many others.
Ata, (And anyone else interested),
If you go through this video with a pad and a pencil nearby, and write down the names, and the works of the different contributors, a truly in-depth exploration becomes quite possible.
This particular video is more or less an overview, but it sites multiple experiments that goes on to prove many of the assertions that I have made over the past year or so.
For example, I'm not buying the crap that we have no thoughts of our own, so screw Mark Twain, although I do consider him quite the gifted philosopher.
As far as evolution is concerned, there is only evolution of consciousness. Evolution in the material realm absolutely must be preceded by an evolution in consciousness.
Darwins model is hopelessly flawed, and in fact, there is no evidence whatsoever to substantiate it. It's a myth, invented to keep us from seeing what's actually going on.
If you'd like a real working model, easily provable, and the findings of cutting edge science and quantum physics, into the areas of consciousness, and in fact evolution, this video is well worth your time:
Published on May 26, 2017
There is a growing revolution in the field of human consciousness. A greater search for personal meaning is emerging, driven by a generation of self help, alternative health and spiritual books that address the bigger questions to which people seek answers. This video is a contribution to the evolution of human consciousness, seen through the eyes of both practitioners and clients.
This video blends some of the simple yet powerful concepts of Quantum Physics, Expanded States of Awareness and cutting edge models and research in the field of human consciousness. The combination of these different, though complimentary areas of human potential combine to form what has come to be known as the Quantum Consciousness Experience. We draw on the quantum principles of: The Observer Effect, Entanglement, Non-locality and the Holographic nature of our existence.
I have already studied the works of many of the researchers mentioned in this video, but I have also discovered areas of study which I need to pursue at a deeper level.
It's somewhat therapeutic, and at least it outlines a course of action.
New discoveries create new thoughts. New thoughts create new discoveries. Yeah, it's kind of like the chicken and the egg,
but evolution of consciousness does in fact result in the creation of thoughts that are not hereditary.
I only need to look at my own family of origin to prove this.
Mr. Fix wrote: For example, I'm not buying the crap that we have no thoughts of our own, so screw Mark Twain, although I do consider him quite the gifted philosopher.
I will ascert with great authority, confidence, grandiosity and ego narcissicm (not really confidence is not the same as the last two) that Mark Twain, the greatest thinker of his generation, is absolutely correct.
I will also ascert that you just opened a rabbit hole so deep, and so wide, that you are unaware of all the ramifications of Mark Twain's statement.
This gets down to the nature of reality and how things work. I really don't feel inclined to have the conversation where I have to support with great specificity the idea's that support Mark Twain's conclusion. Actually, we've dealt with some these concepts in the past and I'd have to talk about things like layers of the mental function with man, the unconscious thoughtstream, how we tap into it and la la la la la.
Would it suffice to say that probably Twain didn't know any of that esoteric stuff, but he looked out into the world of the TFMetals of his day and realized that most people were simply repeating what they read somewhere else and accepted it as truth? Even when somebody says the coming collapse, I have no idea what they are talking about but I'm certain they are repeating something somebody else said.
Would it suffice to just accept the spirit of his comment instead of looking at the detail? It's not to say what you write isn't unique. Your commentary on why debate was rather good. You uniquely took diverse thoughtforms from the ethers ran them through your processor and laid them out in a structure that some of us said, very nice job. Were there any original thoughts?
Even take any event that we discuss. There might be only one person that brings forth some very insightful perspective on what's happening. But the creative process in itself is a process of being to able to tap into a creative flow. Some people are not connected to it at all.
Was Mozart or Bach unique? Yes, they brought through music that never had been heard before, the combination of tones, rhythms. But what they were doing were actually translating stuff they heard in their head that already existed. Because all creation is complete. The Universe is actually in a state of already finished. It just has not all been manifested in this moment of time. All creative works, all inventions, all idea's have been written by the creator. Somebody might invent something new but would you know what acutally is transpiring according to the literature?
So like I said big rabbit hole so it might be sufficient just to see if we can agree on the spirit of the comment by going to main street and looking at the daily comments and bring back here a statement that isn't a result of somebody else.
Fix, I have a more efficient way to resolve our disagreement so I don't have to listen to another person say I'm a windbag which is quote, I'm not going to answer or reply to your post and most of it I didn't get.
You recognize that Twain is a satireist? And the idea that monkey's and jackass's are superior to humans is an dramatic exaggeration of a truth that actually helps you to get an idea that isn't literal.
Secondly, google Scott Adams Moist Robot theory. I posted it a long time ago. He is saying the same thing that Twain is saying. And in a different way saying the same thing that AM is saying about how emotions were used to get people to vote for Trump. Probably a 100 ways to say the same thing. They all look original until you reduce it to the pure concept which is universal and timeless.
After you review Scott Adams moist robot theory, tell me if you still have a problem with the idea or Adams like Twain is full of bullshit and you have a better operating theory on how human's process information.
Yeah I know, we are way down deep in the rabbit hole now. I will agree that most of what I post is a compilation of things that I've read, things that I've heard, and knowledge that was essentially handed to me from others.
Even when I speak of my own experiences, they are in fact old stories, told thousands of times throughout history.
So in the spirit of things, Mark Twain was right, or at least his statement can be described is accurate the overwhelming majority of the time in human experience.
I was specifically addressing the evolution of consciousness, not even on the micro individual level, but on the macro overall universal level. It does evolve overtime, and at some level, there must be new input into the Universal consciousness field.
After all, it's how the universe itself learns.
For someone to come up with a genuinely new thought, would be quite an anomaly, yes, a very, very rare occurrence.
Even some of humanity's greatest philosophers may have not had any original thoughts of their own. They were just tuned into what is.
But for example, for the consciousness of an amoeba to evolve into the consciousness of a human being, some new input had to evolve somewhere, somehow. I would venture to say that our physical existence is for such a purpose.
How about all of the new ideas required to turn human civilization from a Stone Aged worker, to an intergalactic spacefaring race? Do you think there was some new input at a certain point?
Even if there weren't any original ideas in this particular realm, new ideas needed to be placed in other realms or we would never have access them.
It could be for example argued that Nicola Tesla was channeling knowledge from Advanced ancient civilizations, and that even his ideas were not new, or unique, but where did those ancients get their knowledge from?
Now we are back to the idea of time being circular, and that the ancients derived their knowledge from those who preceded them, all the way back to infinity?
Well, now you've got me thinking...
I may have just proved myself wrong, and you correct.
Except for one thing...
I was under the impression that our actual purpose for being here was to learn, grow, and contribute to the knowledge of the overall universe.
If the universe always has been and always will be a "know it all", then Mark Twain is correct.
If the universe actually seeks new knowledge and learns, then he is not.
That's what I call an interesting thought experiment, I will have to ponder it while work today.
Thanks for the reply,
Have a nice day.
I recognize that much of Mark Twain's brilliance was in his satire, and many of his statements should simply be viewed as such.
Then we don't have to explore any rabbit holes.
You probably know me well enough by now to know that I simply don't think in those terms on a regular basis.
I was largely working towards combining Mark Twain's statement, and applying it to Darwinism, which I'm sure you'll agree, isn't a typical application of satire.
I will agree that for the human experience that we typically witness, and talk about here, Mark Twain's point is quite valid.
That does still leave some theoretical questions as to the evolution of consciousness,
But we can get back to that another time.
sengfarmer wrote: Yes, 80 years. They have the 4th turning starting in 2008 and ending around 2028 which in the big picture isn't that far off from the date you talked of as being in the 2050s for the end of the 600 year cycle. Could it be that with the exponential progression of technology that the cycles could be shortened? It appears that these cycles have ended in major wars and that is my main question. What could possibly happen to avert that outcome?
They have the 4th turning starting in 2008 and ending around 2028 which in the big picture isn't that far off from the date you talked of as being in the 2050s for the end of the 600 year cycle.
Could it be that with the exponential progression of technology that the cycles could be shortened?
It appears that these cycles have ended in major wars and that is my main question. What could possibly happen to avert that outcome?
This is what can already be seen. You see, there are certain unit sizes that life respects. For an example, you want to make several points, you can count on your fingers if it conversational, or use letters if it is text, but you normally stay in whole integers like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or alternatively using a, b, c, d, and so on. Ever see anybody make point number three and a half? Sure it's possible, but not likely!
Well society, and the cycles of society are already working that way. There are preferred time spacings between events, and they are so embedded in everything we just no longer notice them. You go shopping at about the same time and on mostly the same days. But you don't feel the need to say "Wow, this is amazing! I was at this traffic lights last week and the week before and every time I was going to the same place! What are the odds of that!" No. it's not odds against, it's odds against you doing something different, or doing something the same but in a different way/time.
So if I talk about big long term swings of humanity, or just a nation, it works the same way, but the units wil be bigger and the periods longer. It's just as normal for things to go the same ( in a present day context) and it's perfectly normal for everybody to not notice.
These things work like Lego. You make big blocks out of smaller blocks, and it's freedom of expression, but you can't make anything that can't be made from blocks. So you make a Lego castle for instance and everybody says it's a nice Lego Castle, not saying that castles aren't made from Lego. This is the fractal process. The little constructs the larger usually in a similar form as the little.
You mentioned war. Remember all those posts I made about megalithic structures? Bronze Age henges are not so interesting as looking at war cycles probably. And the posts are a while back. Well, they contain built into their architecture an 18.6 year cycle. Take four of those and you have 72-74 years. Two of them = 37 years. Now pick a war, and move those time periods forwards and backwards from that. You might be surprised at what you find. The cycles are the same.
So now you have a certain length period of time eg 72-74 years between establishment of North Korea and present day attempts to subjugate that place. Attempts made by the same country if we allow for UN = US. So there are present day wars in the oil producing countries. Instigated by you know who again. What was going down 50 years ago? The Six Days War. Is 50 years, a half century, a neat time unit? Of course.
So what about the 37 period I mentioned. Going back 37 years takes us to the year 1980. Here's a partial list of conflicts just for that single year , 1980:
Military Coup in Turkey 1980
Student Protests in South Korea 1980
Kwangju Uprising in South Korea 1980
Iran-Iraq War 1980-1990
Army Revolt in Libya 1980
Does any of those sound like something from today's news? Give or take a couple of years as it's a long time to be messing around trying to be excessively precise. Be prepared to sometimes see the aggressor become the attacked second time round.
There is much much more of course, but I trust this answers your question, and you see shorter times turning up. You can get creative on that aspect and you'll surely pick up more (useful info) if you do.
Mr. Fix wrote: I recognize that much of Mark Twain's brilliance was in his satire, and many of his statements should simply be viewed as such.
He was a master of this subject of consciousness but he embedded it in his writings in such a way that it didn't blow people away and alienate them. Unlike you and I. He found a way to deliver it to people that was palatable. You and I aren't in that business.
You'll find subjects such as parallel realities, his ability to tell the future, invisibility, interdimensional realities and much more in his work. I had written before about the syncroncities of the conditions of his birth with Hailey's Comet. Astrologically, that was a sign that he was a special person. I'll look for it and repost it. Plus he understood the human condition and how it played it out in politics.
We're not dealing with a "normal" person with a gift for writing, philosophy, humorist. If you look deeper under the hood, you'll find that he had a mission to change the consciousness of humanity. We always think in terms of spiritual "guru's" but there are men and women helping fulfill the destiny of the planet that bypass our conscious filters.
Now I'm curious. It sounds a lot like the formula I was looking for a few weeks ago in how to raise the consciousness of others, without them erecting a brick wall in my path.
I might even put my plans for "The Church of Mr. Fix" on hold, along with my "One & only true" scriptural text entitled "Fixology"...
Besides, I would probably just get socked with a windfall profits tax.
This government would not be providing me with a 501(c)(3).
I guess I'll just settle for fixing dinner now.
The word is assert. Not acert. Sorry to be a nitpicker. Your whole message is skewed when I have to abridge my intellect around your spelling. Not that I have a lot. That may be my problem.
When you acert with authority my brain tries to explode.
"Although I'll grant you that humanity may become extinct, and replaced with something else, which is exactly what the demonic priestcraft that rule us is attempting to do, but the outcome won't fix anything, it will be designed to remain permanently broken. It will simply be the culmination of separating all of humanity from its source.?
Have a think about exactly what we may be replaced by.
The outcome won't fix anything FOR US. That's it right there.
There is no room for US, therefore there is room for another.