Lightly Touch, And Leave It

I really think it's impossible to discuss anything that is not going to end up becoming friable in the hands of the public - when it comes to 'extraterrestrial aliens.' There are so many expressed opinions already out there, and then there is also a lot of what academics themselves claim is 'scientific' discussion or evaluations of the phenomenon.

You know, here is one of the major problems with so-called 'science' as it is being presented widely today: of course we accept that science is based around the repeatable experiment; but what is too often over-looked, is that all events in the material realm fall somewhere along a standard deviation curve of periodicity.

That is, some things happen a lot and thus may be tested for a lot, and some things happen less frequently, and some things happen very infrequently, and some things don't occur at all.

Alien visits to this planet, should, by reference to the great distances required to be traversed (boundary limitations issue), and the incapacity for normal travel to be the means of traversing the distances, be extremely infrequent. And consequently, it will not be possible to 'test for' particular occurrences or repeat performances with any reasonable order of frequency.

When the assumption is made that therefore, a different means of travel over time and great distance is implied, it is clear the technological advances possessed by whatever 'alien' culture is doing the travelling, will be far ahead of anywhere that we are at right now. Once that assumption is made, it might be more reasonable to think then that the occurrences of alien visits is more common than it possibly would or even could be using anything like 'ordinary' travel methods.

Which leaves us with the question of 'why?'

Do aliens eat ramen noodles?

And here we are greeted with all of the irrational and nonsensical speculations that attend this area: on the one hand they are more technically advanced, on the other hand they are unable to attend to their own DNA 'problems' (as is regularly posited by the folklore).  

Going by the evidence of inherent sociological and psychological 'stuck-ness,' human beings are quite obviously functionally terminally flawed - they cannot use the potential of their brains virtually at all beyond the iterative social/cultural functioning of almost countless ages of the same repeated cycles of birth, conflict, suffering, and death.

It's more logically able to be posited that human beings are incapable of evolution because of something perhaps terminally defective in their brain, rather than the usual Darwinian/Dawkinsian argument that we are part of some 'evolutionary' path at all. We may be capable of survival, against competitor evolutionary species or just on our own, but we cannot represent what is the peak potentiality of sentience in the Universe; not even close.

Now if aliens wanted to help us, then perhaps they might have done so already... Hasn't happened though. So the conclusion is they don't want to help us.

And a further conclusion is the 'human race' itself is not what it is usually taken by science to be - namely some monolithic or amorphous biological phenomenon of its own exactly characteristic (all the same; a species) kind. 

My position is that 'human beings' too, exist upon a continuum of sophistication: some relatively primitive, albeit outwardly 'modern,' others less primitive, and others still - having exceeded the boundary conditions of the structurally-flawed and intellectually limited and primitive median range grouping. It is not logically conceivable that 'repeatable proof' and 'evidence' will be able to be passed backward to the less-sophisticated types of human, from those who possess it since they are specifically and 'only' meant to be its recipient.

No one is ever going to see this and nor will it be promoted widely across the internet or anywhere so you might as well have it:

There certainly are aliens, and they are sometimes present on the planet and they interact with a small handful of people, none of whom have ever been heard from publicly and nor will they ever be. And one thing is absolutely certain about it - these aliens will be more like the most perfect average of what superficially represents the human species; in age, in visual appearance, in every material and physical respect, because qualitatively, this is the peak of the biological category, not some bizarre theorized strange streamlined, sinusoidal 'grey' creature thing. The 'grayness' of aliens represents the mystery to the ordinary human, of what an alien, or advanced being is. It is a visualized metaphor.

The peak is the SD curve peak, not the outlier condition state.

NASA has never encountered aliens or extraterrestrials or any of their technology. There are no aliens from 'Zeta Reticuli (oh, well, there may be, but I'm not aware of any) - what there is are people who have misheard and misunderstood the phrase 'reticular neural system') when tests were being run for standard functioning processes being obtained.  

What Is The Mission Of The Aliens?

The iconic conception of extraterrestrial aliens who manage to get across the distances to come visit us, is that they have somewhat superior technology than we do, but they have gotten it a cost to what we all like to call 'human values,' which is not necessarily meant to be the exact same thing as 'moral values.'

And so the typical basis of trade and interaction in most of the sci-fi or fantasy movies and books that you will encounter - is that we want their technology, and we get it by somehow 'giving back to them' their own lost plangency and inner natural values that they 'evolved' away from over centuries or even thousands of years.

'Human values' in the hands of the myth-makers and film makers, is sentiment, or something along those lines.

And 'moral values' are generally linked to religious ideas and ideologies and are less significant, in the mind set that is encouraged by the popular media - that is to say, less significant than some simpering and childish expression of 'what it means to be human.'

In our typical atavistic way, we seem to simply have to begin with seeing something that someone else has, that we can 'get.'

But is that how 'the aliens' see things? ...A bunch of coldly logical, exquisitely technologically equipped intelligent beings, sitting inside 'cloaked' and invisible space ships just outside of the Moon, watching endless re-runs of 'Lassie Comes Home' and 'Shane' and seeing whether they can re-ignite their lachrymose glands?

The mission of NASA is straightforward: get more funding.

And the 'mission' of humans is also easy to apprehend: get, basically, anything that will be of benefit. Wow, technical superiority, advanced weapons, energy devices, blah blah blah.

And so the factual reality is that the very first thing an intelligent species not from here will be able to ascertain on the whole about humans, is that - hey, these people are childish, desirous of things without due consideration for consequences and how these will be met, and, well, they want things; they are almost permanently desirous.

We shall soon explore what might be the actual mission of 'the aliens.'

Put On Your Skates

What's the point?

No, but seriously; what is the point!

Sure I love the internet to death, and YouTube too for that matter regardless of what its management is fiddling around with right now. 

...So you have the main guy at Duke's Hotel in London explaining pretty well everything there is to know about Fleming's so-called Martinis -, naturally, he doesn't give away every detail but he nonetheless makes enough clear about the why's and wherefore's to do with the unusual cocktails that people are construing that Fleming said were Martinis... He didn't and neither did Bond in the books. Doesn't stop almost everyone from literally slandering both of them.

This is a proper 'Russian Cocktail' (actual name of it)

The whole entire rest of the time right across the internet and YT there are all kinds of 'experts' regaling everyone with fairy-tales about 'the perfect Martini.' And poring over supposed controversy about 'shaken not stirred.'

Now there are about four or five things in the world today that are straight out garbage and yet they all have the status of 'truth:'

Firstly - that there is no contemporaneous (to his supposed - and notorious - lifetime) 'proof' or 'evidence' for the existence of a certain Jesus Christ. There is, it is right slap bang in the middle of Jerusalem, with similar things in Palmyra where the 'Three Wise Men' set out from together. Written documents were a lot rarer than they are nowadays, and mostly, the more common 'written down' things were inscriptions and symbolic designs etched into stone of some kind. And these have been academically dated without conjecture. There are numerous underground places (meant to be hiding places from the Romans) in Jerusalem, still intact today with a wide range of indications of the sect we now call 'Christians,' and academics are well-aware that some of the signs and inscriptions are for the person by name 'Jesus the Christ.' No tourists are sent to these places and few ever go there. I don't know why that is.

Secondly, that the moon is not visually larger at the horizon, and smaller higher in the sky; it is. Period. Yet you will even find 'scientists' claim not.

Thirdly, that aliens and UFO's are seen by various Military personnel and that they even intentionally 'show themselves' to government representatives and/or to various Military people. 'Part B' to this is that there isn't any or any sufficient 'proof' and 'evidence' that is easily accessible to the public and therefore scientists cannot agree or confirm there are such things. A., no aliens or UFO's have ever been seen by any modern Military agency or government specifically ever, and there is no 'extra-terrestrial technology' at Area 51, although people like Jack Parsons suggested they were in receipt of 'inspiration' from outside of the world in order to be able to come up with their ideas. But there is nothing on any official Military Intelligence file confirming the validity of their assertions.

...One fact that can be amply demonstrated is that there is categorical evidence of advanced, extraterrestrial, 'para-human' beings and their presence here on Earth - one of these being the statement in Homer's Iliad about the 'little grey people' and their secret island in what is now the North Dalmatian Sea. That place is still there and yes, so are indications of a culture of advanced people, different to what we know humans generally were, at the given time. Again, tourists are not directed there and no one much ever goes there. The whole existence, though, of the Venetian Republic, owes itself to this race and culture.

No reason why not

And Fourthly, if not finally, but finally for this post, is that Bond made a mistake having his Martini 'shaken and not stirred' because it 'bruises the gin.'

In the first place Bond specifies he wants Vodka in his drink, and Vodka doesn't have the fuselol oils in it that mean any kind of 'bruising' of the flavor elements are relevant. And secondly Fleming has a real point to Bond creating the drink in this way: he means to have the female made inebriated quickly, and yet recover almost at the same time that, presumably, the actual physical events that are the intended objective, are taking place. 

And so you will not find what I am about say here anywhere else. And that is not something I have any very good explanation for; a lot of people would know the facts and why they don't say them against the BS all over the internet I do not know. 

In any case, those who know - and there are a few around - will use the expression, 'put on your skates' or something akin to it, when they are handing over a shaken, Vodka cocktail. The vigorously shaken ice and Vodka once poured into the deep glass cone, with a sprinkling of salt over the top, produce shards of ice crystals almost like a layer of ice on a frozen lake, with the liquid below cloudy from tiny air bubbles. If you break through into the cloudy liquid below you are in trouble! The air bubbles increasing the rapid uptake of alcohol into the bloodstream making the person rapidly come under alcoholic influence - and this means, really, that the person is not going to be able to get very far into the drink before they are already affected. By the time the drink itself clears - all other things are underway.




  

The Nature Of Substance

Okay so the sub-title of this is not "...and why there is so little of it around today."

For a start we don't need the whole world to be awash in 'substance' so much so that we devalue it.

We need it, we need to locate it, to access it, to possess it, and to hell with everyone else, frankly.

Substance, I guess, is whatever specifies a thing - what is the underlying material of a surface nomenclature; so even when discussing 'superficiality' or image and appearance, there must be a complete description of its specificity and that is its substance.

It's in England, on an academic campus, and yes, this is
where the Illuminati comes from today.
A recent pic - advertising this year's Illuminati Party.
For real, my friends. This is a 'for real' pic. It's what it is.

Then we can move to relative substance, and that brings today's world more into view. A twenty-four hour news cycle limits the importance in the mind of today's world, of any particular thing, to a period of twenty-four hours. In terms of the normal life of a human being consisting of the whole year of seasons, and then a few of these consecutively until death - then today's news must be considered relatively insubstantial.

But what do you do with substance, once you have found it?

I recently watched a YouTube video in which a nice voice told us about the mathematical significance of the numbers 3, 6, and 9 - following which down in the commentary section, someone had posted: 'but what do we do with this knowledge?!' And he appeared to have written it in a tone of some sarcasm as if to say, yeah so what of it, this 'amazing' math-a-garbage... Edjakayshun neva dun me noh gud.

Now granted it takes a lot of years deeply immersed in the world of philosophy, and looking at what other thinkers have made of the Earth's history, and how society performs, to be able to link up all of the many dots that will give you the nature of the real substance of mathematics as it affects all of the Cosmos.

Dorchester Hotel's 'Forbidden Fruit' cocktail - one of the earliest
cocktails ever made

Nowhere - not anywhere - in any ancient artifact concerning the earliest times of the Egyptian pharaohs, does it say anything about a path to do with 'work' as a means to either enlightenment or material gain. But if you simply Google Search all the images to do with 'wealth motivation' you will see the whole entire thing replete with nothing but brief fairy-tale messages to do with working harder, longer, with greater focus, and so on, than others until you exceed their material position... and substance.

Nobody knows how the pyramids were made.

The ancient Egyptians themselves say that Thutmose II 'discovered' the Sphinx by accident when he lay down to rest from the hot desert sun once as a young boy - and that it was at the time virtually buried in sand.

The only thing we are able to say today, a priori, with any solid amount of certainty is that these great edifices were not built without mathematics.

Richard Browning, and his jet-suit

Now it's really not wise - nor fair - to suggest to anyone 'oh hey, you can just levitate stuff using maths and your mind...' Nobody has seen any such thing happen. And there is far too much colorful speculation that goes on about all of these mysterious subjects such as 'the Pyramids' or what is on the Moon(!) or Mars, for me to wish to add to the pyre of useless words here.

But maths - that is to say its highest expression - music - is that pathway that the dog Anubis leads the seeker along, to get to the power-room of the material Cosmos; indeed, of all the Cosmos.

Epistemology

"Epistemology." Now this is a word used in some strata of academia and which is another one of these things that no one bothers to ever check. And so of course, naturally, everybody is sure they know what the word means.

Okay...

So if you want to raise the dead though, or walk on water, or heal the terminally sick - then this is the word you need to understand in depth.

"Life's Rich Tapestry" a modern work inspired by Mondrian

Can you - right now - do any of these things? Can you?

How 'bout you, doc? You - Mr Science-Man; can you manage at least some of that list? ...Maybe turn water into wine, at least? Seems simple enough.

Okay so just how do we get though, from 'espisteme' (genuine knowledge) to the word 'faith' in modern religions? Because the word used in all the books is 'pistis.' Which doesn't mean 'faith.' It means sound, factual knowledge.

Oh dear. Jesus did stuff because he had 'sound, underlying factual knowledge...(?)' Actually, he even laughs at some of the disciples who were not able to heal one particular young boy when they tried to mimic what he was doing, and he told them 'ah, but you don't have the underlying basis (about the particular thing being looked at) to have that happen.'

Hmn. 

You see we don't any longer possess such highly discriminated types of words or explicit meanings, and it is only with some difficulty that we may look at what it was more learned people of deeper times were on about:

Epistemology comes about from a branch of rhetoric, concerned with being able to have and to communicate the necessary elements to induce true judgement about something, and hence also to give proof of a statement.

So what is rendered nowadays as the word 'faith' (pistis) is really something quite categorically different, and with more a much more complicated and long-winded 'meaning.' And there is another word that bears some scrutiny in relation to this whole thing too: proseuxomai. In doesn't really mean 'prayer' like we use that word now - it means prosecute, but not prosecute in the way we use that word either (lol), which is that people go to court and make a lot of accusations and so on...

A modern art photo called 'Neon Life'

No. Proseuxomai means persuading by having (possessing) the underlying factual basis in the correct logically connected steps so that there is only one conclusion to any given matter.

Modern human beings then, you have to admit, from your present basis of knowledge now, are pretty stupid, are they not. You can't say they are just ignorant - they all have incredible access to information and historical references; and they should know better.

I think, I suppose, if we continue to look at the religious context and the vast highway of religious tradition - that the most obvious question arises as to whether or not people at the time actually felt that Jesus was literally or actually doing any of these 'wonderous' (Italian/Latin - 'mirare'/'miror') things. Because if he was and people there thought it to be so from what they saw, then he was some kind of 'futuristic, super-scientist' really, who 'understood the correct underlying basis' of things and was able thereby to manipulate elements of those 'things' in order to secure particular outcomes.

Now this then is a bit different to 'The Secret' and this present-era concept about 'manifesting through the law of attraction. There might not be any such thing as a 'law of attraction.' 

The presumption, of the traditional religious texts is that there is a solution to every given problem and somewhere, some day, somebody will discover it. Assuming Jesus is God, then He must know each one of those solutions. I suppose the only unresolved matter is how come He doesn't just give everyone the solutions so that everyone can solve every serious problem that right know we don't know how to.

Mysteries and Treasures

I sometimes watch with some mirth, videos about the Sphinx of Egypt and that kind of thing, and listen to all the speculation about what else is or was there.

For me it's all rather amusing because the one thing it reveals is just how little of any of the actual ancient texts from which people regularly quote, is ever really read by any of them.

In those texts there are crystal clear and detailed descriptions of what was there, and why. How come people don't talk about that?! Sure the texts are quite austere and complex in the Greek but that shouldn't prevent really intelligent people from reading them fully.

Maybe, okay maybe, just maybe, there has been some consistent plan down through the ages to hide what is there, from most people. And rather successful it has been too!

But what's the point, really, of knowing what was there, or still is there, and what is meant to be there, unless it performs some sort of contemporary function today? If it's just a burial mound or a memorial to a ruler, or some completely mysterious building whose point and purpose no one knows any longer because it pertains only to functions of past societies - then it is just a relic; very large but nonetheless just a relic and a ruin. Pointless to our lives as they are today.

A depiction of the Goddess 'Night' from a scroll which had an
ancient poem written on it

That is not, of course, the case.

Yet exactly what the thing is - the whole complex of structures - I can guarantee you that very few people really know. Some people have suspicions, and they draw on them to make allusions in public but they definitely do not know.

And that is the way it should be - great treasures lie always undisturbed behind thick mists.

Stephen Fry On God

The entertainment identity and occasional journalist, Cambridge man Stephen Fry, poses the straightforward question which is at the heart of all human inquiry into Cosmic moral existentialism - the question often termed 'the problem of Evil': 'How can a good God permit bone cancer in children, or the existence of tiny parasites whose entire life cycle involves burrowing into human eyes and eating them out from the inside making the victims blind.' And Fry adds, 'how dare he!' (In other words, how dare God claim to be Good when he creates or allows such pointless evil).

And so, we have at least established as an existential fact, to the satisfaction - albeit depressed - of most normal human beings, the reality of Evil.

Man in the rain of Stephen Fry's question!

Reality however, is the most elaborate of things. We, as humans care to know mostly, what our senses relay to us, and what intellectualizing we make from those sensations and feelings, and moreover we are positioned inside a fairly small perimeter of our 'now' or momentary consciousness bouncing off a very relatively small stockpile of memories from one personal lifetime, and the limited visions about the future, from our creative, imaginative mind.

Even so, Fry's argument is quite a fair one. There is no moral equivalency between some putative Being that has consciousness BEYOND the simple 'now' combined with limited memory and even more limited imaginings -, and the constrained consciousness of the human being.

And so I go back to what I also just said: namely, that reality is most elaborate. And even among those who recognize this fact, it is their own elaboration (means, 'presentation or explanation of their view') of why there is the presence of a grand Cosmic Evil in the material Universe of sentience (many sentient beings) while at the same time declaring the existence of a Good and Supreme Divinity, that trips itself up often, and becomes confused and unable to convince objective and discriminating people. 

Fry should know better, though, since he is a Cambridge graduate. He should know that Christianity, for instance, within its ACTUAL source texts in Greek, does not teach a 'Creator God;' it does NOT teach that God created EVERYTHING. The words 'In the Beginning God Created the Heavens and the Earth' are not even very close to what the actual Hebrew and Greek texts say.

'Ba Ra Sheth, Aleph-Tov.' And this means 'God contains (is 'around'/'surrounds') everything.' And there are very elaborate, more detailed and complete explanations of what this means to say and also imply, but we don't need to go into that here.

On a quest? Or after having found?

You see, I'd like to say just this to you: it may be, for instance, that there are aliens - Extraterrestrials - who have space ships parked on the Moon - like the chief engineers and scientists from the old Douglas Aeronautics (Division of Douglas Aircraft Company) are rumored to have claimed. And it may be that there are such things as a kind of Reptilian (Alien) species which advised Adolf Hitler and gave him some technology. These things are all 'possible,' within the concept of God being 'around' all other things. And it doesn't make either the Reptilians the source of all Cosmic Evil, nor does it make God somehow complicit in a violent struggle in the Cosmos between material 'armies' of advanced Alien species, some of whom are 'Good' and some of whom are 'Evil.' This is good stuff for Star Wars movies but it isn't reality.

Well, it isn't reality in the sense that it does not represent the 'Grand Scale' of Morality and Ethics in the Cosmic Universe of all things material and non-material. 

If you take a Sine Curve profile of let's say, all moral levels of things, all points along the curve, let's call it - then you are confronted with an idea that says 'everything is there; it's there in potential but sometimes it is also there as a material fact.' Pain is there, suffering is there, insanity is there, pointlessness is there too. Reality is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional; things exist, they cease to exist, and some come back into existence, others have great longevity, others yet, like certain ideas from Physics seem to be eternal. But 'everything could be there' is not the same thing as saying 'everything that could be, is there.' Yet again, even so, Fry's argument still stands in this way - why not 'all good' and 'wonderful;' why any evil at all? But I don't think human moral self-awareness is sufficient to quickly grasp any complete answer. 

You see - Sentience is one thing, but sentience with power is quite another thing. Human beings are forever on this path of hope - vainly, mostly, seeking some glimmer of hope that somewhere, out there, or deep underground even, there is power greater than what we have commonly speaking, and then then if we but might grasp that power, then we could apply the best of moral standards and use the highest ethics.

We want power.

Very few of these around - not lost,
but very 'distant,' and fairly isolated

Mankind is after power above all other things.

Now here is a word that I throw to you, and which is never used in religious discussions: 'Thuroros.' Now it's better for you that you find out for yourself, and to your own personal satisfaction what this word means.

But if you are able to locate a 'Thuroros' and are able to communicate with it, you will learn what skills are necessary to be able to master the power of the Cosmic Forces - and then you will be able to do anything. And yes Mr Fry, this means even you - but then, what will you do? And will you yourself not be motivated by the demands issued from your own ego? a la - worship me, for I go about the world curing all children of bone cancer, and saving the sight of African babies and old people. Or will you just go about doing it and telling no one.

We are certainly NOT alone, this I must tell you though, leaving the tongue out of the cheek for a brief moment. We are most certainly NOT alone.

If It Wasn't So...

I wouldn't say it.

So, yup. Bitcoin is something that took off - a lot.

I mean what's the point of someone like me continuously having to say things like 'told ya so?' ...I don't want to do that. It's very frustrating, not about having to say this kind of thing (because I don't have to), but to see the same inane critiques of something new, anything, really, by people with the same mindsets you will find among aggressive-toned, and actually aggressive, but otherwise fairly ordinary individuals. 

Bitcoin was always going to 'take off.' It had the numerical coverage in 'a' market and it possesses innovation that permits a certain 'ease of use,' and it has a function in the digital product marketplace for sure. It improves on 'standard' money forms and formats for the kind of new marketplace which exists, obtaining for a new type of product category. Bitcoin is a thing; it's a thing. 

Let's sell our Bitcoins and go First Class,
on 'Oud Airways.' 

So it's time to get over it and move on and not become fixated if at some point there are temporary and relative price retracements.

But you see, one of the things that is an issue, is that there is so much opinion out there, so much noise, in fact, that it becomes ever more difficult to 'see' anything clearly these days.

For me a current example of the sort of widespread nonsense and meaningless describing of things people don't really know about, but insist on claiming to be experts on, is oud. 

Oud is this wood thing that they use in the Middle East as a kind of household scent or fumigation. It's absolutely disgusting and yet clever people have been marketing it to the point that you cannot go to any fragrance counter anywhere in the world today and not find some of it, and at atrocious sums of asking money.

Okay some people might like it - I don't like it. It doesn't smell pleasant at all!

Why didn't 'oud' trade take off in England?
You know, back when Sir Richard Burton was translating
that salacious 1000 Nights And 1 Night (correct title). 

But the point I would argue is that you will find absolute gibberish and utter rubbish spoken about the subject, all over the internet and everywhere - television, in literature, in Wikipedia; everywhere.

What the bloody hell are they talking about?! You will interminably hear these descriptions: barnyard, skanky, earthy/woody (if you're lucky, they'll include that) - and then worst of all 'incense-y.' It's not incense-y. Some people do include it in incense sticks yes, but then incense sticks are in the first place not 'incense!!!' People are just taking, hiving off, words and names and applying them wherever they like.

And then another one - fecal. Jesus H. Muhammad!

We used to have this saying in Malaysia, about the dumb people - 'lagi bunghi lagi baik.' Means, the 'louder' the better, as in, the more blaring, the noisier, the more over-powering...

Yes, oud hangs around as an odor and you can almost never get rid of it, so, if you think paying stupid money is justified because of longevity, then sure, oud. Oud = Hillary Clinton! Must do.

See the thing is - and let me be direct here, even if there will be members of the dumb ordinary public who will hate me for saying this kind of thing: there's people, regardless of how much money they have, just plain simply do not know, and never will know because they don't come from the class that teaches them.

I have not seen anyone anywhere on-line - and I defy someone to show me - 'experts' telling you straight what this thing is indeed like, but not truly like. Oud is a fake thing, in a way, in that it is near to something significant, but it is not that particular thing.

But oud is extraordinarily expensive. Don't waste your money.

Here is the real deal, and why:

Even Wikipedia is all over the place about it - on the one hand it says 'attacked by a beetle,' and in the same paragraph says 'inoculated with the fungus.' Fungus? What fungus? 

LOL

There's fungus involved. Yep. That's part of it.

How about we shift over to truffles...

Ha-hah!

No one ever mentions that now do they, when it comes to oud!

Some aloeswoods (oud) some, not all, are a source of more or less penicillin, and it is used, and has been used, for centuries to render a cure to various diseases from infection. That is why aloeswood is important in ancient cultures. 

People who have never been raised around really big money society have no idea about truffles, and they make up stuff. Truffles are only very vaguely odorific in their natural state. People talk a lot of rubbish about truffles. The only time you will really become aware of the scent of truffles is after you have eaten the things. And it helps if you have ingested some alcohol into your body as well.

A depiction of the Arabic chemist 'Al Kindi' - Muslims
love to make much of this guy, except they killed him when he was
an old man! They don't put that in too many current compendiums. 

Truffles - why they are of interest to these olden days clever clever and rich people, is that they are like MSG once inside the human body. And yet, they tend to enhance only two things - the male chemistry in the male, and the female chemistry in the female. Fact. Take it from me. Like oud, truffle increases in power over time - unlike oud, truffle increases in intensity inside the human organism. Oud increases in intensity in the air, after contact with the skin. Truffles more or less smell like mushroom, like fungus, and a little bit antiseptic - oud smells just plain sickly awful albeit it does have a certain toxic, penicillin-like sense about it. Think old fashioned plasticine (therefore aliphatic acids), and possibly poisonous mushroom, and almond. Oud is really strong, truffle is not that strong. Truffle is a LOT MORE subtle.

There are secrets about how to use truffles to their fullest value. I have talked about it before, maybe a long time ago now though.  

Oud doesn't enhance anything in particular - it just stays, cloyingly, around. It is sickly, vaguely antiseptic at best, albeit alongside this unpleasant maybe cyanose, sort of vaguely almondy-poisonous odor with hints of something literally not too good. It isn't uplifting and it certainly isn't anything at all like incense. For incense you want to be thinking Omumbiri Myrrh, and of course, Frankincense. 

But - bu-u-u-u-ut - there are all these marketing places that will take your money off you and try to convince you oud is this wonderful amazing, blah blah blah, thing. It isn't. Forget it.

What you are smelling is the chemistry of ascomycota, a fungus which previously we all knew from the red colorant 'cochineal.' Except with oud it is related to a resin produced by the tree, as a defense against either the bugs that can infest it, or the fungus which can get into it. It's a kind of a gas reaction that is taking place that causes you to smell something, and for that smell to seem to grow and grow and also to hang around. Even cochineal is quite pleasant in a way, and especially compared to oud, which is not pleasant because of its strong hint of something poisonous about it.

Ah gawd almighty. What the idiot world thinks and does and behaves like... I dunno. SMH (Shake My Head).

Oud is certainly not an aphrodisiac. That's for sure.

Words Of Mystery And Magic

To the actual people who live there, 'Egypt' is not called Egypt, but Masr.

'Masr' is a peculiar, ancient word that few, even among the locals know the true meaning of.

Some people say it is just the word for 'city,' others 'civilized' or 'civilization.' While these are broadly true, the essence of its meaning is 'to blend or meld together as in a crucible.'

Egyptology in its formal suit, agrees that in the times of the Pharaohs themselves, the place was known as 'Km't.' And today, this is written and said: 'Kemet.'

Kemet is however, superficially merely a descriptive phrase that suggests that the land there has soil that is dark or black and thus, fruitful.

The real 'name' for the place is: 'Ka-Ra-Sar-Atnapishtim.' Or, Karasart-Utnapishtim.

A scene from the movie short 'La Legende de Shalimar.'

Utnapishtim is, according to the Sumerian legend or epic narrative, the only person to survive the Great Flood designed by superhuman beings to destroy the world and all of Mankind. He build an ark which protected him and this was eventually lodged on Mount Nisir. 'Nisir' though, means a place of seclusion or mystery, inaccessible, hidden. One of his future offspring, Gilgamesh, searches for some item that has the property of bestowing eternal life - which he eventually finds at the bottom of the sea.

The component 'Sar' can mean an Epoch over which a Cosmic 'king' will rule. This is the, let's say, phonemic reason there are such people who are called 'Tsars,' and also 'Caesar.'

So you can see that if you go by what I am saying, there is some vague similarity to this modern popular film - Zeitgeist's - ideas that have largely been taken from the books of Zecharia Sitchin. 

Today, these very ancient folkloric stories are used in modern marketing - of things like, for example, the House of Arabian Oud's premium perfume 'Kalemat Black Arabian.'

'Kalemat' is taken to mean in this context - 'words of magic,' and the word has the same essential idea behind it that the Greek word 'Logos' has.

'Kalemat' means: 'Spirit of Universal Power in the Material Realm.'

The word found on hieroglyphic inscriptions for the composition of some kind of special perfume made by the Court of Cleopatra - in modern times translated as 'Calamus' or 'Calaminth...' is actually 'Ka-El-Ma't.' Physically, materially, it describes the physical item ambergris, but also there is a philosophical dimension, namely that it engages a force in the mind that comes about through the harmonization of human thinking and ideas with sensations given rise to from the burning of ambergris. And these ideas are not human ideas...

The analogy is that of a plant growing, in a dark, inaccessible, hidden and mysterious Earth-bed, and which comes to life, develops, and at a point, bears fruit, having been given its energy to grow from the fire of the Cosmic stars.

There is nothing, that is available or capable of being made in the material realm, whose doors cannot be opened, and whose very existence not exploded into being - 'kun faya kun.' (The ancient Aramaic and also now the Arabic for 'Be, and It Is.'

Morvan - And She Smiles (Moonsouls Remix)

 

Authenticity

The word 'authenticity' means of undisputed origin, not a copy.

But almost everything you see around you today, is a copy, and often a very poor copy.

There is very little that is in fact truly authentic nowadays. 

When you have achieved that semi-divine status (well in fact, among living human beings in what they consider a practical lifestyle, it is a divine status) of material human wealth, then you can purchase all kinds of expensive things to suit your whims or your desires - and these will for the most part, and regardless of who you are and where you came from in the modern world, be inauthentic things and give you completely inauthentic experiences. So much then, for material wealth, if that is all it is.  Not that we don't like wealth - we just don't want to be a victim of success, which is a thing that can happen.

This is Sergio Ermotti - he's the Sean Hannity of
the banking world

And perhaps you have come across some fellow here and there too, usually in the media spotlight, pontificating about the 'wealthy elite...' They don't know what they are talking about.

There is no - 'the wealthy elite.' There are people who get to spend a lot of money sometimes - and if that is what is meant, then certainly there are a number of these types around.

A truly elite individual, is someone whose functionality when they determine a certain path, is always guaranteed - and that type of person comes from a different place to what the pop version of the 'wealthy elite' considers must be the case.

*

Now here is a secret to the whole Egyptian pyramid thing, and something that will be a touch at variance to what you see and hear from all the book-writers and academics and 'experts' and even different to what the contemporary 'Illuminati' mythology says:

The first psychologists of the human being as a structural 'thing,' that were on the Earth ever, were the ancient Egyptians and by 'ancient Egyptians' I mean not really 'Egyptians' at all, of course.

These people left a huge monument to the psychology of the human being. Every one of those megalithic statues and monuments, equates to a driving emotional or psychological factor that exists inside the human.

And this is a whole-cut shoe - which means it
comes from only one piece of leather; only the great
master-craftspeople can make this shoe

The sphinx is of course a dog, or a lion (and it is meant to be both dog and lion, or, better put - dog OR lion), and it represents appetites or the innate sense of justice and morality, and an innate sense of good and evil. 

And the obelisk is the thing that represents or depicts the highest flying part of the mind, which can take a point of vantage so high up that it is able to see in all directions, as it were, including past or behind the walls to sight and vision, that are there at the level of our normal physical sight.

There is another 'figure' which has never been discovered, or perhaps, it is there but not been understood for what it is - and which represents or depicts how the creative, inventive, and in the reverse, the fearful aspect of the living dynamic mind, works.

The modern 'Illuminati' are not the people who know anything about all this - they know there is some significance but they don't actually know what it is although they claim that knowledge.

Once again, we have another example of the inauthentic.

You will observe, that all the symbolic figures have two aspects - a positive one, and a negative one. And taken altogether, the whole thing presents a complex equation with multiple variables.

*

...Now if you have a lot of money and you want to buy your wife some French perfume - then you can indeed spend a lot of money if you want to; there are a lot of producers around with expensive and well-packaged products.

But if you want an authentic product, then buy something from the young man 'Sultan Pasha.' He doesn't have any formal qualifications as far as I know. And he's not recognized by the big perfume houses.

Sultan Pasha is a young man from London and he makes the best and the most authentic perfumes in the world today. 

How does he know what he knows, and how does he do what he does?

It's a mystery, you see... That's the correct answer. It's a mystery. And it's meant to be a mystery. It's designed to be a mystery.

Me - I'm not a believer in 'Intelligent Design;' I am a believer in Intelligent Mystery.

Just Calm Down

Why calm down?

Because everything's fine to the extent that it is a lot better now than when there were no mobile phones with video cameras in them!

People will work it all out sooner now, than later.

I fancy there is a line in Noel Coward's Mad Dogs and Englishman about where Mandalay is, and what it's connection is to the Islamic Rohingya - but then I'm probably wrong and it is only a near miss.

Or perhaps I'm mistaking his gibberish lines in it with some foreign words about Abu Sayyaf and the heat they've been taking with Duterte's crack-down.

One of the things casinos are notorious for, though, and about which there has never really been much conjecture - is cash money laundering.