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.