Beyond Simple Veda 'Secrets'

I don't whether you are going to be shoved even further out of the 'normal' run-of-the-mill society, by reading here!

You go just about anywhere nowadays and read all about, maybe even watch all of these experts tell you about the chakras and the... ...well, all of those names they give the main circles.

There's actually hundreds of circles. Not that you would know going by the 'expert stories.'

But then again, okay let's be practical, it is certainly true that the main ones consist of only seven. The heuristics are that the main circle platforms (and that is what they are) consist of the seven colors of the rainbow.

'Come with me, watchman.'

Now the reason - as I was saying just previously here - that there is so much in the open public, the wider world of human society, financially, economically, and object-wise, that is all kilted over to the energy consumption-based style of thing (and that includes the grandiosity of tall buildings, which are gross and observe the gravity of apparent 'land value centricity'), is due to the fact that the predominance of human beings here lack genuine access to those 'circles' above the 'green-line' (going by the common heuristics model).

All of the 'intelligent' effort is continuously going only into the red, orange, and yellow aspects of life. The green segment in any case, is a zone of 'taking' because it is where the natural organism (taking this, sort of psycho-sociologically) growth happens and there is a lot to go around there. Just going by the standard narrative, the 'red' circle is not so abundant in real energy because as living organisms which follow a Gauss profile of life, human peak output energy is at the individual's 'prime of life' years - and so real maximum human material life energy output is in fact in relative short supply. Which is also why there is prostitution - of everything in that zone. 

You can sell Arnie Schwarzenegger because he can do ten shows a day and lift more weights than you as well on any of those same given days. ...Well at least he could do a few decades ago.

You can sell Emma Stone for more or less the same kind of reason. These people are all more 'hard-working' on average. The fact that their actual material output is rubbish is of no aesthetic significance in present human society. There is no such thing as 'aesthetic significance.' Not today.

The movie 'Moulin Rouge' was rubbish but the cast worked tremendously hard and that was obvious. Stone's 'La La Land' was exactly the same kind of garbage. You would leave the cinema sweating just out of sympathy for the actors and all the workers on set.

...And then 'they' (the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences) give out awards.

For effort. And look, this is not at all to say Emma Stone et al are in any way 'poor actors;' that is certainly not true. But they are compelled to do the work that is there being handed to them - they literally have limited choices.

I'm going to jump to a seemingly different subject now, but it will be tied in later:

As someone finally observed, over this relatively recent 'hot-button' matter of the definition of a woman, the actual underlying point is to achieve absolute moral and systematic ideological relativity in the public's mind - so that they will be able to have the only absolute then which will be: absolute control over you.

Blue is right. Blue is good.
Blue clarifies, cuts through;
blah blah blah blah blah.
It is nice though.

You won't be able to 'appeal' to independent or actually objective academic certainties about 'justice' because there won't be any.

The hierarchy of power will be in charge and it will determine what you 'believe,' what you are able to believe, and mostly certainly what you are able to 'know.'

The media commentator observed that if they are able to confuse you over such a common socially-obvious thing as sex, then there is no limit to how much wool they will be able to pull over people's eyes.

Still in all, let's just go back to the common popular subjects around the place - one of them, for example, being this idea about 'manifesting.'

Well manifesting, yes, this is the idea that material things suddenly appear just by some kind of particular 'mind effect' rather than by the sweat-equity of Emma Stone (and don't get me wrong, I could easily find her sweat... Ah never mind; back to the thing).

For growing humans, it takes about 14 years for new layers of bone to naturally be replaced within the organism. So. No 'sudden re-appearance of the rib that became Eve' for you!

And, typically that other form of prostitution called the medical profession, trades on human need for speed, with mechanical interventions, and sophisticated drugs and very heavy-duty long-term toxic chemicals. If you think you will get away with shoving 14 years into 3 minutes, well, the immediate next 14 years after those 3 minutes will prove you wrong.

But no doctors are going to hang around to say sorry though, after 14 whole years of a slow catastrophic descent into the grave for you.

Or me too, maybe. 

If we're stupid enough.

Have you noticed though, how even dead bodies - even lots of them - quite quickly disappear into the big blue briny ocean...

'Red' is dissolved into the big blue.

When those characters - like Sir Salman Rushdie and Stephen Fry (who accused 'God' of doing to very small children, what he does himself via low-frequency radiation emitting electric power towers; many studies/science is in, sorry Stevie babe. It's not 'God' who's killing small children with bone cancer, it's you) 'see' blue, they don't really see it - it is only a reflection or something being filtered downwards through the semi-translucent green layer. And then it becomes 'purple' in their lives, that is to say, in your life, since they are powerful political and social determinants across the whole of modern Western society.

Suddenly, Sir Salman's rage against his own father (who admired Ibn Rushd and so changed the family name of 'Ahmed' to 'Rushdie'), having morphed into a general rage against the whole of the Arabic Islamic world, has taken you along with it and now you too, are also at war with all Muslims. All 1.8 billion of them, more or less. 

Now hey, look, maybe you could want to argue with them, and tell them, just like the 'Moses' people, that they have almost the same 'holes in their narrative' as the Moses people do.

But what motivated you to disturb someone minding their own business in a cool mosaic-tiled place, kneeling on a mat oriented to the 'Eastern' part of the flat Earth? 

This is red. A red machine.
Well actually, this here is a painting
by Manu Campa - he's a guy
who specializes in painting
what looks like photos of shiny
metal objects, mostly cars.
(Thanks to our 'Bill Smith' who told us
about Manu).

Of course it is also clear we can certainly sustain the argument that well, tit for tat, Muslims also interfered with other people themselves - 'not Muslim' people - too. So yeah, let's all just go to war. That will solve everything, right?

..But I can show you 'blue' and it will dissolve his (Salman's) red, all 1.8 billion Muslims' red, your 14 years of 'red' in whatever form that is coming, and anybody else's red. Oh yes I can. Yes I can too!

Because my 'blue' is bigger than his imaginary blue. 

He doesn't have 'blue.' He only has mimic blue.

My blue is 450 nanometers. His blue is he doesn't know and he doesn't care.

Did you know, by the way, that historians and archaeologists tell us that the ancient Greeks did not have a proper word for 'blue.'

Just like Germans today have no proper word for 'woman.' 'Frau' does not mean 'woman;' it is a title meaning a free person of the land.

So what is the sociological impact? 

Well, I dunno. They did have 'Herr Hitler' though.

LOL ('Herr' is not 'man' either; as you know. So 'damen' does not mean woman either - it's a title again; means 'lady').

Now I'm not going to get into the etymology of 'Aegean' because you won't believe me and you'll shoot off to the Universities, who really know, right...?

But, did the ancient Greeks therefore 'see' the color 'blue' if they didn't have a specific word to distinguish it?

Well, let me just say this much:

'Blue' clarifies, cuts through, captures the essence...

LOLOLOL.

Yeah but it does though!

Did you know that some people
don't like fried onions??
Can you imagine...
I like fried onions.

It is the thing which permits the 'boundaries' of all other things to take shape around it's continuum pressure...

When you have good clear, and direct access to the 'blue' in your microtubules (thanks, KP and Stuart Hameroff), for a start it creates a downward pressure, into the lower circles (you can say 'chakra layers' if you like), and then next it crystallizes all material things in there, in their moment-of-inertia so to speak, but most importantly, around their peak of temporal existence too.

Eventually, it can, if you want it to, dissolve all of those things as well.

You cannot break out, in fact it is 'break up(wards)' though, isn't it, unless you can restrict these primal lower rank components with their innate energies -, IE break out upwards with a discrete idea into the 'indigo' zone, which is the key place that the UV missing energy 'disappears' from - if you go by the 'ultra-violet catastrophe' conception in physics.

Then, then and only then will such a clarified idea become manifested by the functioning of the higher-end wavelength effects of David R. Hawkins' 'Universal Field' (although I admit I said his field to avoid having to attribute the concept to that Austrian medical doctor and psychologist whose name must not be mentioned at the extreme peril of the 'ghazis' of Sir Salman and Fry, believe you me, coming and stabbing you in the neck. Well, it would be me in this case, except I'm not mentioning his name, am I? Because he was crazy and all of his books were banned and burned by the FBI. So I wouldn't mention his name).

Here fishy, here little fishy...

  

EHang

Well okay so Nancy went to Taiwan.

Right now in selected futuristic industrial park cities, the government of China (CCP Beijing) has established complete integrated digital wireless air traffic control systems, which allow the operating of 'Autonomous Aerial Vehicles.'

There are literally thousands of these vehicles presently lined up in warehouses, and a number of them are already in operation out in the actual real world.

'Real world' I suppose, in this case being delimited by the 'futuristic urban centers' definition though.

Real thing, really flies, by automated control;
you can fall asleep quite safely at the wheel
if you like.

We are living at a time when the mind of man, is turning from the pages of books where its most adventurous exercises were manifested, to the land, the seas, the skies, the buildings - and having those speculative propositions manifested within organised reality frameworks.

This is a manufactured reality, it isn't the natural reality naked, but the extension of primary natural reality filtered through the mind of man and the manipulation skills of human beings.

Adam and Eve in the Garden were naked. We are not naked.

The human being is not a naked primary thing. It is a covered, elaborately transformed manufactured item (ETM).

Every single designer or architect on the planet will tell you, that the imposition of human ideas into form, transforms a previous reality... And they will tell you very strongly, that this 'can be' a good thing, but that it is seldom a good thing, and the worst consequences are only discovered long after widespread societal implementation.

There are literally no reports, by the way - hate to tell you this - of human encounters with advanced ET Alien beings, in which the usual state of said 'Aliens' is clothed!

They have clothes, but these have express and very consciously deliberate teleological causes for being worn at all.

Was that a tautology? Dunno; might have been.

When we look back into our broad cultural past, it is possible to think that some writer somewhere, saw the smallest birds in existence, for example, and then anthropomorphized them into stories about 'Fairies.'

Not a small bird in reality, let me tell you.
For Balenciaga.

But if you take that thought as excluding all other possibilities, this runs counter to our own current experience with our manufactured, elaborately transformed own reality.

And as more time passes, unless some cataclysmic event overtakes our steep progress in technology, we will ourselves have become those things that past ages were thought about as only having imagined in books of fantasy.

In fact one issue we will all soon confront as a generality, is that there will be a number of ideologies that cannot sustain themselves in the coming world.

Marxism might, capitalism might, Islam certainly will not. And so, in all events, Sir Salman Rushdie (whose father changed his surname to reflect his admiration of Averroes - aka Ibn Rushd. Thank you to Mufti Abu Layth for having told us that little fact) will have 'won.'

Will there be though, as KP questions, retrogressive rebellions driven by this apparent ubiquitous dichotomy of forces, a seemingly Universal polar opposite relativity of existential absolutes, be they merely 'idea' guidelines, or actual mechanistic extremes of material possibility (which is the kind of thing Marxist atheist materialism asserts)?

And in any case, is unlimited forward 'progress' by the elaboration of technical means and technology alone, a materially absolute 'freedom?' Are there any existential fence-lines of 'impossibility' which in fact determine what can really be attained in the end?

The basic 'concern' that has been regularly voiced regarding the speculated disabling of nuclear weapons by 'unknown vehicles' or 'objects' was that we, human-kind, had already transgressed into a Cosmic 'no-go' zone on account of nuclear warfare. The extension of that idea, is that were human technology to go even much further forward into weapons far more devastating yet than nuclear explosion devices - and yet still there was the underlying prevalence of this 'competing interest' dynamic obtaining in human society - well then would it mean we would wipe ourselves out at some point in the near future.

And so the question was asked by a lot of thinkers, not just KP here, well, is there any idea as to how, or whether some advanced civilization had successfully handled that issue - or is it the case that the reason there are no 'ET Aliens' is because in fact, well, they did obliterate themselves in their terminal desire for power and control.

But what is the objective though, of a conspiracy by the world's rulers and leaders, whereby they are most intent on never giving up to the public any facts disclosing the known real existence of advanced intelligent beings not of this planet who have resolved the self-destruction matter - and instead proliferating the clear-cut terminally risky 'two pillar' ideology of the Freemasonic cult teachings, the Hebrew and Judaeo-Christian 'sin' mentality, the Islamic 'human slave to Absolute Other (plus Caliph)' paradigm, into whatever disastrous future is in store for humanity by sheer conclusion of logic??

The logic leads to an absurd conclusion.

Why risk it? Why go there?

And most of all, why insist that everyone else goes there?

The EHang flying vehicle has 16 rotors, and all of them are under intelligent control -  that is, of computers.

If you only had two rotors, well then you would not be able to 'fly' under controlled conditions.

If I say that someone has only two operating psychic nodes, using the Jungian sort of terminology here - like I said Stephen Fry and Salman Rushdie have (how insensitive and arrogant of me) - then they cannot implement any actions that are undertaken by another of the other potential nodes.

So their material power is limited to toxicity, and to physical strength.

Even so, these things are under intelligent control to the extent that their physical actions and rage are being controlled by a person's intelligence (IE their own brains).

And so they look like 'intelligent beings.'

When the Austrian medical doctor and psychologist whose name must not be said, attempted to look at the obtaining moral relativism which resulted in the Holocaust as in fact a false paradigm, instead proposing a Cosmic material absolute with a material physical, albeit quantum level existence - the American government burned all his books and banned you from ever reading them in any officially licensed published format (in other words, they withdrew the rights of Protected Copy under publication licence). During the term of the enactments of statute law to do with the sale of banned literature and banned reading material, it was in fact illegal for you to have a copy of any of those titles.

Brian Transeau sent this pic.
Brian = 'BT.'
We've featured his music here
lots. ('13 Angels On My Broken
Windowsill'). A hummingbird's
nest is about the size of a dime.
He photographed this himself.
The nest was next to his home
on his own property .

But this 'Cosmic material absolute' was no more than the natural extension of Jung's collective unconscious, and it was in every sense the same sort of thing as David R. Hawkin's Universal Field conception. And those ideas themselves swirl closely around the material science nexus of Stuart Hameroff's microtubules model of consciousness. And that then makes them 'electromagnetic field' elements too.

Well you know about those things. You have relatively easy access to small devices today that can measure EMF signals in your brain and in your nervous system.

People like Rushdie do not have those systems inside them to measure anything. And they never will. They are a terminating line of 'Evolution.'

But they are intelligent beings.

Perrier-Jouet.

And that's where the conflict arises between let's say, you, eventually, and them.

Because one day, you will learn how to kill them at a distance. You can easily learn how to disable them, put them to sleep and they will have absolutely no idea how it ever happened. And they will deny literally to their dying breath, that you did it. Or that you could do it.

As for me, I'm not saying anything further on this, in case someone wants to stick me in an iron cage and suspend me from the furthest branches of the tallest tree/s.

And I am not even a hummingbird! 

Fun, Till You Hurt Someone

There is apparently, always this group of super powerful beings - out there, elsewhere, distant - and you cannot touch them, see them, feel them, talk to them...

...But there's always some intermediary that can; except not you though. Never you.

Even Stephen Fry does it.

The TV journalist asks him - but what would you say, if you were standing in front of 'God' (and you found out He exists), what would you say to Him?

And Fry jiggles about in his seat once again (funny, it's just like the thing Dr Peter Duncan, also MI6, does) and says, in stentorian, and very self-assured tones - 'Bone cancer in children? How dare you?!'

Hmn.

Bears out-gun wolves...

Sounds great, right? I mean it's a valid challenge after all.

Those six million Jews in the Holocaust (or only twenty-five Jews, or whatever number you want) though... That was God or that was you?

Was that actually in fact you, human? Did you do that?

'Oh no, that wasn't me, that was some other body!'

Oh but me thinketh thou doth protethteth too much, phrend.

...Ah now you want for 'God' to intervene when something goes too far off the rails.

You want 'agency' (this lovely new word coined by the acolytes of Gramsci) but suddenly you also don't want absolute responsibility though.

So no problem, you stand at a distance (via a screen) and watch, and just hand everything over to people who tell admittedly rather cute tales about the 'Galactic Federation' somewhere far far away - or maybe even really really close - except but you can't see them... But they can see them: 'trust us.' And just 'trust us,' right?

Makes life so easy.

Life - as in real life with maximum agency - is so complicated, isn't it.

So much easier to be 'a happy idiot, and struggle for the legal tender.'

Stop pretending.

Not around here. Maybe elsewhere but not here.

The real 'issue' is happening at human personal self 'ground zero.' How is it possible, that a human being, with only two main salience nodes functioning (1. toxicity and rage/anger/venom, plus 2. raw primitive appetites) can come across as sapient - fully intelligent, very highly intelligent, in fact.

Wa?? Have we so soon run out of 
decent 'food porn' pics?
Nup. This is cool too.

You cannot say that either Stephen Fry or Sir Salman Rushdie are less than very highly intelligent.

But every other one of their internal psychic 'personal self' nodes is fragile, some are not functioning at all, and all the others are subject to wild vagaries of orientation.

When you look at the world political stage - there is some media frenzy over Sanna Marin, and the fact that she dances and has parties with friends. She has friends. This is truly amazing.

Liz Cheney says she has friends; I heard her only this morning address her friends.

Does Justin Trudeau have any friends? Not sure.

And what's his trajectory, d'you think?

Elena talks about people 'making decisions.' And that was far away, somewhere out in space, apparently.

Well I'm pretty sure we right here already decided the 'trajectory' of Tony Blair's test-tube twin Serge Lutens.

Oh you think I'm making stuff up?

LOL

You just 'don't know what you don't know,' isn't it?

Look. Getting up in thirty foot-across white Tic Tacs is a lot of fun, and those people who are able to pilot them, really know what they're doing and they are very good at it.

NASA just declassified some report about a flying saucer slamming into a lake and making a huge crater at the bottom of it. Makes you wonder if they recovered any bits and pieces of the 'thing' that slammed into the silt at the bottom of the lake. It's a somewhat BS story that NASA has produced. Sure they de-classified a report, and sure they tracked and recorded and even filmed something going into a lake.

I think it's going to be very cold, in Canada
this year. This is not Canada,
but it is French.
Pay me money when it happens.
LOL When, Mr Wray, not 'if.'
And there's not a GD thing you can do about
it. Not now, not afterwards.
Because how you gonna prove anything?
You told Congress you'd didn't believe
'Havana Syndrome' was really real.

But why are they slanting things now to the 'Oh, super advanced beings smash and crash and make mistakes all the time and we used to classify that stuff...' 

Nobody's making any mistakes and there's never been a 'crash.' Not in Roswell, not anywhere.

When someone get's hurt, happens to get hurt - it's on purpose. Just lettin' ya know.

You show me how you can get out of the trajectory, human...

The trajectory terminates in the graveyard. Am I wrong?

Meanwhile, back to the immediate 'moral equation.' There is no moral equation. Believe me it's a helluva lot of fun messing around in high technology equipment. Okay maybe someone will get hurt. Won't be me and it better not be you.

Why do rabbits exist? For Elmer Fudd, that's why. We're not smart, dude. Not like Stephen Fry or Sir Salman Rushdie!

The problem of 'Theodicy?' What question of 'Theodicy.' I don't have any questions about that kind of thing. That's because like you've all been training in here for awhile already, 'we' can actually see past the 'ultraviolet catastrophe' (which is, for those who are late to this party, Sanna - that segment of the light wavelengths spectrum near UV, at which there is a huge missing part of the energy trajectory, and that no human scientists at all, have as yet been able to account for; where the missing energy 'is going').

For us it's just about the fun. 

This sort of fun, and by the way, summer's gone boys and girls:

The Unconscious Versus McFreedom of McSpeech

Thanks to 'Rasputin' for that. (A guy's handle on a private investment forum that some of you here know well).

So if you go 'Google-Search' the collective unconscious according to Jung you instantly get a definition from Britannica claiming the Jung said it was a form of the unconscious - in brackets next then [that part of the mind containing memories and impulses of which the individual is not aware] - common to mankind as a whole and originating in the inherited structure of the brain.

Now that's just about as far away from what Jung actually said in his fairly precise English and his very precise German as well, as the cow is to the moon.

You look at it from the perspective of a grasshopper and you could think the cow did jump over the moon though. 

He definitely never said 'only containing memories and impulses.' God, and impulses - I don't think so!

Come inside. It's warm in here.

See the thing is with these diabolically slippery words in the hands of a toxic criminal class of supercilious so-called 'elites' who want to control everything especially you and your life, is they are excellent at spinning words and dissembling.

Stephen Fry is a great example. He will sit there, wiggling about, tapping his ankles as if everything is real jocular and he will take this utterly self-appointed position as knowing more than anyone else, and tell you, that the French woman in some Flaubert novel, is 'looking up in awe at the colors and the grandeur...' of the cathedral or whatever.

And he even has the hide to continue on and say things like: 'In her simplicity, she appreciates...'

...Whatever it is he is pretending she is 'appreciating.'

And then the idiot interviewer, who claims to be a physicist, nods and adds that someone else said they 'did not enjoy the rainbow any less because they now know how it works' (or how it is made).

Oh you actually know, do you, how the rainbow is made?

Okay so you tell me where the energy went after the violet band then.

Carl Jung never said anything like that. But what he did say is sufficiently verbally like it that Britannica and whoever is continuously pushing this Karl Popper-style line can easily get away with saying what they have said, because the new kids will never 'get it;' get how deceptive and tangentially these people's words depart from the meaning of anything Jung ever did say.

For a start Jung never did say 'brain structure' and he did not say 'inherited' pure and simple  -like you would take that to mean 'from the DNA!'

Or only from the DNA.

You need to be warm, kids,
it's going to get cold soon.

What he actually said was we do not know what the unconscious is at all!

Not - we are not attentive to it in our conscious states, or 'unaware' - he said and he meant 'really not knowing about it at all!'

He said we can observe, maybe, if we look really hard, some signs and that these are the same things across all cultures and hence it is a collective thing (IE the collective unconscious).

The surreptitious, and quite deliberate reason people like Fry put out this 'positioning' of themselves intellectually above you - unless you agreed with them and even then, you will find it is not all that simple either(!) (...They won't let you do it) - is that it deprecates then, the observer reliability.

And that is actually not a prima facie fact.

But once someone has uncritically just accepted it that it is a prima facie fact, then it's easy to hit them over the head because the wool has already been pulled over their eyes.

Except the observer could be both honest and reliable. Certainly they have no obvious hidden agenda, whereas if you have the board of editors at the Oxford University Press behind you and all of the press and media pumping that is going on, there most certainly is a hidden agenda and a very strong one. It's about research grant funding attracting, it's about political power, and it's about controlling the field of ideas.

There is no 'freedom' of 'speech;' there is McFreedom of McSpeech which is a generic label for in this case the particular brand of OxCam Freemasonic propaganda which is a literal one-way flow, in a drive-by take-out for ideas and 'philosophy.' They vend, you suck in, and you also pay and you pay dearly. 

Stephen Fry will tell you if you asked him, and he will tell you floridly and rapidly, that he does not see God, nor any evidence of God and even were God to exist then God has to answer for His Theodicy.

Yeah, I know. You vegetarians
don't want to eat this!
Bill and I will have it.
Heck, there's not even that much to
go around on that plate! 

And then...

Wait for it.

Wait for it.

Can you imagine what is going to be said here now - next?

What? What do you suppose?

Imagine me as the interviewer though, right...

Just imagine it.

"Hey Steph. You're familiar with Genesis, aren't you?"

Fry rolls eyes. He's thinking: (What does this low-life intellect think he is going to 'challenge' me with?! Humph. Scoff. Snort).

"That snake guy, he was the most intelligent, maybe even the most intellectual, certainly the smartest, cleverest and most self-important arrogant slimy bastard around, right?"

Fry: 'Huh? So what?'

"Well did he see God then too after he got tossed out of G-of-E, or like you was he not ever able to see God either..."

But see, the cunning lowness of people like Fry, is even in saying that above there that I said -, it does not diminish the possibility that those who 'see God' are just simply wrong, because after all he's already positioned them as stupid. ...Unable to tell the difference between 'dream' or imagination, or wish-fulfillment - and reality.

Susana.
DJ and prominent Euro
trance singer - sings in
multiple languages.
We're backing Susana
around here now.
She sings the trance song below.

But what I said was that super super-duper advanced intelligent (EG ET Alien) beings, come here, can do so, do do so, materially and physically, not 'metaphorically,' but that they do it under the blanket of either other events which take precedence in the attendant minds of humans generally, or in places that they are not being watched.

Carl Jung said that as our scientific measuring equipment got better, it may be possible soon (meaning, after the time when he was making those statements), to observe more and better things relating to the unconscious.

He did not ever actually distinguish - as two different, entirely separate things - between someone's individual unconscious, and the human collective unconscious. All he said was that the personal ego was one clear 'thing,' the personal 'self' was another thing that encompassed the 'ego' and that the personal unconscious was the unconscious whatever that was, especially necessarily including the collective unconscious, interacting specifically to the personal self.

But I will certainly distinguish between people like Stephen Fry or Sir Salman Rushdie, and say, you, and very definitely 'the collective unconscious.'

Stephen Fry is not attached in any way whatsoever, to the human collective unconscious. He is a different creature altogether.

The genius of real scientific thinkers like Stuart Hameroff, is that they can perceive down into the mysterious, previously unseen bits and pieces of things, and, by applying good quality thinking and also adopting these new physical tools that Jung foresaw - they are starting to come to terms with what the unconscious might be.

They already know very clearly, that consciousness is operating on one frame of reference of its over all activity, easily at the quantum level.

And so we can start to authentically envisage the real logic of actual 'collective' connectedness...

But that then asks a question about my assertion that people like Stephen Fry are not 'here' with the rest of us; that they are not connected. So well then where are they, in fact? Where does their consciousness tie in to, if it ties into anything at all. They have a consciousness, it would appear, but they deny 'God' so they are not consciously at least tied to that...

But see hey, why are they so intent on saying 'God does not exist?'

Aaaah. Just relax you 
vegetarians.
Drink your tea.

Because what flows from the scientific understandings and knowledge of leading-edge mechanistic scientists (and I am a mechanist, when it comes to 'Cosmology'), is that at minimum, the entirety of the connected-up human race, albeit 'unconscious' must be a kind of a 'god' - if you consider that it, the human species, will go on and on into the future, maybe even to Eternity. 

Ah now but if someone truncated that 'eternal unfolding...'

In religious thinking 'the Devil' aka Satan, wants to do that.

And already Imperial College is going to establish an entirely 'from a tabula rasa;' an inceptive new 'being' that has AI 'consciousness...

So you've already been shoved to one side, my good friend.

And secondly, Fry has no 'connection interest' with the simpleton woman who 'looked up at awe' - meaning you. He means you - you're the simpleton, the simple-minded fool. Make no mistake about it.

And see you can't really connect to him either, because you will never be as smart as he is. That's what arrogance says, see. He might not say it to you so openly, but it's what every single word and action of his whole being tells you actually!

Now, you have to make up your mind about something though. The human collective conscious knows everything. Jimi Hendrix said so: 'Just ask the Axis, He knows everything.'

And it also has supreme power to do anything and everything, that it, sorry - that you, want.

And you have to hurry up now, and decide whether you are going make any moves right now.

That Austrian medical doctor who was also a psychologist, whose name must not be McMentioned - well he said that all politicians, were unable to be sexually satisfied. And he gave really good reasons for saying it. Uh-oh. LOL

 

A Staggering New Fact

The topical Salman Rushdie said in an interview, the following - he said, and I quote: 'I mean, I do not believe in the literal truth of fairy tales, for example. I do not believe, for instance, that magic carpets fly.'

When the early Persian myth writers said that the Deev captured Peris every now and then, and kept them captive in iron cages at the ends of the highest branches of tall trees, exposed for everyone to view them and exposed to the elements - and that Peri helpers would fly up to those cages and feed the captive Peri fragrances, which is what their fundamental sustenance consisted of, was this true or only metaphorically true? ...Until some human hero would arrive and was recruited to rescue and release the captive fairy being?

The label of 'Prince' in those days also meant a broadly powerful, maybe even a roaming, ruler, but not the absolute ruler.

...This is where I come from.
Up there, beyond that mist line.
There's giants up there, you know.

So when you read in the New Testament, for instance, that 'Satan is the Prince of the Air,' it does not mean he is a Peri - he is not of the kind of being called 'Peris.' And it does not mean that he rules the Air at all! It means he is a traversing, meaning 'uncrowned' but still dominating, power. Albeit for our purposes we are going to say, also an actual real person/being. Not just a 'power.'

I posted previously that I was going to specify which bits of anything that I had written in other places, were absolutely true and correct in all details and materially factual... Meaning, hard matter-type, fact. Not 'metaphysical' fact.

Rushdie next goes on to explain that he still 'believes' in the 'truth' of the metaphysical lessons or teachings.

And that is exactly not what I am going to say.

In this case, let's equate 'magic flying carpets' with 'UAP's/UFO's.'

Everything I wrote about Thomas C. Schelling, Dr Munro Leaf, Lincoln Gordon (CIA) was completely true. Well in fact all those gentlemen were CIA in one way shape or form. Leaf was a top academic in sociology and political science. He was a major government adviser and adviser to the Disney Corporation. The Rand Corporation, Eastman-Kodak High Altitude Photographic Laboratories - all of those groups, everything I wrote about them in context of those gentlemen was also completely true. And they worked for all of them in different roles.

And this means that somewhere, maybe deep in a government archive somewhere, are government files detailing all of those things about which I wrote concerning those people and the secret or covert government programs that they were working on and in.

Now today, the media talks about 'compartmentalized' classified files, but I cannot see how anything dating to way back then in the late-Fifties, early-Sixties needs to be 'compartmentalized' because you would not 'suppose' there are still any on-going projects or programs, related to those things back then.

Except... I can think of one and it is not anything to do with ET Aliens and UFO's.

I'm not going to say what it is, because it doesn't affect what we want to talk about for right here and now.

And that is specifically, that I have not ever been talking about 'metaphorical' UFO's or metaphorical advanced beings from somewhere else - I have not been talking about Rushdie myth 'magical flying carpets' but about real ones.

So I am not really all that interested the way KP has been characterizing things to do with Dr Steven Greer and all of those groups of UFO chasers, as 'dreams.'

I'm a reasonable guy.

I am going to explain here why people such as Rushdie are intent on hammering away at metaphors when someone else raises the matter of 'flying carpet'-type thing.

Rushdie sees only the metaphorical representation, in the same way that the Deev of Persian folklore, imagined that the top end of tall trees is more or less the region where Peris live and so, keeping them 'up' there would prolong their lives...

Sir Salman would like even less what I am going to say next about him.

Which is that he lacks a range of capacities inside his own structure, which places him more or less on the same standing as the Deev. Deev, have only neural energy which goes up to but not beyond the harmonic multiples of, maybe 550 nms.

At around that type of range of wavelength, there is a 'reflective' mechanism of the Gauss Curve of shortening wavelengths (as we talked about many times earlier, this is just below the so-called 'ultra violet catastrophe' section of the curve). So that all that the intelligent neurological processing is able to do beyond that is 'see' (perceive) the reflections downwards of what lies above and beyond.

So naturally, he says - and he is telling the truth about what he perceives, and he is being self-honest - that everything that we 'think' about beyond that range of existence is only a thing representing some other thing. That's the only way he can think about it.

In fact though - yes what he sees does represent some other thing; a reflection of that thing, not a metaphor for some other thing.

Steven Greer's assertions that there is some exclusively private layer of private corporate involvement, outside of government, but linked with government in the matter of ET Aliens and craft and materials and technology, does fit in somewhat, with what I was saying about those private companies and 'think tanks' of academics post-War (WWII). It's more than possible.

It's strongly possible.

I'm a reasonable guy, yes, 
but man I could still waste a lot of money!
Don't you worry about that!

The split in official policy and thinking at the highest levels, comes about through the difference, the structural difference in neurology between people like, say Dr Munro Leaf, and Sir Salman Rushdie in modern times.

If even an army officer or a soldier comes to a secret panel and tells them 'yes I saw such-and-such' the 'Rushdie's' on that panel will automatically default to the 'and that was a dream/a metaphor/a psychic phenomenon coming from the stress of the risks of nuclear conflagration...'

And so from then on actual policy is determined, governed, not by the actual facts as reported and ascertained - and which might have been able to have been fully validated - but by the 'metaphorical lessons' or the 'moral values' dimension as perceived by people with a defective neurology.

You see, these 'little bluish-grey guys' are not the actual ET Aliens as they live elsewhere. These are functionaries who are alternated backwards and forwards from their real physiology, to a physiology that is suited to being 'perched' like a space bird, not very far out in space from us in order to perform their tasks. Their ears pick up higher-frequency sounds because those are the ones that travel best in low atmosphere and low natural gravity conditions (which affects the atmosphere gases and gas and particulate dynamics), their eyes see better in the relative dark, their fingers can magnetically cling onto surfaces where there is molecular density, their bones can survive Earth atmospheric super high G-forces, and extreme rapid medium changes.

Actual real ET Aliens from very distant places look virtually just like you or me.

You would generally speaking not be able to tell one apart from any other human being down here.

What the hell, JES!
You post these pics, what do you
expect me to do with them!!
And stop 'skiting.' You and me both
are not the ages
they all think...

Imagine though, if a team of serious-minded, senior academics, were canvassing in front of President Kennedy, the need to look at human beings and assess them with regard to what range of neurological wavelengths they actually possessed the structural capacity to use...

I mean there's plenty of ways of using meters - electronics devices - even available way back then in the very early-Sixties, to 'see' these things on a scope. Tavistock was using them.

They're still using them but they just got into a world of trouble experimenting on little kids just then though. Those experiments are not totally wrong - you can definitely reverse chemically-induced organic changes with electronics; not other chemicals. It's just that Tavistock does not have that kind of electronics just yet. But they will though, sooner or later.

You could check Hoover and declare him defective. Johnson - defective. Any number of people.

And what would be the 'benefit' of those human beings with a much greater range of neural wavelength traffic and traffic capability?

Well you can touch an electric heating bar and burn your fingers. But can you touch a high ultra-violet data stream? Can you hear it with your ears?

Can I stick you, you personally, in front of a xenon gas discharge tube and turn it on and after a few minutes will you be able to read electromagnetic signalling through brick walls? Some of you will, some of you won't.

That doesn't necessarily mean you are 'deficient' but it probably does though! Because for all of your life, maybe your lives if you believe that kind of thing, all that you have ever jammed into your head was the 'reflection only' of matter sensitivity above the green codes.

Someone would have to take you away from your bullshit that you are 'smart' and that you are 'scientific' because for one thing - you just ain't!

To take you into a material physical craft that accommodates all of the ranges of neural wavelengths, well that is a thing that your radar can 'see' very easily.

Maybe you could do that, where, oh I don't know, ten thousand people were being pushed around in a massive earthquake and so it would be a waste of time telling anyone 'Hey I just saw a space ship!' Pull yourself together man. You're imagining things because of the earthquake. Or 'stop being stupid. Don't you know it's a crisis right now? You're hallucinating. You're panicking.' They'd tell you.

If I ran an ad, though, say in the Auckland or Christchurch Times, asking how many people saw space ships a few hundred feet above the ground during that massive set in 2011 - what sort of response do you think I would get?

We're just going to have
to take her to dinner, Bill.
At your old house.
(Thanks for this pic, btw).

?? 

Anyone? Anyone?

LOL

I already know what the answer is. No point 'Vera' circularizing that in CIA because that would then 'potentially' mean Vera gets to stay and goes even higher, and her bosses get kicked out - that's if anyone even smart in the White House 'gets the point.' And then they - her erstwhile bosses - all have to come see me and Bill and goddammit maybe even KP at that point - and sit in lectures every week until we 'manually' fix up their missing bits.

Well you try telling that kind of thing to Mr Salman Rushdie! Sir - Sir, Salman Rushdie, hero of free speech and atheism and science and truth and reality.

And if you think 'someone' cannot make massive rainstorms and floods and earthquakes at will, then you got another thing coming!

LOL 

Listen, it ain't 'metaphorical magic flying carpets' going up and down into phreatic pipes during volcanic eruptions and causing volcanic lighting and ionic storms, thereby affecting the weather somewhere else. 

As Suzie Quatro as 'Rio Rogers' said once in a Bob the Builder kids' video:

'That ain't fake singing, pardner, that's real singin'!'

Kick your ass you'll know about it. 'Someone,' if 'someone' does that.

I dunno... Is it time Morgiana, is it time?

Jesus.
Just, honestly...
Just Jeezus.
...It's kind of interesting though.

It is getting very close to time.

But why, why did 'God' make Sir Salman with a neurology which does not extend past his reflection filters level.

Well hey hey hey, hang on just a minute though. There's nothing wrong with just being stuck in that zone for a while. The world still has the need for ditch-diggers too, ya know!

And besides, what makes it that he has to go grab some Peris and close them up in iron cages and suspend them on the highest branches of the tallest trees? That's something he did all by himself.

He is fundamentally evil at heart.

Nobody asked him to damage or 'shake' people's 'faith' such that they were in danger of 'losing their faith.' Just because you hurt a fairy or even kill a fairy does not mean you have proven anything other than that you are an extremely heartless individual. Except they are not just 'individuals' - there's a whole bunch of them.

An ascendant line of species development, still also has to contend with competing descending lines though, sometimes. Not everywhere in the Cosmos but it is so here. This is a sequestered place.

It's like a share farmer in an adjoining field. He knows his crops are screwed because the land he's on is no good, but he throws a bunch of his seeds over to your place. Now don't forget - every single cultural outcome, every slightest nuance of innovation emerging from the field of the 'Evolution' of any particular species, is preserved and protected... ...maybe by the little bluish-grey people. Maybe. DNA is unfolded, iterative magic.

Because as Carl Jung did say, it's all a combination, of genetic start-up plus the 'social incidence.' It's not exclusively one thing or just the other thing alone - it's both things unfolding together, which then results in a Beethoven or a Mozart.

And by the way, what makes it that the next-door share farmer is not stealing all your Beethovens, and keeping them 'preserved' somewhere just for himself? He's a long way ahead of you in this matter. Because for one thing he was not 'you' in the first place. He is your enemy in every sense.

You are a new thing. He is an old thing. 

You don't even know how to use your UV ranges (yet). And he, doesn't have those...

Am I wrong, Tiger? Even just a little bit?

Here's the clue: