Take it or leave it,
Like it or hate it..dont watch the last third of the section..
I have no link to this video and have my own ideas..
Someone elses ideas on aliens..I thought it was quite interesting
if you are open minded. And its in contrast to the film the fourth kind.
Unholy Communion: The Fourth Kind Unveiled - YouTube
Regards
M. Gregg
Like it or hate it..dont watch the last third of the section..
I have no link to this video and have my own ideas..
Someone elses ideas on aliens..I thought it was quite interesting
if you are open minded. And its in contrast to the film the fourth kind.
Unholy Communion: The Fourth Kind Unveiled - YouTube
Regards
M. Gregg
So much is known about the world and society now, there isn't much room for speculation. Far from being open minded, fantasy is culpable ignorance.
There are now many cults that appear to make a living from peddling pulp metaphysics. Young and vulnerable minds are at risk from the usual "cracking" techniques. Fantasy has become the new "opium of the people".
It seems strange to me that those who engage in this kind of thing are equally inclined to get niggly with audio fantasists. What's the difference?
Yeah, like people reading from books black from ages of reading near candles that the Earth is round and rotates around Sun had to be considered crazy, ignorant, as dangerous. 
By the way, I am going to attend this Alchemical seminar. Promises to be fun.
Emerald Tablet Workshop | Summary | powered by RegOnline
Let's see what ancient people were thinking about our modern world.
By the way, I am going to attend this Alchemical seminar. Promises to be fun.
Emerald Tablet Workshop | Summary | powered by RegOnline
Let's see what ancient people were thinking about our modern world.
No, not at all like that. Science has always been under attack from fantasists. Early science was thought heretical, not crazy, because it threatened the prevailing, economically convenient fantasy.
It is still under attack. I'm standing with Copernicus. Whose side are you on?
Only a few super-rich people knew anything about alchemy at the time. Most ancient people were too busy trying to stay alive to give the world much thought.
It is still under attack. I'm standing with Copernicus. Whose side are you on?
Only a few super-rich people knew anything about alchemy at the time. Most ancient people were too busy trying to stay alive to give the world much thought.
I am with Copernicus, as well. He used to learn ancient teachings. Sir Isaac Newton, as well. Ancient knowledge inspired them to do their own research, doing experiments, developing what we now call Science. After Tuthmosis-III it was not necessary to be rich, just to have desire to learn, and pass through the filter to be accepted. Before Science it was Teaching. Teaching was much more comprehensive, but Science could prove to Inquisition that anyone can reproduce experiments, without involvement of any "Black Magic". Sciences could be taught openly.
What I find rather confounding are those who look at science and cite Occam's razor as some sort of proof, apparently unknowing that Occam was a monk and devoutly religious man.
Looks like a very interesting seminar Wavebourn. While I unfortunately don't have the budget to attend the seminar this month, I may have to soon pick up Hauck's book 'The Emerald Tablet'.
Looks like a very interesting seminar Wavebourn. While I unfortunately don't have the budget to attend the seminar this month, I may have to soon pick up Hauck's book 'The Emerald Tablet'.
Copernicus may well have dabbled in the occult, and may have been religious, but he had to break away from all that to establish his simple model, deduced from mathematics and observation. Both I and Copernicus can understand the truth he uncovered without reference to whatever "ancient teachings" you might imagine he followed.
Lots of scientists are religious. Lots are bonkers, too. Science itself is neither religious nor bonkers and does not cite Occam's razor as proof of anything.
Some people will say anything to sell books and seminars, and not care what damage their propaganda causes. The more obstacles they can erect against real enlightenment, the easier it is to hold people long enough to bleed them dry.
As a teacher, I have seen some of the damage this stuff causes. Many of my neighbours deny evolution, and believe the moon landings are American lies. This makes lots of their kids unteachable. No joke. Real, deep damage.
Lots of scientists are religious. Lots are bonkers, too. Science itself is neither religious nor bonkers and does not cite Occam's razor as proof of anything.
Some people will say anything to sell books and seminars, and not care what damage their propaganda causes. The more obstacles they can erect against real enlightenment, the easier it is to hold people long enough to bleed them dry.
As a teacher, I have seen some of the damage this stuff causes. Many of my neighbours deny evolution, and believe the moon landings are American lies. This makes lots of their kids unteachable. No joke. Real, deep damage.
Now I see how modern education damages people...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...-no-clothes.html?highlight=university+clothes
I don't buy this silly mantra, sorry. It is enough to read the word "Unteachable". To me, it means that students have questions that teachers have no clue how to answer. They have no clue how to motivate students. They have no flexibility, intelligence, that means they deserve the word "Unteachable" more than students.
I think it oddly coincidental (if you believe in such things) that the essence of the Emerald Tablet is 'As above, so below'.
Emerald Tablet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What this says to me isn't so much a mythic fantasy or ancient propaganda as the simplest statement of a very real reality, the reality that science and mysticism are really talking about the same things, only from two very disparate perspectives.
The point being, IMO, a perspective isn't truth, it is only an understanding. Even science is slowly coming to understand that how someone looks at something can have a profound effect on our understanding of it (e.g. the wave/particle duality). If there is a myth, I would say the idea of perfect objectivity is one of the best, for positing a 'perspectiveless' perspective. Fortunately, that idea seems to be gaining the association as a Newtonian ideal.
Just as myths are often a metaphor for our physical lives, that which is physical can also be seen as metaphors for our spirituality, the lesson being if at first something seems completely inexplicable (or unteachable), perhaps it is time to take a completely fresh approach.
Or not.
Emerald Tablet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What this says to me isn't so much a mythic fantasy or ancient propaganda as the simplest statement of a very real reality, the reality that science and mysticism are really talking about the same things, only from two very disparate perspectives.
The point being, IMO, a perspective isn't truth, it is only an understanding. Even science is slowly coming to understand that how someone looks at something can have a profound effect on our understanding of it (e.g. the wave/particle duality). If there is a myth, I would say the idea of perfect objectivity is one of the best, for positing a 'perspectiveless' perspective. Fortunately, that idea seems to be gaining the association as a Newtonian ideal.
Just as myths are often a metaphor for our physical lives, that which is physical can also be seen as metaphors for our spirituality, the lesson being if at first something seems completely inexplicable (or unteachable), perhaps it is time to take a completely fresh approach.
Or not.
I agree.
Like entropy, mediocrity always increases.
This manifests itself in all strata of modern society, even in the education system.
Contrary to popular belief, IQ decreases with each new generation.
This is consistent with a new world order in which you need to think less and less.
I don't think too much, I just do it slowly...
I think it oddly coincidental (if you believe in such things) that the essence of the Emerald Tablet is 'As above, so below'.
Emerald Tablet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What this says to me isn't so much a mythic fantasy or ancient propaganda as the simplest statement of a very real reality, the reality that science and mysticism are really talking about the same things, only from two very disparate perspectives.
The point being, IMO, a perspective isn't truth, it is only an understanding. Even science is slowly coming to understand that how someone looks at something can have a profound effect on our understanding of it (e.g. the wave/particle duality). If there is a myth, I would say the idea of perfect objectivity is one of the best, for positing a 'perspectiveless' perspective. Fortunately, that idea seems to be gaining the association as a Newtonian ideal.
Just as myths are often a metaphor for our physical lives, that which is physical can also be seen as metaphors for our spirituality, the lesson being if at first something seems completely inexplicable (or unteachable), perhaps it is time to take a completely fresh approach.
Or not.
Honestly, I don't understand what such people as Isaac Newton and Karl Jung found so special in that short text, that's why I am going to the seminar. Who knows, may be I will understand some ancient wisdom.
Again only one reply is possible here:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I have been there and seen that.. It seems we are our own worst enemies.
Regards
M. Gregg
I think the teachers and students can be equally at fault..
The example quoted above shows how the students may be unteachable.
However, here's something that occurred in my Physics class.
The teacher had just been explaining about how when nuclear fusion/fission occur, the products always tend toward the most stable element (Fe, IIRC) - Uranium breaks down and Hydrogen builds up to form Helium etc.
To add weight to his point, he picked up a piece of paper, curved it into a U shape, then dropped a pen on to it. Notice, he said, how things in nature tend toward their most stable state.
One student (yes, it was me...) puts his hand up looking slightly confused: "Sir, what about entropy?"
I'm still awaiting a reply.
Chris
The example quoted above shows how the students may be unteachable.
However, here's something that occurred in my Physics class.
The teacher had just been explaining about how when nuclear fusion/fission occur, the products always tend toward the most stable element (Fe, IIRC) - Uranium breaks down and Hydrogen builds up to form Helium etc.
To add weight to his point, he picked up a piece of paper, curved it into a U shape, then dropped a pen on to it. Notice, he said, how things in nature tend toward their most stable state.
One student (yes, it was me...) puts his hand up looking slightly confused: "Sir, what about entropy?"
I'm still awaiting a reply.
Chris
Just my thoughts.
Science is what we know of the universe now..I guess it will change and has changed as time progresses. However I do believe we must keep one foot firmly in science as we know it now.
We have to accept that science will take long time to find the answers.
Why because it gives us a grounded reference point.<<This is Very, Very, important.
Science hasn’t got all the answers, Then again I don’t believe anything has.
Man must dream because technology is the stuff of dreams.
The open minded bit is the acceptance that others have other ideas..if you believe or not that’s personal choice. However it must be grounded. This is a major point of science today.
Without it we are cast adrift with no point of reference.
Anything that prevents a link to science is in my mind missing the point. Again think of this as a duality and walking the middle road. Moral truth is an issue.
Anything that blocks the understanding of science is not the way forward. Think of it as a filing cabinet that stores what we know to be true today.
Without it the structure of the human race will lose order. (perhaps it already is)
Teaching now there is a point of contention..Most of (How to teach) is based upon philosophy...and the red tape of "good ideas" is preventing progress..the paperwork is another wall of confusion..
Regards
M. Gregg
Science is what we know of the universe now..I guess it will change and has changed as time progresses. However I do believe we must keep one foot firmly in science as we know it now.
We have to accept that science will take long time to find the answers.
Why because it gives us a grounded reference point.<<This is Very, Very, important.
Science hasn’t got all the answers, Then again I don’t believe anything has.
Man must dream because technology is the stuff of dreams.
The open minded bit is the acceptance that others have other ideas..if you believe or not that’s personal choice. However it must be grounded. This is a major point of science today.
Without it we are cast adrift with no point of reference.
Anything that prevents a link to science is in my mind missing the point. Again think of this as a duality and walking the middle road. Moral truth is an issue.
Anything that blocks the understanding of science is not the way forward. Think of it as a filing cabinet that stores what we know to be true today.
Without it the structure of the human race will lose order. (perhaps it already is)
Teaching now there is a point of contention..Most of (How to teach) is based upon philosophy...and the red tape of "good ideas" is preventing progress..the paperwork is another wall of confusion..
Regards
M. Gregg
- Status
- Not open for further replies.