What do you think?
21 QUESTIONS TO ASK EVERYONE YOU
MEET FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE

What is the nature of God? If there is a God, what is Its True Nature? Is It a “personality” existing somewhere in another dimension, with desires, needs, intentions, preferences, dislikes, judgments, responses, joys, sorrows, and proclivities identical or similar to those of human beings?

If there is not a God, what is or was the First Source of Life as it is observed in the universe? How did all that we see in the cosmos begin? Is there a system of physical laws that can be used to produce intentioned, consistent, and predictable results in the process that we call human life? Is there anything to be said for what some have labeled the “power of positive thinking?”

Do our thoughts have anything to do with creating or producing our reality? Is there such a thing as collective consciousness? Is there such a thing as “consciousness” at all — collective or individual?

What is the point of human life? Does it have a point? Is it simply, and nothing more than, an expression of a biological entity that begins in utero and ends at death?

Is there life (that is, individual existence, consciousness and awareness of self) after death — and, for that matter, before birth? Is there such a thing as the “soul,” defined as a metaphysical individuality? If so, what is its function or purpose? If not, are humans simply two-part beings, comprised of Body and Mind and nothing more? Within that context, if we hold this to be true, what is the best, the most fruitful, the most fulfilling, the most joyful way to live our lives? Is there any reason to behave in a certain way, other than to avoid the punishments or consequences of civil law or the disapprobation of our friends, relatives, and peers?

What does it take to make life work? Is it possible that there is something we do not fully understand about God, about life, and about ourselves, the understanding of which would change everything? If so, what do you think it might be?

There are 21 questions here. I call them My 21 Inquiries. They are the kinds of questions that have called to me for answers all my life. I imagine that some of these questions are inquiries you have placed before your own mind as well, at one time or another. Perhaps you’ve answered them to your satisfaction. If so, you’re a fortunate person — no matter how you have answered them. Yet it feels to me that we must always remain with the questions as part of our journey. One never knows when one’s answers may change. And that change may change you.

I’m going to offer my current answers to My 21 Inquiries here in the weeks ahead. If you are a regular visitor here, you no doubt already know what my answers will be. I will nevertheless offer them, for ongoing discussion.

Please Note: The mission of The Global Conversation website is to generate an ongoing sharing of thoughts, ideas, and opinions at this internet location in an interchange that we hope will produce an ongoing and expanding conversation ultimately generating wider benefit for our world. For this reason, links that draw people away from this site will be removed from our Comments Section, a process which may delay publication of your post. If you wish to include in your Comment the point of view of someone other than yourself, please feel free to report those views in full (and even reprint them) here.
Click here to acknowledge and remove this note:
  • As someone who has contributed quite profusely to Neale’s blogs and his other websites and being part of the organization as a volunteer in such things as the group of 1000 (no one here probably even knows what that is or means, but that’s okay, it’s simply part of the CwG history that I was & continue to be a part of). I have come to certain conclusions.

    Getting his paper newsletters to watching the growth into the internet as well being a current spiritual helper on his CwG helping outreach site.

    I’ve looked at the questions he’s raised over the years including this blog which is an outgrowth of his book “The Storm Before the Calm” attending many retreats and talks he’s given. I just got back from one of his retreats yesterday. He is soon going overseas to give some more talks,

    As a result, I have a certain perspective that has been gained simply by being a sort of senior contributor and CwG participant from early on, for what ever that’s worth.

    I’ve come to a few conclusions to the many questions he’s asked and will post these a little later. Again, for whatever it’s worth.

    • Spiritual_Annie

      Marko,

      Actually, I have heard of the 1000, but wasn’t able to commit to it at the time. It has been quite the journey over the decades. Although I haven’t been able to attend a retreat in person yet, I have taken an internet course that was seven weeks long, and have been a member of one of his organizations for years. I was volunteering with another of his organizations, just beginning in a leadership role, when I became homeless and lost my access to the internet. Because my own purpose became more clear during the course, I continue to be a member of both organizations, but haven’t yet taken up a leadership role again.

      I look forward to your own perspectives and conclusions, even as they may differ from my own. Who knows… I may gain a new understanding or area of inquiry from your sharing.

      In other words, I believe that your sharing may be worth a lot.

      Love and Blessings Always,
      ~Annie

  • Spiritual_Annie

    What wonderful inquiries these are! It’s been my experience that some of these questions have been answered to my satisfaction as each time I reach the same conclusion, even though more data is provided. Other answers have been evolving as I experience new things and thus grow and change.

    I believe that the nature of Divine Energy (that many call God, by any name) is the underlying cause of existence in this and all other realms and dimensions, from which everything else emerges. I believe this Divine Energy, or Divinity for short, consists of and carries in it the consciousness of and information about all things through it’s presence in all things. I’m not sure that it’s a “desire,” but I believe Divinity also has an evolutionary impulse, as we do. I believe that it’s the experiences of all things which cause Divinity to evolve.

    Science surely shows us that in our physical world, there are physical “habits,” as some scientists have begun to call them. There are forces, such as gravity and electromagnetism, that have been discovered and measured. However, I believe that there’s much more undiscovered thus far than has been discovered and defined (or that we’re told about). We haven’t even but begun to understand what’s in the deepest parts of our oceans, much less why or how our universe came into being—what some call “first cause.” I believe this is in part due to our physicality, which limits us to earthly experiences unless we are motivated to look more deeply—within ourselves and in our lives and in our world. I also have had the positive effects of using my thoughts, words and actions to create changes I desire in myself, others, and the world around me.

    I believe that we affect who and what is around us, and that the reach of our influence never ends, affecting everything. The degree to which it’s affected appears to be connected to proximity, how strong my intentions are, and if my intentions match the intentions of others. This is what I call my consciousness—my thoughts about things, including my thoughts about who I am. I believe that there is a collective consciousness, where similar intentions or energies coalesce, creating a shared reality.

    For me, the point of human life is whatever we choose to give it. If someone chooses to live as a biological entity that returns to the dirt when they die, leaving memories and accomplishments of their life as their legacy, then that is the point and purpose they will experience. If someone chooses to believe that there is an afterlife and that our experiences are shared on the other side of this life, then that will affect the point and purpose of their life. I personally believe that the point and purpose of my own life is to unconditionally love and be compassionate, especially for those society considers outcasts. This includes the homeless, those with mental health conditions, those who are disabled, and those who have been abused.

    I see myself as three parts. The first is that I, like everything else, consist of Divinity. Arising out of that Divinity, being distinctive but not separate from it, is my Soul. My Soul is an individuation that serves a purpose for Divinity, and for myself. Arising from that Soul, being distinctive but not separate from it, is the human being that I am. I envision it like many familiar groupings in society. One belongs to the species of homo sapiens, yet is grouped by boundaries of country or religion or class, yet is an individual. Being an individual doesn’t mean I’m not also a homo sapien or that I don’t belong to other groupings. In the same way, I am an individual, yet I’m also Divinity and my Soul is a grouping of experiences that I have over lifetimes in this and in other realms.

    I do believe that my Soul has a purpose for me in this physical lifetime, as well as the rest of my lives, physical and nonphysical. I’m not sure, but I think that the purpose of my Soul can be different for each of my lives. It makes sense to me that there may be a theme my Soul has for all of my lives. It makes sense to me that it’s in this organization of Souls that Divinity evolves most quickly.

    I believe the most fruitful, most fulfilling, most joyous way to live, regardless of our beliefs, is to determine what it is we desire our lives to be about, and then be it. What our lives may be about may change as we grow and mature, but our attitude about being it need not change. I can be homeless and joyous, be unemployed and fulfilled, be disabled and fruitful. (I left out “best” as I’m not one who can say what is “best.”)

    I’m not sure what it takes for life to “work.” I have experienced that what I think, say and do is what I most often experience—eventually. I have experienced that gratitude is very powerful in changing not only my attitude but also my circumstances. Knowing that I have all I need, even when it appears to be otherwise, is a rock-solid foundation for me. Projecting that into the future—that I’ll always have what I need—is simple for me because of the uncountable moments in my nearly 58 years where I’ve had what I need, or I wouldn’t still be here. Projecting that even further, I trust that I will have what I need on the other side of death because I’ve had all those uncountable moments on this side.

    I think there are many things we don’t understand, whether about Divinity, about life, about ourselves, about what makes life “work,” about the planet we live on, about the universe we live in, about premonitions, about OBE’s and NDE’s, about this physical realm that may have many more dimensions and multiverses than we yet know… We are toddlers, but somehow the gate meant to keep us from falling down the stairs has been removed, and the result may be the end of our species, or of our entire planet.

    What do I think we might discover that could change our ideas about everything? A unified theory that includes their being an energetic force that’s the glue that holds it all together—us, the dimensions and realms, all things everywhere—that will turn the laws of physics on its head. That everything emerges from this energetic force, which I call Divinity, rather than the other way around. A Divinity that is self-aware, conscious, knows what we learn, and shares our experiences. There’s a hint of that possibility in quantum physics, with quantum particles existing as all possibilities until one specifically takes a measure, which then causes one possibility to appear as real. Quantum entanglement is another curiosity that I don’t believe is fully understood. And I’ve read reports that, in China, experiments in teleportation (not telekinesis) have been moderately successful, with people using their minds to transport particles just a few inches.

    Another discovery that would change everything is the proof that other sentient beings exist, whether in our universe or another dimension. Humanity has long believed itself to be alone, or so far removed from other sentient life that there are no chances of our ever crossing paths, that such proof would be paradigm shifting. My hope remains that either another sentient species will learn how to create wormholes, or learn how to travel between dimensions. I hope this because I believe it would change our understanding of what we consider “ownership” of our planet and dominion over all of which it consists. That what we do here, now, affects more than just us and our little blue planet. We’ve discovered that we’re not at the center of the universe, but we still seem to cling to the idea that we are still the center of existence and that what happens to us only affects us.

    I remember one of the first questions asked in a philosophy course: What would happen to Christianity if the bones of Jesus were irrefutably discovered? Would it somehow change Christianity to know that Jesus’ “bodily ascension” wasn’t about a physical body, but a transfigured one? Would it cause people to lose faith because one facet of their belief system was misinterpreted? It’s made me wonder and think deeply and question the basic tenets of all religions. What I discovered is that they all have much more in common than most realize. The “golden rule” is just one example. If this were “discovered,” or rather if it were understood, maybe we’d see more of ourselves in others, focusing on similarities rather than differences. That would also be paradigm shifting, on a social system level.

    Those are my thoughts, experiences and beliefs.

    Love and Blessings Always,
    ~Annie

    • Patrick Gannon

      “Science surely shows us that in our physical world, there are physical “habits,” as some scientists have begun to call them. There are forces, such as gravity and electromagnetism, that have been discovered and measured. However, I believe that there’s much more undiscovered thus far than has been discovered and defined (or that we’re told about)”

      What? I’ve never heard of physical habits, other than things that contribute to personal health, like exercising, eating well, avoiding smoking, etc. What do you mean by physical habits – and what scientists do you refer to?

      There are definitely other forces and particles to be discovered or understood (dark matter/dark energy for example), but these forces will have no impact on our particles. If they did, we’d have found them by now. They will either be too weak, like neutrinos or dark matter that is flowing through us all the time, or they will be too massive and will decay instantly before they can push around any fundamental particles, like the Higgs boson. The beauty of the core theory is that it not only tells us what is, but what cannot be.

      The comment “or that we’re told about” seems to insinuate some grand conspiracy by scientists to hide woo from the rest of the world. This is patently absurd. I’ve been accused of paranoia, but wow…. Any scientist who could prove such woo, would get acclaim, books, speaking engagements, Nobel prizes, etc.; and they would have to do it by demonstrating why every single physics experiment ever conducted gave the wrong answers. That’s quite a hurdle to overcome.

      Universes aren’t like everything else. As far as we know, ours is the only one. It need not obey the laws of physics that the things contained within it do. The universe does not need a cause, and as discussed in my response to Raphael, there are a handful of hypotheses for how this might have happened. In any event, even if a god created the universe, it would have to be a deist god, not a theist god that has anything to do with us – or we’d know it.

      “What do I think we might discover that could change our ideas about everything? A unified theory that includes their (sic) being an energetic force that’s the glue that holds it all together—us, the dimensions and realms, all things everywhere—that will turn the laws of physics on its head”

      That could be string theory, but it won’t turn physics on its head, just add to it. We are made of particular materials, and those materials can only be affected in certain ways. There is no evidence of them ever doing otherwise. If there was, we’d still be trying to find out what was making it happen. There are no unexplained actions by the particles in our natural world, so any magical forces that might exist are having no impact on us at all.

      It is quantum mechanics that tells us with exquisite precision that your woo doesn’t exist, and as I mentioned a few days ago, new evidence has recently been presented that confirms that quantum properties are real physical things, not just mental constructs. This has to be confirmed, but if it is, that’s pretty much the end of saying the moon only exists when we look at it!

      I would like some information about a Chinese experiment showing we can use our brains to transmit particles a few inches. I think I’d have heard about that if it was reliable information. I’m pretty good at using search terms to find stuff like this, but I come up with zip. Can you provide a source? I can’t find anything to support that. What you may be referring to is a recent experiment with entanglement, in which entangled particles were sent to a satellite. While this discovery was the subject of much click-bait, often referencing “teleportation” which it isn’t, all it did was confirm what we already know about entanglement, but at the largest distances tested so far. Theoretically entanglement should work across the universe. You still have to get the entangled particle to wherever it is going, and that can only happen at the speed of light. When the Chinese sent those entangled particles (some 900 out of many thousands of attempts – entanglement is not easy), to the satellite, they went there at 186,000 miles per second, and not a bit faster. Entanglement is an interesting property of quantum mechanics, but it has no bearing on spirits or souls or other woo. It’s possible that our brains use very short range entanglement for quantum computing… but it’s all physical. No woo.

      The discovery of other sentient critters will have no bearing on the issue of souls, gods, consciousness forces, etc. It will have a bearing on the development of life and where else it might have originated. You are hoping that these other sentient beings create wormholes so they can come and present themselves to us. Any civilization that can create wormholes will likely see us as little advanced beyond ants, and may be very dangerous. The difference in DNA between us and chimps is 1%, so an alien species with a 1% difference from us, might be as far removed from chimps as we are – or more. Very scary idea.

      Good luck finding the bones of Jesus. Chances are very slim that such a person actually existed to begin with. Your point is a good one though – and it has happened in a different way, through the discoveries of science. We know irrefutably that there are no god or soul forces. You ask how finding Jesus’ bones would change things? How is it going to change things as we come to grips with the reality that there are no gods, no afterlives…. Neale asks the question – assuming this is the case, how do we go about dealing with it. It’s probably one of the most important questions he’s ever asked. I hope some here will attempt to answer it.

      • Patrick Gannon

        “I would like some information about a Chinese experiment showing we can use our brains to transmit particles a few inches.”

        Um, actually our brains do transmit particles a few inches. Electrons are particles and we pass them along axons for several inches on a continual basis, until we die.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Now that I think about it, our brains can transmit particles (electron) the entire length of our body! If you stub your toe, you’ll know this.

      • Craig

        A good reflection on entanglement I notice again you are in search of truth above all. So let as discuss Jesus and his bones… If the biblical records are correct you will not find them… Risen from death and ascended into heavan…
        So zero possibility there.
        Fantastic explanation on chimps and aliens and DNA.

        What do you consider us humans to be? Animals, Evolved Animals, separate entity…
        I view us as a unique separate entity. And the uniqueness is not the 1% DNA difference but rather a different intent. It was this intent that made us investigate, examine, question and make calculated deduction… This does not make us God’s but causes us to consider a higher being… As we cannot explain this higher being in relation to our temporary being humans fantasy about eternal life so we created a soul. But the records of the religious scripts explain thoughts focused and actions improved create a harmonious interactive relationship which seem to be the implied so called soul… But that my view.
        If the ancient scriptures and human records are correct then all our search for more answers makes us like these gods to know good from evil. And this is not about our animal 99% similarities that cause us to copulate, eat, care and create habitation…
        So that difference between us and other living entities is what implies a purpose for living and being alive.
        If we just fall back to survive as animals, on our intellectual level we will destroy, sorry have destroyed, the natural habitable planet. I think this is all the result of thinking we are equal to the higher entities, instead of using our intellect to align with the purpose of the habitable reality, the only one we really know.
        And that Patrick in short is the soul we are revealing.
        Again if the scriptures are correct there are only 144 000 living realities of humans that measure up to the purpose of the higher being. Allegorical speaking believing in a higher being is a human soul which separates us from other life forms on earth.
        Marco, Jethro and Raphael say something worth taking cognisance of… Reread their posts… It is not about what is in the mind or perceived to be possible that will change the way we relate to each other, it is about how we live so that others realize that solutions or salvation is here and now. When we achieve this we may change woo to wow and soul to example lifestyles that do not endanger but rather sets free…
        Just my 2 cents…

        • Patrick Gannon

          “If the biblical records are correct you will not find them… Risen from death and ascended into heavan…”

          Yeah but the biblical accounts are so full of errors and contradictions that they can’t be relied on. Matthew and Luke have Jesus being born 12 years apart. Jesus may not have even existed. There is not a word written about his life till Mark’s gospel (~70AD) a couple decades after Paul’s writing in the 50s.. Paul knows nothing of a historical Jesus. Nothing. Mark made up Jesus – that seems pretty clear. Perhaps he was modeled after some real human, but the story is mythical from end to end.

          Humans are evolved primates. We’re animals. There is evidence that chimps are evolving in the same way we did; starting to use tools and demonstrate higher thinking.

          I’m delighted with talking about the best way for us to live, but I come from a different starting point. I want to start from a point of truth, not a point of myth. The Abrahamic religion is based on myth. It is not a good starting point. It has held us back, it keeps us at each other’s throats. The concepts it came up with like “souls” have not helped. Now, we have to be afraid of life after death, and not just the life here. The Church made sure we were filled with that fear.

          Please give me an example of changing woo to wow….

          • Craig

            Think and do is wow. Think and wait is woo.
            I was taught as a child if I spit in one hand and wish in the other which is the most measurable… Woo the wish spit the wow…

          • Patrick Gannon

            Aren’t you wishing in one hand, when you propose the existence of a creator god? By your definition, isn’t that woo?

            Not all researchers will agree with you regarding chimp evolution; some claiming they have entered into a chimp stone age. Keep in mind that evolution is something that takes place over very long timeframes. We would need to try and show that there was a time in their past when they did not use tools, and then began to. You seem to be expecting something along the line of “Planet of the Apes” wherein they obtain human capabilities, practically overnight. It will take tens if not hundreds of thousands of years for them to evolve, if they survive.

            The real concern is that they will never have the opportunity to evolve, given that we’re reducing their habitat and reducing their numbers to the point where evolution won’t have the diversity it needs in order to select for advantageous traits. You can google: “BBC Chimpanzees and monkeys have entered the stone age.” There are several articles on this subject.

          • Craig

            Thank you for the reply, luckily I do not wish, as I said before my experiences tell me there is…
            So concerning the chimps the evolutionists are also making a calculated guess concerning the evolution of chimps…
            I still think we underestimate the abilities of animals as we have labelled them lesser creatures…

          • Patrick Gannon

            The studies continue. Coincidentally, there was a press release on the subject today. Google “TerraDaily Chimpanzees can learn how to use tools without observing others”

            That means they are thinking it out – evolving their brains. Prior to this, it was assumed that they just copied us. Apparently not…

          • Craig

            Maybe we should accept we are the lesser species still trying to dominate the stronger ones… That live in peace and harmony until nature or evolution calls…

        • Spiritual_Annie

          Craig,

          “So let as discuss Jesus and his bones… If the biblical records are correct you will not find them… Risen from death and ascended into heavan…
          So zero possibility there.”

          In my original post, I noted that this was presented in a Philosophy course as a “what would happen if” question, not as an expectation or biblical question. I believe, though, that if you look at scriptures, some say it was a transfigured body that ascended.

          Love and Blessings Always,
          ~Annie

          • Craig

            Anne
            Thank you.
            As this was presented as a philosophical view so are many scientific concepts presented as statements of possibilities which are either proven years later or disproven.
            I reflected on what is given as facts in biblical records. Patrick highlighted the assumptions of the narrator’s who recorded the gospel records. Both are views and or philosophical opinions offered at the times. Think of the consequences of the written philosophies… I trust this is way Patrick wants to stick to facts or proven philosophies, which CwG is not.
            Just my 2 cents. Or doing what I seem to do best: Mess things up for others…

          • Patrick Gannon

            The whole thing is nonsense. At the time, these primitive people thought we lived in a 3-part universe with the heavens (multiple) above, the firmament dividing the heavens from the flat earth below, and the underworld (Sheol or Hades) below. People at the time, thought the stars were holes poked in the firmament. Let’s be realistic. This is mythical nonsense. Lots of pagan gods also ascended to the firmament (i.e. went to outer space).

            Further, of all the NT texts, Acts is probably the least reliable of them all. It’s outright propaganda. It is full of misinformation and was written long after the events in question, probably early 100s AD, at least two full generations after Jesus’ alleged crucifixion. (Average age was about 35 in those days). Even authors who disagree over whether Jesus was a historical person, say Acts can be given no credibility in making that determination. (See Bart Ehrman and Richard Carrier’s books about the historicity of Jesus).

  • Jethro

    “What is the nature of God?”
    To allow humans the ability to agree on the right and wrong of humans. We can either say

    “God says” or we can say “everyone agrees that”.
    It pretty much means the same thing in a group who believes in the same deity.

    “If there is a God, what is Its True Nature?”
    Life or that which promotes a life of perfections based on the definitions of perfections according to the opinions of the majority in any given geographical location with differences based on the struggles of the surroundings.

    “Is It a “personality”
    existing somewhere in another dimension, with desires, needs, intentions, preferences, dislikes, judgments, responses, joys, sorrows, and proclivities identical or similar to those of human beings?”
    The existence of God, the personality of God, the location of God, the triggering of all emotions of God, is all based on the Human beings communicating about God. Free will denotes no interaction and no interactions means no truth in any comment by any human, only guesses and assumptions.

    “If there is not a God, what is or was the First Source of Life as it is observed in the universe?”
    Turtles all the way down! The universe evolves without confirmation of a beginning or a determinable end.

    “How did all that we see in the cosmos begin?”
    No answer of surety has been determined. Religious truth is based on faith and science may have a theory I’m unaware of… Pat, the floor is yours on this one. Probably without saying.

    “Is there a system of physical laws that can be used to produce intentioned, consistent, and predictable results in the process that we call human life?”
    Yes. That system changes from second to second based on the interactions of humans with other life on the planet which may change the views of prior experiences of any given human being at any given second of any given second.

    “Is there anything to be said for what some have labeled the “power of positive thinking?” Yes! It can have a dramatic effect on That system that changes from second to second based on the interactions of humans with other life on the planet which may change the views of prior experiences of any given human being at any given second of any given second.

    “Do our thoughts have anything to do with creating or producing our reality?”
    Our thoughts have everything to do with creating or producing our reality. We are in charge of creating it. We just don’t like to understand it. We don’t want to.

    “Is there such a thing as collective consciousness?”
    The collective consciousness is God, the individual consciousness is based on God or the collective consciousness. Therefore, wars have started over differing beliefs in/of God. Too many large groups (majorities) have come together without the ability to balance differing beliefs. A balance that may occur when individuals meet and talk.

    “Is there such a thing as “consciousness” at all — collective or individual?”
    Our we self-aware? Yes, or we wouldn’t be self-important. Are we aware of the existence of things around us? Yes, or we could not realize self. Are we aware of our own desires and that those desires may differ from our truest need? Yes, we are aware of even the differences within ourselves which leaves us also with the ability to realize that all humans are aware of this and this awareness has created a collective and individual consciousness in which we have defined the rules of living, the right and wrong of all things, the acceptable and the unacceptable actions of ourselves and others.

    “What is the point of human life? Does it have a point? Is it simply, and nothing more than, an expression of a biological entity that begins in utero and ends at death?”
    The point of human life is the point that we give it, nothing more and nothing less. Yet we do not make the decision. We are taught from birth the right way and the wrong way to be and we make the point of our lives based on that and the experiences we accumulate from birth to our given present moment. If it ends at death is yet to be seen by myself. I hope to leave some great memories that last many years. The bible states that there is only one unforgivable sin, it is to give up on God. Either suicide is the only unforgivable sin for giving up on life or giving up on a belief in God is that sin, but which God? If there is an afterlife available after death other than suicide there’s still a chance to join eternity as a living entity, whatever that entity may be.

    “Is there life (that is, individual existence, consciousness and awareness of self) after death — and, for that matter, before birth?”
    Only faith in the possibility makes either one possible now. It is my understanding that all of this knowledge will be had after death, right now is for me to learn to live, not be dead as dead is defined in my current state of life.

    “Is there such a thing as the “soul,” defined as a metaphysical individuality? If so, what is its function or purpose? If not, are humans simply two-part beings, comprised of Body and Mind and nothing more?”
    The soul is that part of thought that knows the brain is wrongfully siding with the desires of the body. The soul is reasoning between the personal knowing of right and wrong. Because we can recognize the differences in the cause of our thoughts, we have separated the thought process into three different entities. The mind, the body, the soul. We do not wish to be our minds because it is willing to serve our body. We do not wish to be our bodies, as it desires things that we know are not right, our soul has said so. Our soul serves the best that we know, the soul serves God, the greatest grandest thoughts that we can understand about anything. We must be that, and that must be the part that survives death to return to God while the body and the brain rots and returns to the earth… sort of. It’s trapped in an expensive box and confined for the life of the box, not even serving the daisies.

    “Within that context, if we hold this to be true, what is the best, the most fruitful, the most fulfilling, the most joyful way to live our lives?”
    The definition of these very things is to be answered in the process of life. We do not need to find the most undesirable things of life to know the most desirable things of life. We need only follow what feels right and move away from that which does not. Only the individual will ever know what that is. Therefore, the secret to happiness is only a secret to those who have not found it. The secret is doing those things that make you happy. How we define best, fruitful, fulfilling, or joyful will depend on us being exactly who we really are, the body, the mind, the soul, the totality of who we are.

    “Is there any reason to behave in a certain way, other than to avoid the punishments or consequences of civil law or the disapprobation of our friends, relatives, and peers?”
    That would really depend on which outcome you wish to pursue.

    “What does it take to make life work?”
    Life. After that it depends on who you ask. I’m going with doing that which feels like the best possible choice based on the best possible knowledge we have about ourselves.

    “Is it possible that there is something we do not fully understand about God, about life, and about ourselves, the understanding of which would change everything?”
    Not only is it possible, it’s inevitable. We have set our elderly and their wisdom aside as useless and we are listening to our youth. A youth whom lacks the experience which provides the wisdom that comes with age that we set aside and/or ignore every day.

    “If so, what do you think it might be?”
    I get the feeling I could write several books on that subject and it would still never be right for everyone. I will make a personal decision that improves my life and let others do the same. Lots of great books out there that have not been read and people who haven’t been talked to.

  • Patrick Gannon

    I’d have started with a different order. Asking the nature of God presupposes God. The “If” there is a god question should undoubtedly come first. Perhaps the second question should be “which god” and what do we mean by “god,” and who gets to decide?

    If there is a god, it is an impersonal god, a deist god, a god that does not interact with us in any way. If it interacted with us, we’d know it. Personal, theist gods that interact with humans are essentially impossible. (Nothing is every impossible – it is possible that every single physics experiment ever performed produced incorrect results, but that’s all there is to hold onto).

    The glory and wonder of man is that we can ask questions, like how did it all start, and we can dedicate ourselves to finding those answers. If we assume “god did it” then we have no motivation to be what we are – exploring, inquisitive humans, curious about ourselves and our origins. We are explorers and have been at it since our roots in Africa. We deny a basic part of who we are if we fail to do that which is programmed into us by evolution, because we simply assume “god did it.” Fortunately there have always been brave people who have continued to explore and discover how our natural world actually works.

    “God did it” has left God with a continually diminishing role, and physics has removed the rest. God died on July 4, 2012, but it didn’t make the papers… Our grandkids will learn this though.

    ” Is there a system of physical laws that can be used to produce intentioned, consistent, and predictable results in the process that we call human life?”

    YES. And thank you for calling it a process. It is not an energy or some other sort of force. It is a process that depends on the components upon which it is based, just as the chemical reaction process of a flame on a candle depends on the materials it is based on. We don’t know yet exactly how life started, but we’re closing in on it.

  • Patrick Gannon

    “Do our thoughts have anything to do with creating or producing our reality? Is there such a thing as collective consciousness? Is there such a thing as “consciousness” at all — collective or individual?”

    The word “consciousness” is a convenient way of talking about an emergent phenomenon. Since we decide what consciousness is; there can indeed be a group consciousness. But the real question – is consciousness an illusion? The answer seems to be yes. This is a complicated subject because there are different types of consciousness. All of them are products of the brain, and none can exist without it. I suggest Indre Viskontas, “Brain Myths Exploded” for those who are interested in learning more.

  • Patrick Gannon

    These are all great questions…

    “What is the point of human life? Does it have a point? Is it simply, and nothing more than, an expression of a biological entity that begins in utero and ends at death?”

    The only point of human life is that which we give it. The universe cares not a whit about our existence. For most of us, or at least many of us, we do have a purpose, a point to our lives; one that we give ourselves. In the end though, we are biological entities that begin in utero, and end in death. That this is so, has now become overwhelmingly evident thanks to our understanding of our natural world.

    It’s not good news. It’s not what many scientists hoped. They hoped to find forces, or at least unexplained actions, to keep alive the hope for a soul or god or consciousness force, but all avenues have been exhausted, and what we know includes the limits on that knowledge – it tells us not only what can happen, but what cannot. There cannot be any forces, particles, fields, souls, gods, consciousness, divinities or essential essences that can do anything whatsoever to our physical matter; and without pushing around atoms, nothing happens. Synapses don’t fire so you can talk to the dead. Tissue doesn’t heal of its own accord. It’s a bummer, but it is what it is. How do we deal with it? Right now, we’re denying it – like a cancer we’ve learned about…. Later we’ll get mad, and eventually we’ll accept it.

    Where spiritual folks might seek purpose in the decades ahead, is helping people who inherently fear death (a useful evolved trait), to deal with its inevitability. Humanity grew up with this hope that we lived forever, but that hope has been dashed. It’s over and done with. So now what do we do? How do we carry on from here?

  • Patrick Gannon

    “Is there such a thing as the “soul,” defined as a metaphysical individuality?”

    What is a metaphysical individuality? If souls exist, they have nothing to do with us. They don’t interact with us, so it doesn’t matter.

    “If so, what is its function or purpose?”

    To give humans hope that they won’t die.

    “If not, are humans simply two-part beings, comprised of Body and Mind and nothing more?”

    “Mind” is an emergent property of the brain and cannot exist without it, but essentially, since the idea of “mind” is an emergent way of talking, we can say yes. We are body and mind and nothing more.

    “Within that context, if we hold this to be true, what is the best, the most fruitful, the most fulfilling, the most joyful way to live our lives? Is there any reason to behave in a certain way, other than to avoid the punishments or consequences of civil law or the disapprobation of our friends, relatives, and peers?”

    What an amazingly beautiful question. Given that this is indeed our status, what is the best way for us to live? What a great question. I think the concept of oneness can still apply if we see our oneness as being part of the human genome, for example. This new reality is a very interesting one. Neale raises a great question. What will people do when they realize there is nothing that really matters, because when you die it all goes away?

    Interestingly you don’t see atheists and scientists running around creating mayhem and destroying lives – in fact that problem seems to be more associated with the believer crowd, does it not? Perhaps there is something about realizing that this is all we get, that makes what we have more special. No second chances, no do-overs. It’s a lot to consider, and a great path to take in the light of the new reality.

  • Raphael

    “Yet it feels to me that we must always remain with the questions as part of our journey.”

    Exactly! We all should be cautious and avoid falling into the trap of thinking that we have everything figured out, spiritually or otherwise. We might be surprised…life might not be what we think it is, particularly when it comes to time and space and cause and effect ,
    or linear thinking.

    From the religious point of view, if we accept the notion that God created the universe, then the next logical question would be “Who created God?”

    From the scientific point of view, if we accept the notion of a big bang, where did the original substance originate, and how did empty space itself come into being?

    As we can see, using linear thinking, every cause becomes the effect of a prior cause, ad infinitum. The answer might actually hide in plain sight, outside of linear thinking!

    • Patrick Gannon

      I can’t put forth a theory on who created God (which one?), but there are a number of hypotheses about how the universe came into being. Lawrence Krauss, in “A Universe Out of Nothing” provides a couple different alternatives. To watch a video google “Lawrence Krauss: A Universe from Nothing – YouTube”

      There may have been no original substance from which the universe came into being, or there may have been. An interesting tidbit is that all the energy and matter in the universe cancel each other out. So in a way, we have nothing and we started from nothing – and could go back to it.

      Empty space, by the way, is not empty. It contains energy, referred to as vacuum energy. “Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space throughout the entire Universe. One contribution to the vacuum energy may be from virtual particles which are thought to be particle pairs that blink into existence and then annihilate in a timespan too short to observe.” (Wikipedia) How this space came into being, and how it is still being created, as it is, is truly an interesting question. The creation of space can exceed the speed of light. The stars and galaxies we see in the universe are expanding away from us faster than the speed of light. At some point they will be so far away that we will no longer be able to see them. If humanity lives for billions of years, they will see the night skies gradually getting darker and darker. We are fortunate enough to be living in a time when the universe is interesting. And yes, we have hypotheses for why the universe is expanding – could have something to do with dark energy and/or dark matter.

      Quantum mechanics tells us that virtual particles not only can, but must, pop into and out of existence, so the universe when it was quantum in size may have simply popped into existence. This seems like it would defy the conservation of energy, but quantum mechanics apparently supports the ability to do this in certain cases.

      Another proposal says the universe was a point of infinite density – everything we see today was once piled on top of each other in a tiny point, which experienced a “phase transition.” A good example of a phase transition is to place a beer bottle in the freezer. When you pull it out and pop the cap, it will often go from liquid to frozen in an instant, sometimes cracking the bottle. This could have happened to our universe, and it could undergo another phase transition, in which the entire universe goes back to a point. Right now, it’s expanding at an increasing rate, so a deep freeze seems to be our likely future.

      We don’t know the answer to this yet – and possibly may never know since it may require that we look at the universe from outside of it – a place we can’t go; but with our growing understanding of quantum mechanics, there’s a good chance we’ll know quite a bit more in the future.

      While I certainly agree that we must keep asking questions, we should note that some questions have been fully answered. There are some things we do know with an extremely high degree of confidence based on actual observation. Of all the things we know in physics, nothing gives more exact answers that quantum mechanics. We can come back in a million years, and Newtonian gravity, general relativity and quantum mechanics will still be perfectly valid. If all that knowledge was lost and we started over, we’d end up right where we are with our understanding of our natural world. If every religious text in the world was destroyed, and we came back in a million years – how many of those books would come back exactly the same as they were? That’s right – not a single one!

      • Jethro

        “Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space throughout the entire Universe. One contribution to the vacuum energy may be from virtual particles which are thought to be particle pairs that blink into existence and then annihilate in a timespan too short to observe.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy)

      • Raphael

        Interesting answers…keeping it extremely simple, it seems that, if polarity is actually a principle that is observable anywhere in the universe (no one knows, but let’s assume it is for the sake of discussion), then if the universe is expanding today, it will eventually reverse course and contract, and collapse into a tiny point…and then it will expand again, and keep repeating these cycles slightly differently perhaps but according to the so-called “law” of polarity (yin yang), again if such a thing is universal.

        Creation-destruction-creation-destruction etc might be the monumental game the universe is playing, and we are trying to make sense of it all while living on our tiny golf ball.

        Now a truly crazy question for the spiritually inclined only: if the entire universe contracts itself into a pinhead after having expanded as far as it could and having run out of juice (or simply being subject to the “law” of polarity), does it mean that the “souls” or the “consciousnesses” or “spirits” (or whatever) of all living things will do the same and return to the “source”, to the point of origin, to be presumably blasted back into existence again as another big bang occurs? And if such “spirits” do return to the point of origin, will they be totally voided and reabsorbed or reduced to the state of a seed, spiritually speaking? What do you think?

        Seriously, if the physical universe is basically little more than a game of card that gets reshuffled periodically, why wouldn’t the same thing happen at a spiritual level? I know, the thought is a bit unsettling…

        • Patrick Gannon

          Interesting mind game, notwithstanding that there are no spirits or souls… I hope you get some responses.

          • Raphael

            Looks like I did…thanks for participating!

        • As interesting as these speculations are, for me, the focus and attention is working and playing toward my/our own spiritual peace and harmony, self worth, self esteem. living with positive self talk and appreciation etc. This is the first order of business.

          This is primary. All esoteric speculation is secondary. If peace and harmony is (to use a baseball analogy) getting to first base, we would do will to get to first base. A home run would be moving more into a HEB or Highly Evolved Being state.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “All esoteric speculation is secondary.”

            So when Neale says this:

            “Is there life (that is, individual existence, consciousness and awareness of self) after death — and, for that matter, before birth? Is there such a thing as the “soul,” defined as a metaphysical individuality? If so, what is its function or purpose? If not, are humans simply two-part beings, comprised of Body and Mind and nothing more? Within that context, if we hold this to be true, what is the best, the most fruitful, the most fulfilling, the most joyful way to live our lives? Is there any reason to behave in a certain way, other than to avoid the punishments or consequences of civil law or the disapprobation of our friends, relatives, and peers?”

            …he’s wasting his time because this is merely idle speculation? I disagree. It may be the most important question he’s ever asked.

            I can’t think of much that is more “esoteric” than the idea of HEBs, as they are strictly a hypothetical concept, given the complete lack of evidence for such beings. How much more esoteric can you get than that?

            No, Neale has raised a point that is critical to your primary objective of, “playing toward my/our own spiritual peace and harmony, self worth, self esteem. living with positive self talk and appreciation etc.” All of these factors are going to be affected in the future as we come to grips with the reality that there are no gods or afterlives. We need to start thinking about how this new knowledge is going to affect us in our journey to “spiritual peace.”

          • I was referring specifically to the speculation that you & Raphael were having on the as of now, the unanswerable question of the origin of the Big Bang or end of the universe speculation.

            Speculation is fine I do it all the time. But at this moment in time for me the primary is peace.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Well I hope some people respond. I thought Raphael asked an interesting armchair thought question. If the universe doesn’t last forever, do souls? Why would a universe even matter to souls? Allow me to muse out loud…

            God is said by many religions to be outside of space and time – in other words outside our universe (where logically, he/she/it can’t affect us), so if souls are part of god they too must exist outside space and time, thus they never really come here to begin with, right? They never affect us – as our science confirms. They can’t exist in any sort of state that allows them to interact with us, or we’d know it, so they are in some sort of nebulous state of nothingness outside the universe, right? No space, no time, no matter.

            But this is based on the religious idea that God is outside space and time. CwG says we are god, and as humans, we are clearly inside space and time, or else, part of a mass delusion or computer program. Leaving that possibility aside, we are inside the universe and bound by its laws. We are physical entities whose material makeup is now very well understood. If God was part of us in the form of souls, inside this space and time, inside this universe, then we should be able to confirm the existence of these souls, or at least confirm that they have some effect on us. But they don’t. There are no unexplained effects. So they are moot.

            It seems to me, that at best, these souls if they exist, must be outside space and time, and can only watch as the universe goes through these hypothetical cycles; however I guess these cycles would be instantaneous and continuous, a blur of moments, but not a passage of time. Time is a construct of the universe. No universe means no time. Our arrow of time started at the Big Bang as far as the classic universe is concerned, but a lot of quantum physics says some things can happen forward or backwards in time – which, apparently, was the state of our earliest universe; so was there a sort of quantum reverse time, at the Big Bang? Could be, though how this would contribute to a hypothetical god/soul observing the cycle, is more than I can imagine at this point. I guess I need a drink to continue with this mind game.

            Anyway, at our material level, there is definitely an arrow of time. Eggs don’t unbreak. If you know the term, ‘entropy’ was exceptionally low at the start of the universe, and it has always increased, and this gives us our arrow of time; but at the quantum levels, this isn’t necessarily true. In addition to going back in time, quantum particles can fluctuate in and out of existence. Are souls or gods basically a name we can give to “quantum fluctuations” like the one that might have kicked off our universe? A quantum fluctuation could indeed be the Creator, so to speak. Shall we call this quantum fluctuation God? Jethro might like that idea. He likes allegories; a way to redefine words so they don’t cause so much angst? (I prefer plowing into the angst head on, but that’s me!) I wonder how much luck we’d have selling the word “God” as a definition for a quantum fluctuation!

            Then there’s the issue of how these souls would “observe” this hypothetical cycling of the universe. How does something that is not constructed of matter “observe” anything? What does it observe with? How would it “see” inside the universe since it exists with god(s) outside the space and time of the universe?

            Mind blowing… Easiest solution is Occam’s Razor. There are no gods or souls, so nothing to explain. Scientists don’t like the god theory because it’s already complicated enough. Gods don’t simplify things, they make it more convoluted than it already is.

          • Patrick so very fascinating!

            “ I wonder how much luck we’d have selling the word “God” as a definition for a quantum fluctuation!”

            WoW, your are now sounding like Technospeak in Star Trek. There is a quantum fluctuation in the subspace singularity, causing warp signature disruptions of photonic energy patterns……

            Quantum Fluctuation, I like it! If it works for you, use it.
            Richard Back in his book Illusions called God “The Is”.

            As for all the other musings, good luck with it. You are not the first or last to deeply consider the working operations or OS systems of the Universe. I remember a short conversation with someone in a copy shop. The conclusion we came to.

            God is code.

            Happy speculating.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “God is code.”

            Actually that possibility is taken seriously. There are a number of scientists who ponder whether we might be living in a computer simulation. There are of course, arguments against it, including the incredible computing power and storage required to generate all of this. Unless it’s all some sort of illusion, and the only one who really exists is me, and the rest of you are an illusion…..

          • Craig

            Here is another possibility; God is but a word or thought…

          • Patrick Gannon

            I guess that’s true. A word or thought does not have to be real or true (Jethro and I are debating the meaning of the word “real”), and personal gods are not real or true unless the laws of physics are all wrong. I can have a word or thought about unicorns and fairies, which does not make them real or true, though Jethro will argue that if I believe in the unicorn or fairy, then indeed they are “real.” I would respond – no they aren’t. The individual who believes this is delusional.

            Why can’t we just let the gods die in peace?

          • Craig

            God’s need not die in peace… We need to find peace towards that we cannot explain or rationalize.

          • Patrick Gannon

            What is it that we cannot explain or rationalize?

            We have rational explanations for the few things that are still attributed to gods – the origin of the universe, the first biological replication (life), and to a lesser extent, consciousness (which is almost universally agreed by neurologists today, to be a product of the brain).

            What other things do we need to explain or rationalize that we need gods for? They just complicate things, because then we have to explain them. And gods certainly don’t bring us peace!

          • Craig

            Everything natural can be explained as evolution from nothing into something. Not science logic. People are trying to make their mark by introducing new findings etc. Yet nothing found or discovered is new all is ancient. The findings just confirm what was… So have we really progressed to understanding this universe. No we are starting to realize there is something greater and bigger. If this was not true scientists would have stayed on the earth but here is nothing to prove what must happen will happen and we cannot change that.
            Now Patrick tell me why do we keep discussing. If we could rationalize surely we would agree that some things may never be answered until they are accepted at face value. God is one of those things. His value and purpose cannot be explained as it does not fit our paradigm. But that is woo.
            Why must we ejaculate millions of sperms just so that 1 can do the job… Why must a mother endure pain and discomfort for a natural birth… Why is it a possibility that children born unnaturally seem to form some deficcienc

          • Patrick Gannon

            Who said anything about evolution from something to nothing? Don’t confuse terms. Evolution is what happens after there is life. Everything natural with regard to biological life can be explained from there.

            Our natural world can be explained as coming about from “nothing” but there’s a lot of physics in how you describe “nothing.” I’ve provided books that can explain this better than I can. Besides, every male here who has been in a relationship knows beyond any doubt, that when a woman says “nothing,” there is definitely something!!!

            What do you mean nothing is new, it’s all ancient? GPS technology is ancient? Laser surgery is ancient? I don’t get your point. What’s new, is that we are finally, for the first time in human history, coming to a very good understanding of our natural world, but this understanding is in deep contrast to the understanding we had before, which was based on magic and mythology.

            “So have we really progressed to understanding this universe”

            Absolutely! We don’t understand all of it by any means, but we’ve accomplished more in a handful of decades than all of human history before it. We understand some parts of the universe exceptionally well – the parts that dictate what is and is not possible in this natural world of ours. The only thing greater and bigger, is the as yet unexplained phenomena that drives us to continued exploration and gives us a purpose.

          • Craig

            Nothing natural is new, only man made things are fashions and trends and will always change as woman use make-up on a daily basis. The image and appearance changes very superficial…
            We are more informed on how again not why…and it is only when we understand why that the how becomes unimportant. Our focus is to much to know how. Let’s start seeking why and change our paradigm…

          • Patrick Gannon

            Disagree. When we understand “how,” the “why” of it often becomes evident. When we understand “how” the earth’s water cycle works, then we understand “why” it rains. Prior to understanding “how” the reason “why” it rained, was because the gods did it.

            How is a much more helpful piece of information, in my view.

            It’s also the problem here. We understand now “how” the particles in our natural world work, and that removes any “why” questions that require gods, souls, forces, energies, consciousness or whatnot. The “how” of it, tells us that the “why” of it, is the laws of physics.

          • Kristen

            Lots of new age teachings think that, including CwG I think, stating nothing is real, its all illusionary, a game called the human experiment, a figment of The Sources imagination as such, containing thousands of games and books within, and prophesies are clues. The winner can ‘create’ the perfect human and get them to the Rosetta Stone or a Vitrivian Man.
            I guess then Gods are the gamers, all with teams.
            Its not something I would ever dismiss, Kabbalah is all games, but would wonder who has the game over button? Trump?

          • Craig

            And what do you think Kirsten.
            Are you practising for eternity or are you living eternity?

          • Kristen

            I dont really have thoughts on any of it, I need facts proven to me, opinions dont really count for much.
            Not sure if I want eternity, depends on the company and if theres enough to keep me occupied and entertained, I dont really believe in the concept of existance at all….I dont think we should exist or co exist where evil and those who knowingly cause suffering are in our midst..not on a planet where children and animals exist. And the entire man made concept of working your entire life just to pay bills just sucks. Earth is much too cold for most life forms on it, forcing us to live unnatural lives. Sometimes I wonder if Earth is actually ‘hell’, a trial run in life before we actually live our lives for real in Heaven, IF we do, and can actually get there.

            BUT in saying that Ive chosen to ‘take out insurance’. I disagree with reincarnation so spent many years studying and working on myself to ensure I get past the point of the Tree of Life (google it with Kabbalah) where you have to be reincarnated which was 10 years of damn hard work and studies with a Rabbi and at Uni, follow the ‘rules’, studied Universal Laws, follow Gods instructions of justice and righteousness which includes supporting justice in place for all hence being a biarch when someone here is too mean and open about it, and avoid everything in scriptures and other teachings that could carry consequences. Ive also trained myself to use my thinking mind and creativity rather than my physical brain so when my physical body and brain die I still have everything I need intact. This has been a huge exercise, ‘uploading’ everything I want from my brain to my thinking mind. I chose to do it writing fiction, from the 70s onwards to upload childhood memories, music, photos right into now. Including writing concerts of all my favourite songs, relearning how to sew etc. One section of a book is about someone with a memory loss brain injury who ‘felt’ she would die so committed a year to doing what I’ve done. I did and do all of that because Im sure people must be incredibly ‘thick’ when they pass and go to the afterlife or a Heaven, with their only memories the emotional ones that we remember personally.

            Then I try to live my life as just a happy human, tolerating that which I have to, doing my bit and just being a human being, being human.

            So to answer your question, no matter what happens, Im prepared and have trained myself for it and semi live how I would want eternity. Change my physical environment, throw in more righteous people and a hot husband, and take away bills, then my own little world, often in fiction, is a Heaven on Earth, where I can function fine. The exact environment all my books (now on book 5, all at least 400 pages) are set in, where Ive been able to face every possibly hypothetical senario and experience being about 50 different people I might encounter so I can understand them all while studying psychology.

            Is this “living or practicing’ eternity….probably practising so I can live as me…literally!

            K

          • Craig

            Ye, preparing sounds the norm.
            Patrick and Jethro seem to be living it. Living life fully without considering negative or positive outcomes, being in the now and here.
            Me I am trying to livelive it, but then easily leave something for later when I am lazy which is 80% of my life…

          • Kristen

            Just choosing to make productive use of time raising my kids and being bored but pretty housebound with a family for so many years.

          • Patrick Gannon

            The idea of a computer simulation took a big hit a couple days ago.

            Physicists find we’re not living in a computer simulation. Cosmosmagazine

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Somehow, I just knew you were a fellow Trekkie! 🙂

          • OH yes!

          • Craig

            I read in CwG 3 that God inspired Trekkie’s…

          • Raphael

            Glad I was instrumental in sending you on this interesting journey. I will think of more crazy questions to ask in the future…I actually love speculations and mind games…mind exercises.

            The idea of a “God” is actually very ancient…but there are two kinds of gods, as Kristen often points out…there is the “ruler”, the “law maker”, the commander-in-chief of a people (to which I do not relate because I do not like authority and rules, being a disobedient child), and then there is the “source”, the “unnamable origin”, to which I relate because it cannot be defined.

            In my opinion, the ruler is most probably a human invention…unless we were created by some advanced “alien” civilization (a hybrid creature made from an ape-like humanoid and an “alien”) and the “God” who made such rules was simply a big wig extra-terrestrial trying to help the products of his experiment.

            As far as the source, the origin, science might actually redefine it with a new understanding. Life itself could simply be a hologram-like experience.

          • We live in a Star Trek Holodeck. Life is truly a solid appearing hologram. A Matrix of high paradoxical complexity and simplicity. Lucid dreams a the closest we get to experiencing life in a Holodeck at this time.

            Most can’t even find consistent inner peace, so we have a ways to go. A very long way to go to reach any micron of HEB awareness.

            P.S. At Neale’s retreat last week I had a brief psychic experience where our Big black cat Monk paid me a visit. Rubbed on my legs and flopped down on his back to say hello & check in on me. He did not physically appear, but the sensation was very strong and lasted maybe 8 minutes and faded.

          • Patrick Gannon

            That’s pretty bold. We live in a hologram? I’d add the words, “we might,” because of course we don’t know.

            What we do know is that your experience of the visiting cat is a product of your brain.

          • Patrick Gannon

            On the contrary, we were exceptionally adapted to life on earth – we ended up ruling over it. Brains overcame brawn. We have no claws, but we have a spear and a bow and arrow. We have no teeth, but we have fire and the ability to communicate, plan, work together to build a trap for the animal…

            Now, whether we can use our intelligence to continue to adapt in order to prevent destroying our earth, is another matter. I fear that intelligence is now being seen as something bad, and that’s not very promising.

            I’ve read arguments for and against a holographic universe, but it’s been a while and I don’t recall the arguments pro and con. I think the idea is losing favor.

          • Raphael

            Yes, but once you get to that inner peace, appreciation for all life and harmony (as much as is possible in a chaotic civilization), you can play with such ideas as the polarity of the universe (on and off, expansion-contraction).

            Polarity is a universal principle that seems to rule all physical life, as far as we can tell, and applying this principle can lead to some interesting speculations. Polarity might even apply to spiritual life, to a different degree, as even in the “spirit world”, every “action” (thought) would cause a “reaction” (have an effect)…as long as there is life (or being), there is a degree of polarity (the self and the other, etc).

          • Right. However,
            Contrasts will always exist, but they don’t have to be negative.
            Negativity does not have to exist in ones back yard or planet. It will
            exist somewhere as a contextual field.

            So HEB’s have to travel many light years to find such a place as earth. Someday, I hope, we will have to travel light years to see the negative contrasts.

            In the mean time, finding our own peace will help move the world to more peace however slow or fast…….

          • Raphael

            In my view, there is no such thing as negativity, which is a judgment originating from limited understanding.
            Polarity is simply that…and no judgment needs being made about any of it, as it is merely a balancing act, like male and female, or solid and space.
            Negativity originates in the mind only, not in the universe. There is nothing negative about life…only in the mind that witnesses it and fails to see the whole picture, and imagines a war between the “positive” and the “negative”, while rooting for the “positive” to eradicate the “negative”. This misunderstanding is rooted in Judeo-Christian theology.

          • That’s a very good perspective and I think the God of CwG would be in agreement with what you say here. It’s a high level of looking at life and one I do consider this as well. One caveat:

            I’m okay with having good and bad as reference points to decide and create what we prefer. We use these artificial terms as a convenience for the creative process we engage in.

        • Jethro

          In comparison to the universe, spirituality is the pin sized object. Spirituality is the object of the single human looking out to the universe. The mind, body, and soul are breakdowns of human thought to explain why we think the way we do. Anyone who has ever set alone thinking about their own thoughts, and why, would break it down that way easily given the knowledge we have. Does the soul exist? I say yes, but what is the capability of the soul? To the best of my knowledge, my soul has been tucked in, nice and comfortable, next to my body and mind, since birth. It has not remained there through my personal desire, I seem to be powerless to have my soul do anything without my mind and body. I do have the ability, as does every other living being with a brain, to move about with respect for all life as I know it, with the idea that it’s best to help and sustain other life as not doing so might be detrimental to my own. Most of us can see that the world is not holding the same respect and the damage is saddening.
          We need to quite advertising the magic crap and letting people know that the physical tangible interacting parts of people which is conducted by our thoughts of life are the problems with our world. Quit looking to, and wondering about the universe and see the world around us, the parts we can see and touch. If we cannot do that, all souls will be wherever they go after death because our physical beings will not be able to sustain life as we know it. The life we cherish more than the afterlife we assume.

          • Patrick Gannon

            ” I seem to be powerless to have my soul do anything without my mind and body.”

            Doesn’t that make the soul moot? If your soul was doing something to you, or was affected by your body and mind, how would you know it? And why would you care? Your body and mind aren’t going anywhere, even if that soul exists and does go somewhere. There are no souls, Jethro. Usually you try to take things like “god” and turn them into allegories, but in this case you seem to be taking the existence of a soul seriously, so I’m a little confused.

            I certainly agree that our efforts should be on this world, since it’s all we get.

          • Jethro

            The reason for the confusion is that you are only seeing the woo aspect of the soul and not looking deeper into what may have been the soul in it’s youngest state, an idea. Why did someone start talking about the soul to begin with? It’s mixed in with the mind body soul thing separated by the desires of the human body and the right and wrong defined in our time and place and decided upon by the mind. The soul could not have been a mystical thing within us from the first thought. It became mystical and alone through thought and speculation eventually becoming fact in religion. I shouldn’t have to explain the reality of religious facts. Things that are so, because someone “thinks” it’s so.
            I am convinced at this time that there is a lot of truth to spiritual philosophies, but it’s been mixed up with delusions of grandeur.
            Everything exists if enough people believes it enough to give it definition. You will not eliminate the soul by stating it doesn’t exist, you CAN give it a better definition though. You cannot eliminate God by stating God does not exist, but you can give a better explanation of one… ask Neale if it’s working. I’m sure his truth about God is being accepted more than the atheist idea of God among believers. It’s all psychology.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Unless the word soul is being used allegorically, it is woo. The word, of course has taken on a range of meanings in our society. When we speak of “those brave souls,” we don’t mean their souls, we mean their persons. I’m OK with using the term allegorically in that fashion, but you seem to be insisting that a soul is a real thing; something that survives our physical death. If that’s what you are proposing, then you are in conflict with established science. If it’s not what you’re proposing, then I’m sorry I still don’t understand your point.

            People began speaking of souls because they don’t want to die. They want to believe there’s something after this – so that idea brought forth the concept of a soul. Initially the soul included the mind, the memory, the ability to think, which the ancients believed (or hoped) would persist after death. We know today that consciousness emerges from the brain, which might explain why Neale separated the soul from the mind, while most religions keep them together. I think he screwed up when he suggested triune beings (perhaps trying to leverage the Christian idea of trinity in order to capture that market share), as the recognition that the mind is different from the soul, raises the question of why we should give a hoot about some imaginary soul that is going to leave us behind.

            “Everything exists if enough people believes it enough to give it definition.”

            So if enough people believe in unicorns that makes them real? I really don’t get where you’re going with this.

            Are you suggesting, perhaps, that people are simply too weak-minded to accept that things like souls and gods, which have been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt to have no impact on us in our natural world, should be coddled with allegorical definitions, in order to ease their transition from belief to truth? Is that the idea here? We have to coddle the weak-minded among us; the believers who lack the courage to challenge their beliefs? You may be correct, but it’s pitiful that this would be required for supposedly intelligent sentient beings.

            Who says Neale’s interpretation of god is more widely accepted than atheism? I’d need to see some numbers on that. Atheism is growing very rapidly, and is undoubtedly going to increase as the new scientific truths work their way into society.

          • Jethro

            I said, The soul in it’s youngest state, as just an idea. “Before” a group of religious persons got drunk on wine hypothesizing about this new idea of The Soul and placing it in its position of the spiritual center of which everything revolves around. I thought that my statement was enough to place it in the proper context for you.
            SOUL: the immaterial part of a human being or animal. a person’s moral or emotional nature or sense of identity, or as Jethro would put it, 1/3 of a triune of the brain. Pat, what part of this states that I am referring to the soul in a religious sense? The fact that I spelled out the word SOUL? I could have said banana but it didn’t make sense. I do not have the ability to separate any part of that triune from myself. Some claim that they do and THAT is woo.
            Where did you read, “People began speaking of souls because they don’t want to die”? That sounds like an opinion, much like what I am expressing.
            “Neale separated the soul from the mind, while most religions keep them together.” Neale did not create that separation. I was taught most of my life that My soul was the part left over after death. I was Pentecostal, not catholic, but the Catholics seem to mention the soul quite a bit as separated from the other two. It’s the part that enters heaven. More woo. A make believe place with pearls for gates, gold for streets and virgins as rewards. AS IF! I’d rather have 40 experienced women! who giggled at my nudity just so I would feel at home! Actually, Vickie for eternity would be fine. I don’t need the 40 strangers.
            “So if enough people believe in unicorns that makes them real? Yes!! You don’t have to “see” unicorns to “say” they exist, All that needs to happen is enough people believe in them strongly enough to kill for denying them and tell the story enough to the children and keep telling it for generations and even the most intelligent people will believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that they exist. There will be theories about their location, powers, the wonderful things they do. every time they see a rainbow they will say, look! a unicorn farted!. Even when the story begins to change, you will not be able to just deny them and make people believe you. Unicorns will be ingrained into society, responsible for many great things and people will hold on to them for dear life. Belief is stronger than anything in the world, Nothing is stronger than God because so many people believe that. Other products of belief… rhinoceros horns, shark fins, owl Talons and feathers, Aye-aye middle finger, Asiatic black bears bile/gallbladder, an older belief… cats are evil! put on trial for evil happenings. YES!! If enough people believe in unicorns, they become real.
            “We have to coddle the weak-minded among us; the believers who lack the courage to challenge their beliefs? You may be correct, but it’s pitiful that this would be required for supposedly intelligent sentient beings.”
            It is pretty sad for sure, especially when you think about slavery of a man because of his origin or color of his skin. How about the torture they endured because it was believed a black person didn’t actually feel pain? It is our job to coddle the weak minded among us? Yes, responsibility actually, to educate. To stop insane asylums from trying to torture people to make them sane again, wait… nevermind… mostly coddled that one out of existence. That one didn’t happen immediately and they were doctors!! Considered extremely intelligent. So what is intelligence? Having the right beliefs? Maybe having the right belief at the right time and place? that’s it. We are intelligent if we say the right things at the right time to the right people in a time and place where the majority can be tricked into believing the same crap that the intelligent people are talking about. BUT, we are back to just believing. Can you imagine a psychiatrist from 1900 giving a lecture to modern day psychiatrists? I’m willing to bet he wouldn’t be talking for very long. Do we know beyond a shadow of a doubt by witnessing the Higgs Boson, that it was found or do we merely have faith in the people who made the discovery? Have we seen what it does or do we have faith in what we were told because we trust the source?
            “Who says Neale’s interpretation of god is more widely accepted than atheism?”
            I said, “I’m sure his truth about God is being accepted more than the atheist idea of God…. AMONG BELIEVERS. Believers in God will accept “a different version” of God rather than “eliminate God altogether”. Believers will accept Neale’ version of God over yours every day of the week at any given moment. They must! It’s how the brain works. It’s how reality works. If you are given information from birth, it’s real. It takes time to change reality even when it’s not reality. Real and not real are based on a person thoughts about it, nothing more.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Jethro, can you answer a simple question for me, because the more I read your posts, the more confused I get.

            Do you believe that there are literal souls that survive the death of the body and mind? Simple yes or no, please.

            While we’re at it, do you believe in a literal theist god who interacts with humans as Neale and most religions insist on? Simple yes or no, please.

            When I said people began believing in souls because they were afraid to die, of course I was expressing and opinion, but one backed up by evolutionary evidence. We evolved a fear of dying, a good thing to have if a species wants to continue, and as part of that we came up with the idea of gods and souls and afterlives to give us some hope that we won’t really die.

            I can’t speak for Pentecostals, but Catholics believe the soul and mind are one. They actually believe we get new physical bodies, joined by the soul/mind, after we die. Body/souls/minds that go to heaven live forever in boring, useless bliss, while others go to eternal torment for failing to believe, say and do the right things. I never encountered the idea of the soul as being separate from the mind until I read CwG. That was a novel approach for me. At the time I didn’t recognize the implications because I didn’t know then that the mind emerges from the brain, and may in fact, be an illusion. How the mind and soul were intertwined, was something I was never clear on – and that was probably one of the many nagging things that began to seed nagging doubts about Neale’s claims.

            I can not agree that if enough people believe in something that makes it real. That nearly every human on earth believed the earth was flat and went around the sun does not, did not, and never did make it real. It seems to me, as it often does, that you are changing the definition of the word “real” to mean “whatever a bunch of people believe to be real is real.” I absolutely reject that definition. If we aren’t going to seek that which is real and true, then indeed we have no purpose at all.

            Your approach seems counterproductive to me. We have people here who insist that if they believe a thing, that makes it real and true, but that is a delusion, and I think you know that, so why do we need to coddle them? Do we let our children get away with this? No. We correct them. If your daughter believes she can’t possibly get pregnant if she has sex in such and such a way, and you know that is wrong, do you let her continue to believe something that is potentially harmful to her? If she believes it, it must be “real,” right? Do you coddle her belief, or try to get her to use reason?

            I don’t see anything wrong with pointing out that what we think is real, isn’t. Science has always done this. Science proved black people feel pain, and animals as well, and influenced our morals (overcoming horrific religious morals). Those people were wrong. You seem to want to use the word “real” to say that because a bunch of uneducated people believed a thing, and thought it was real, the rest of us who know better should treat it as real. If that’s what you are saying….NO. If you’re saying something else, I still don’t get it.

            “Do we know beyond a shadow of a doubt by witnessing the Higgs Boson, that it was found or do we merely have faith in the people who made the discovery? Have we seen what it does or do we have faith in what we were told because we trust the source?”

            Anyone with the gumption to learn the math, learn the science, observe and study the results can see this for themselves. There is no need to rely on the word of any particular people. Do I have these skills? No, I don’t. I trust the people relaying the information, because I know their peers will eagerly skin them alive if they get something wrong.

            If you quote an intricate and complicated plumbing job for me and tell me XYZ, I have a couple options. I can take the time and energy to learn your business, or I can take the word of plumbers who compete with you, that your XYZ assertion is true or false. Of course trust enters into the process – but not faith. I don’t pretend to know something I don’t know; I trust the process, because nothing in human history has been more successful than the scientific process. If you have “faith” that the Higgs boson is real, that is just as useless as having “faith” in imaginary, invisible beings that live in the sky. Certainly you can “trust” that the Higgs is real because we know and understand the process by which this information was arrived at.

            The announcement of the Higgs boson was anticlimactic, which is probably why it didn’t make as big a splash as it deserved. A good theory makes predictions and then tests them. All the math, all the science, said that the theory was correct, that there absolutely had to be a Higgs boson. There was no question about it. It took building the most amazing technological marvel in human history to prove it – but we did. That’s how theories work. Since we already knew it had to be there, the excitement at finding it was somewhat muted. That’s a shame. It should have been used as an opportunity to start breaking the word to folks that the theist gods had all died.

            “”Who says Neale’s interpretation of god is more widely accepted than atheism?”
            I said, “I’m sure his truth about God is being accepted more than the atheist idea of God…. AMONG BELIEVERS.”

            There are probably somewhere on the order of 3 billion believers, Christians and Muslims who believe Neale is a heretic who will burn in Hell for eternity. Most Christians and almost all Muslims believe this. Atheists know he will not burn. Very few people believe in Neale’s god – he doesn’t even register in any of the polls. Atheists do, and the numbers are growing rapidly as more and more come out of the closet. Atheists have no idea of god – or at least not theist gods. If you’re asking whether there are more atheists who don’t believe in any god, versus worshippers of the New Spirituality (Neale’s god), I think the atheists come out way ahead, even if you leave out atheist countries like China.

            “Real and not real are based on a person thoughts about it, nothing more.”

            Nope. I disagree. There is a person’s thoughts, and then there is “real” or true. Sometimes they align, and sometimes they don’t. Quite often, and most unfortunately, they don’t align.

          • Craig

            Fantastic logic revealed.
            I found that spirituality is not woo or beyond our lifestyle it is actually described in the scripture as a mindset on following the logic to harmonic living between people and nature.
            The scripture explains this reality as going lost as a result of lack of knowlegde. Unfortunately which knowledge is not revealed and that may be way so much different views have been formed concerning God and a realm beyond the now and here.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Why should Bronze Age scripture have any impact on our modern world? As you point out – all they do is add to confusion.

          • Craig

            Just the way to condition the mind…

          • Jethro

            Do you believe that there are literal souls that survive the death of the body and mind? Simple yes or no, please.
            While we’re at it, do you believe in a literal theist god who interacts with humans as Neale and most religions insist on? Simple yes or no, please.
            Simple answer, No.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Thank you for that! So when you and I are in discussion about these things, we’re essentially arguing semantics…

          • Jethro

            Probably. Different sciences to be exact.

          • Jethro

            Nobody really knows how the Soul came to be a never-ending entity. Was it on purpose or by accident? Maybe a bad translation. Either way, information supports your version and my version and I have not changed the definition. I have it as part of the living being. Not the dead being.
            “” The traditional concept of an immaterial and immortal soul distinct from the body was not found in Judaism before the Babylonian Exile, [1] but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies. [2] Accordingly, the Hebrew word nephesh, although translated as “soul” in some older English Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to “living being”. Nephesh was rendered in the Septuagint as ψυχή (psūchê), the Greek word for soul. The New Testament also uses the word ψυχή, but with the Hebrew meaning and not the Greek. [3]
            Nephesh is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as having nephesh. [1][2] Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as having nephesh. The term is literally ‘soul’, although it is commonly rendered as “life” in English translations. [3] A view is that nephesh relates to ‘sentient being’ without the idea of life and that, rather than having a nephesh, a sentient creation of God is a nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 the text is that Adam was not given a nephesh but “became a living nephesh.” Nephesh then is better understood as ‘person’, seeing that Leviticus 21:11 and Numbers 6:6 speak of a ‘dead body’, which in Hebrew is a nép̄eš mêṯ, a dead nephesh. [4] Nephesh when put with another word can detail aspects related to the concept of nephesh; with “spirit” it describes a part of mankind that is immaterial, like one’s mind, emotions, will, intellect, personality and conscience, as in Job 7:11”” (WIKIPEDIA)

            I used the word “real” rather than “truth” For a reason. When it was believed that the earth was flat, it was “real” enough that boats didn’t go too far from shore. Going further told the “truth”, but on their way out further, the possibility of falling off the edge was “real” to them. If people here believe something outrages to you and I, it is because they have had an experience that you and I have not had. I will not call them liars if they insist the experience was “real”. I may find it hard to believe but I don’t know what really occurred.
            “”Who says Neale’s interpretation of god is more widely accepted than atheism?” Pat your misunderstanding this one. Neale can sell his ideas about God to a group of bible thumpers faster than you can sell your ideas about God. That’s it, That’s the point.

          • Craig

            Thank you for adding this insightful explanation, I enjoyed reading through it…

          • Jethro

            Your very welcome Craig. I am learning quite a bit myself as I am forced to learn something by having a conversation about it. We should not be talking with another about ourselves to change the other but to understand ourselves better. It’s inevitable that we will explain ourselves to ourselves. It’s a slow process…

          • Craig

            How does the saying go. The real compensation in life is found in the reality that we are only truly helping ourselves every time we try to help others… Or something like that.

          • Jethro

            This one seems to have not made it here, just my email.

            Pat: I am gathering, that you are in fact, a believer. You apparently do believe souls exist and you apparently do believe god exists. You haven’t confirmed or denied this, so I’m just guessing, but your reluctance to answer directly says something.
            It’s pretty simple. There are no gods that have anything to do with us, and there certainly is no immaterial soul that has anything to do with us. Do you, or don’t you agree with this?
            I completely agree that it’s correct to say that someone’s subjective experience was real to them, but it wasn’t necessarily real at all, if it was something like an NDE, OBE, predicting the future, talking to dead folks, levitating paper clips or creating world peace through intention. Those things aren’t “real” until objectively proven to be real.
            Jethro: My belief is not belief, just out of context with your definition.

          • Patrick Gannon

            The comment disappeared, because after I wrote it, I came on your next post in which you answered the question definitively; so I deleted it.

        • Spiritual_Annie

          Good question!

          In my view, it’s the Soul that has (as one says) one foot in the physical realm and one foot in the Spiritual (nonphysical) realm. I imagine, but may not know for sure until I pass to what’s beyond this particular life, that the Soul would pull itself into the Spiritual realm if the universe were to reduce itself to the tiny, dense matter that you’re referring to.

          Just my thoughts…

          Love and Blessings Always,
          ~Annie

          • Raphael

            I was just musing and amusing myself with the thought of all souls vanishing into a tiny point (of origin) if the physical universe did the same. As they say, as above, so below, and vise-versa. It’s a crazy thought…

          • Spiritual_Annie

            I wouldn’t call it “crazy,” but rather just a musing. Musings can be fun, and can lead to much deeper places than where they first started.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Or you will never know at all. You will simply die, like the rest of us.

        • Jethro

          If we quit thinking about it, does the thoughts about it disappear or are those thoughts merely on and off? If we change our thoughts about the soul, does the soul change or just our thoughts about it. If the universe were to collapse into a tiny point, what are the dimensions of that point? If the point never disappears into nothing, there can never be an “off” in the true sense of the word. No on or off, only small and large. Who’s to say it’s not reduced to a point at the present. It’s as it is, in relation to us, being as we are.

          • Patrick Gannon

            A point has no largeness. That would make it a circle or some other form that would have at least two dimensions.

            I think you hit the nail on the head with “if we change our thoughts about the soul, does the soul change, or just our thoughts about it.”

            We could say, “if we change our thoughts about unicorns does the unicorn change, or just our thoughts about it?” Only our thoughts about it can change, because the unicorn (like the soul) does not exist. Something that does not exist cannot change, although thoughts about it can change. Perhaps I should say, that the soul does not exist, and certainly doesn’t “manifest” by actually doing something, in our natural world. If souls exist outside the universe, why should we care? This is called changing our thoughts about souls. We should stop caring about them, a) because if they do exist, they don’t matter to us, or b) far more likely, they simply don’t exist.

          • Jethro

            A needle has a point until you magnify it 50 times. Then not so much. It’s relative to whoever is judging the point.

          • Patrick Gannon

            A “point” in the sense discussed here, is a geometric term; not a sharp end on a line.

            “A point in geometry is a location. It has no size i.e. no width, no length and no depth. A point is shown by a dot. A line is defined as a line of points that extends infinitely in two directions.” (Wikipedia)

            If something reduces to a point, it disappears.

          • Jethro

            If a point is nothing then I can’t in my wildest dreams believe the universe was ever in that position or ever will be. A nothing. We would then have to have God to make it. In which case everything is constructed of God because God would be the only thing that exists. Something has to magically produce all that is if there is nothing to make it from.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Well, your wildest dreams, and my own, have no bearing whatsoever on what might actually be. Read Lawrence Krauss’ book, “A Universe from Nothing” and he will provide you with a few different ways that the universe could have come from nothing. Invoking gods, only makes it more complicated, because then you have to explain god.

          • Jethro

            Invoking something from nothing makes things very confusing. You are telling people here magic is not possible and it’s woo, but then say it’s science if its the universe appearing from nothing. I’m confused by that.

          • Patrick Gannon

            That’s a fair question. It’s because in the quantum realm we can get something from nothing. We get quantum fluctuations in which particles pop in and out of existence. At the quantum level, nothing is definite; everything is a state of superposition; all options are possible (but based on very strict probabilities). Until something is measured, particles do not exist in any one location. It’s all pretty wild and crazy, but the predictions, the probabilities that quantum field theory give us, are the most accurate results of any other field of science. If QM was wrong, your GPS wouldn’t work.

            To try and explain quantum field theory here, would take too much time and space, and I’m no expert. I’ve recommended Sean Carroll’s book “The Big Picture” several times. He does a good job of making a complicated subject understandable to laymen. He does not go into detail about how QM and the universe – he’s more interested in proving particle physics – that woo things can’t affect particles – but Lawrence Krauss, whom I’ve also mentioned here, can provide more detail. I would read Carroll first, as that will make Krauss easier to understand.

            The simplest answer, and the only valid one today, is that we don’t know yet (and may never know for sure). It’s just that you can come up with a pretty simple explanation for how QM can be responsible for our universe, whereas the the explanation for how God did so, is much more difficult and convoluted. If our universe was the result of a quantum fluctuation, what we see is what we’d expect. If our universe was designed by God, particularly if it was designed for us, it would surely be much different. I suggested a YouTube video for you a while back – “Why God is not a good theory.”

          • Craig

            Your simplest answers makes the theory woo, make belief just accept… That is exactly what is said about God.
            On QM it sounds like appearingappearing and disappearing comes from parralel universes… Do these exist?

          • Patrick Gannon

            No, I am not telling anyone to believe or just accept. Absolutely not.

            The difference is that there are libraries full of books and peer reviewed papers describing quantum mechanics and the various experiments conducted, as well as the predictions of the theory, which validate it when those predictions – such as exquisite measurements – are confirmed. Who can make a prediction about some god that can be confirmed? If we could do that, god would be a viable theory.

            While I may be incapable of adequately describing QM, there is no question that there are resources for those who are willing to put the time and effort into understanding it at much deeper levels. We still don’t understand it all. I don’t believe the physicists, I trust them, because I understand the process they use to arrive at their conclusions. Rather than “believe in,” I “think that” they are much closer to being right about their science than any theologian is about his or her god. The science is real. It works. We all know that. We all have evidence we can see every day.

            God has none of that evidence. All the evidence we do have, indicates that there are no gods. The two cases are not at all similar.

            Do parallel universes exist? Some theories predict them. In order to prove the theory right, we would have to prove the universes exist. How to go about that is a demanding task. Some claim other dimensions exist, and again it is difficult to prove this – though mathematically, some progress can be made. For now, we don’t know.

          • Craig

            Now apply the trust you have for physicist into the spiritual it is just a mindset after all. The physical we can experience so it is acceptable. The spiritual hell no that means nothing for now and here… Except that it helps us evolve into a better now… Not a later now.

          • Patrick Gannon

            We’ve been trying the spiritual path for thousands of years. Let’s try the physical path since it can be demonstrated, and supported with evidence. Let’s start by doing something unique. Let’s stop lying to ourselves about magic and mythology. It’s coming, whether we like it or not, so we better figure out how to deal with it.

          • Jethro

            “Why God is not a good theory.” I watched it for about 15 minutes and it turned into… blah blah god blah blah blah god blah blah god. It just didn’t hold my interest. But I just sat threw it and he really works on my ability to sleep almost as well as melatonin. He does make some statements I agree with concerning say, there was no reason for the other galaxies for our ours to exist and so on. He spent 53 minutes 11 seconds saying “I don’t know how it happened but this is why it wasn’t God in my opinion.”
            I don’t know how to not sound a little insulting on this one, no insults intended and I realize I know nothing about QM. So, If in the quantum realm we can get something from nothing, why do we assume this only happens when nobody is there to witness it? Are we discussing a math formula more so than a known witnessed fact? I respect the mathematicians and I’m very aware that we get the formulas before we can feel a need to test reality against the numbers, but if we can get something from nothing how can we not conclude it’s possible in our time and space as we witness it while not looking for results of a test? We are talking about every single object in the universe appearing from nothing, from a location point, to a physical point, to the massive amount of space that we have witnessed this far with telescopes and whatever means of viewing that we have… from nothing. But magic on earth is hard to believe. Healing a fellow human with thoughts about it, is hard to believe….

          • Spiritual_Annie

            “I watched it for about 15 minutes and it turned into… blah blah god blah blah blah god blah blah blah god blah blah god.”

            I just love the way you put things. I really do. And almost works as well as melatonin? I’ll have to try that one. Melatonin stopped working for me a long time ago. 🙂

            “He spent 53 minutes 11 seconds saying ‘I don’t know how it happened but this is why it wasn’t God in my opinion.'”

            Thank you for the summary. I was planning on Googling this myself, and still will, but appreciate having your perspective on it.

            “I respect the mathematicians and I’m very aware that we get the formulas before we can feel a need to test reality against the numbers, but if we can get something from nothing how can we not conclude it’s possible in our time and space as we witness it while not looking for results of a test?”

            Excellent question! Only healing someone with our thoughts depends on what one calls healing, and whether or not the dis-ease is serving a purpose for the individual one is trying to heal. It’s also an extreme example. What about the everyday “coincidences” (I call them synchronicities, where things fall into place)? What about the “miracle” of your meeting Vickie and the fact that she loves you so dearly? Or that you found this place on the web to explore your beliefs?

            Just my own two cents… or maybe a dime’s worth. 🙂

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Patrick Gannon

            “Thank you for the summary. I was planning on Googling this myself, and still will, but appreciate having your perspective on it.”

            Skip it. Let me try to come up with something less scientific. It’s difficult to follow some of his stuff if you don’t have the background. I forgot he was talking at Oxford to people who had the scientific basics down.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            See my reply, above.

          • Patrick Gannon

            My bad. This presentation was directed to a scientific audience. I browsed through the video again this morning, and you’re right…. At about 15 minutes, he starts getting into the science diagrams and formulas and stuff the people in that room understood (and which I am able to follow because I’ve been studying this stuff for some time), but for a non-scientific audience, it’s a bit over the top.

            Isn’t it refreshing though, for someone to be honest? How many religious or spiritual people will admit they don’t know? They claim their belief is entirely based on their “knowing” it. Sean is honest enough to admit what is known and what is not known. That scores big points with me.

            “If in the quantum realm we can get something from nothing, why do we assume this only happens when nobody is there to witness it?”

            That’s not the proper way to form the question. We don’t know that there was “nothing.” What is “nothing” is an undetermined question. We thought there was “nothing” in empty space, but we were wrong – there’s vacuum energy. There may have been “everything” all condensed into a single point – perhaps in another dimension, or another universe, or a parallel universe. We don’t know yet.

            Lots of things happen when there is nobody there to witness them, but the thing may leave footprints, or clues. If lightning hits a tree in the middle of the forest, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen because nobody was there to see it We can observe the tree blown to smithereens, see the burn marks, and the bark stripped off and deduce what happened. We can recreate the lightning in a lab and see what it does to a model of the tree, so that we might deduce what happened to the tree in the forest, and confirm that there was an identifiable force generated by natural forces, that did the damage and not some magical bolt , from an imaginary Zeus.

            Your question, is a good one, though, as QM is quite difficult for us to understand. Our brains evolved to understand a classical 3D world, not a sub-atomic world, but there are experiments, particle colliders, math and so forth to confirm that this happens. I would say, google: “What physical evidence is there that subatomic particles pop in and out of existence?,” but what comes up is far more complicated than what Sean Carroll was talking about.

            At this point, what does it matter? All we know for sure about the origin of the universe is that we don’t know. His whole argument was that we can provide theories about how it might have happened, such as quantum fluctuations, and we can think of ways to test that theory, and see if it holds water . There is no way to test a theory of God, unless the shy guy decides to show herself and explain how he violated all the laws of physics without being observed, thereby setting us back to square one. It would mean everything that works like GPS or routers that run the internet, or hardware that guides airplanes, or nanoelectronics, or photosynthesis in plants, is all based on magic.

            You have to keep in mind that just because you (or most of us) can’t imagine how something could come out of nothing, does not mean that other people with better brains, like Stephen Hawking, can’t do so. Most of us could not imagine the earth going around the sun if we hadn’t been educated to know this as kids. If we had no formal science education, most humans would believe, as they did for many tens of thousands of years, that the sun went around the earth. They couldn’t imagine how it could be otherwise. What is terribly frightening, and one of the reasons I’m an advocate for science, is that almost one quarter of adult Americans think the sun goes around the earth! Would you define that as ignorance, or stupidity? In many cases, the two go hand in hand and these are the people who are producing the most kids – that’s terrifying. We may end up with a caste system based on intelligence, unless we kill all the intellectuals, and return to the dark ages.

            Your post here has given me some thought this morning. It’s quite clear that our generation, and probably our kids, will never accept that there is a natural explanation for the universe. The science is just too hard, and most if was developed after we got out of school, so we never learned any of it. My hope is that our grandkids, or perhaps great-grandkids will be better educated and will grow up understanding the science. I’m afraid there is little reason for me to be optimistic, that most people alive now, except for the very young, will ever accept science that is over their heads. Few are willing to put the time and effort into learning it that I have, and I only know it at a high level. I’d have to go back and re-learn the fundamentals, the math – so I could better understand it, by relying on my own brain, rather than trusting the brains of people much smarter than myself.

            It’s a pretty pessimistic picture, but that’s in keeping with this forum, which is almost always based on doom and gloom, and naively believing in the right god to make it all get better…

          • Jethro

            I went into the video knowing that nobody knows how the universe began or how it will end, or if it had a beginning and will ever have an end.. The theories about the direction in which it evolves, to the right, to the left, both left and right, in on itself, etc. is common. He presented every possible notion. It’s a notion worthy of discussion, informally, while sipping whisky in the smoking room near the fireplace. I’m sure the discussion would be very entertaining. It’s the nothing to something that I have a problem with. The universe condensing to a big ball of gas and dirt, I can picture that. No magic. Science explaining how nothing came to be something and then deny special forces in the universe especially if a single person makes claim to being a witness. Science will call them crazy to think that something appeared from nowhere. This notion would definitely create question more so if the person claimed God was responsible. Just the word “God” creates a need to deny what happened by those who battle against any thought of God. This is where I begin to question the scientist. Is the person a scientist or a person who uses science to remove God. There is a difference. Yes, honesty is a wonderful thing.

            “What is “nothing” is an undetermined question. We thought there was “nothing” in empty space, but we were wrong – there’s vacuum energy. There may have been “everything” all condensed into a single point – perhaps in another dimension, or another universe, or a parallel universe. We don’t know yet.”
            Nothing is nothing, a vacuum is something. Another dimension, or another universe, or a parallel universe is someplace and a thing, and I didn’t even think you believed in such places. Are there HEB’s in these other dimensions or parallel universes? Sorry couldn’t help it. When we get into the “Realm” of not knowing, some very fantastic ideas come about. It’s ok though, the imagination and reasoning share the same space. It’s why we have scientist to begin with. To know what the facts are. Fact is there’s a bunch of stuff we still don’t know and defining it will happen over time. We may have the wrong titles on some things but those things are still things.

          • Patrick Gannon

            ” It’s the nothing to something that I have a problem with.”

            Understandable – it’s not at all intuitive. Nor is it intuitive that the earth goes around the sun!

            “The universe condensing to a big ball of gas and dirt, I can picture that. No magic.”

            Are you talking about the end of the universe when this is a potential option? Or are you supposing an eternal universe in which this has happened many times, endlessly perhaps, and the last cycle ended up creating us?

            We can all imagine a black hole, the gravitational field being so strong even light can’t escape, and so envisioning something that sucks up into a tiny ball and disappears, is easier to imagine, I guess. In the case of black holes, we know (or are pretty sure) that “stuff” gets emitted back into the universe as “Hawking radiation,” obeying laws about conservation of energy, but where does it go if the entire universe, rather than some number of stars, collapses into a black hole (singularity)? Where does the “stuff” go then? Maybe it pops right back out with another universe, if it can’t radiate back into the one that just got smushed out of existence? We just don’t know. That we can’t imagine it, is an interesting discussion, but I can’t imagine the collapse of a wave function, other than in a very simplistic way – but we know it happens.

            “Science explaining how nothing came to be something and then deny special forces in the universe especially if a single person makes claim to being a witness.”

            I don’t get the bit about a single person claiming to be a witness. Who is claiming this? Nobody witnessed the beginning of the universe, or claimed to. What we can witness though, is what it did, starting just after it began expanding and creating space. That’s the cosmic radiation background (CMB), and it is the energy from the Big Bang. We are looking back in time, because that event took place almost 14 billion years ago and the light/energy from it, is just now reaching us (since we expanded away from it to begin with). It’s like having a video camera relaying what took place then. Unfortunately the video camera could not capture what happened right at the start because there was no light or other energy to collect. It was dark, and the video camera necessarily has to exist in the universe that is being created. It can’t look at the universe from outside it, because the universe is all there is. There is no space outside it to place a camera, or to get it’s video back to us inside it.

            God has to solve all these same problems, and then you have to explain God. If something can’t come out of nothing, then what did God come from?

            “Just the word “God” creates a need to deny what happened by those who battle against any thought of God. ”

            Nonsense. That’s a religious prejudice. Remember that the first scientists worked for the Church. They thought they were proving God, but over time, their work cast more and more doubt on God. Still, many scientists harbored a hope that a god would be discovered or justified, so that we might have hope for an afterlife. Many if not most scientists are not thrilled that it turned out the way that it did. Scientists don’t “battle against any thought of God.” As Carroll made clear in the video – if there is evidence for God or a way that he helps explain our natural world better than science does, then by all means, scientists will take it into account. If you were a scientist and Jesus showed up with his flaming sword, you’d more or less have to add that into your data pool!

            Science simply seeks to understand our natural world. I would counter-suggest that the word “God” creates a need on the part of the believer to rail against anyone who might question that belief. Both statements are prejudicial, in my view. Open minded skepticism, is the best approach for all sides.

            You want me to explain “nothing” but we can’t do that yet. For now it is a placeholder, a word that essentially means ‘we don’t know what comes before this, (yet).’ Keep in mind that all this talk about “nothing” is largely the result of the last couple decades of quantum mechanics. What will we know in another couple decades? Patience, Grasshopper! We give religions thousands of years to do nothing, (There’s that word again), and won’t give science a couple decades to give us the next great breakthrough. Funny, but on the Big Bang TV show last night, they were bemoaning the delay in the next big discovery. Most everything we know about the natural world has come about in the last two or three generations of human beings. What did the spiritual folk contribute to our understanding in the thousands of years, they held the mantle of knowledge? So far, everything they gave us has been debunked, except the origin of the universe and the origin of life.

            I didn’t say anything about “believing” in dimensions or parallel universes. I don’t recall discussing it in any detail. Both are viable options. I “think that” both are possible. Are there HEBs in these other dimensions or universes? Why not? It’s possible. What seems impossible, until shown otherwise, is for them to interact with us. As for beings in other dimensions, I see that option as far less likely, as it’s very difficult to envision a biological being in five dimensions. (our universe has four dimensions including time). They could be aware of us, but we could not be aware of them, and they could still only affect us using the laws of physics we are governed by – in which case, we’d know it. As for beings in another universe, they are as locked in their universe as we are in ours. So they are also moot.

            Until some evidence is provided for these HEBs, inside or outside our universe, it is only rational to treat them as imaginary or delusional inventions, unless they are strictly used as thought experiments – hypothetical superheroes who could show us how to do it right if only they weren’t so shy!

            Jethro, if you think it’s mind numbing to discuss “nothing” and how the universe might fluctuate into existence, you should learn about quantum mechanics. That will really make your head spin. All our classical rules, that we evolved to understand, go out the window, when you get down to the very small scales. Things just don’t work the same way they do at our level of evolved understanding – which is the classical, macroscopic world we see around us But whether we can imagine it or not, we have to accept that it’s there, because the predictions it makes are more accurate than anything else in physics, and that accuracy has been tested and demonstrated repeatedly.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I’m reminded of one of my favorite books. I gave you a handful of quotes from Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land” recently. In that book, “Mike” is a human who was born on Mars in the first mission, but all the astronauts died, and nobody came back for 20 years. He was left on Mars and raised by Martians. He is returned to earth as a young man, with absolutely no human interactions. Basically, it’s a book about how aliens might look at us, if they had no idea what we were all about. And we are confusing!

            As a byproduct of being raised by Martians, Mike is able to do all the woo-stuff I used to love. He could read minds, levitate, make things disappear, all sorts of stuff. He wanted to teach other humans how to do these things, but he couldn’t communicate adequately in English. He had learned this stuff in Martian, and came to the conclusion that in order to learn how this all works, you have to “learn the language” so he set about teaching the Martian language, and as people learned it, they began to learn how to manipulate matter, etc.

            When I first read it, I was fascinated by the ONEness stuff, the psi woo, and believed at that time, that this was possible, if we could but “learn the language” of woo. The book was also a commentary and challenge to social issues like sex, religion, politics, fear of death, etc. I learned later that Heinlein didn’t really believe this woo. It is science fiction after all. An interviewer said: “Heinlein was surprised that some readers thought the book described how he believed society should be organized, explaining: “I was not giving answers. I was trying to shake the reader loose from some preconceptions and induce him to think for himself, along new and fresh lines. In consequence, each reader gets something different out of that book because he himself supplies the answers … It is an invitation to think – not to believe.”[6]

            I could not agree more, as it certainly set my head to thinking. I’ve probably read the book a dozen times, starting in the early 70s, and always got something new out of it. I’m pretty confident that Neale was deeply influenced by this book as well.

            I bring it up, because I think Heinlein was giving us an allegory. If we want to understand our natural world, we have to learn the language – only it’s not Martian. It’s the language of science. He understood the language of science and incorporated a lot of it into his science fiction books. A couple other favorites: “Time Enough for Love – female brain transplanted into male patient, but somehow the male consciousness manages to survive and share the brain with his former beautiful secretary, to whom he was much attracted – a story about the relationship between the sexes. “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” – a computer, Mycroft Holmes comes to life and helps the human settlers on the moon defeat an imperialist earth government that essentially subjugates them. Then there are the Lazarus Long books – he lives for 1000 years or more – how would we live our lives if we didn’t die so quickly? He is one of the greatest sci fi authors of all time. If you haven’t sampled his stuff, you should give it a shot. It’s a lot more fun to read than Sean Carroll’s “The Big Picture!” Caution – he’s addicting!

          • Jethro

            You have written quite a bit here and I can’t seem to find the time to respond the way I like. I have read it. My statement about science and God has some truth though I believe (Believe). Anytime someone wishes to argue God and some of the fantastic statements related to God, Science is immediately the go to. I’m sure as many were wanting to disprove God as wanted to prove God if not more. I have no statistics or facts, just beliefs.

          • Patrick Gannon

            A truly honest scientist is trying to understand the natural world. Period.

            They also try to disprove theories that purport to describe the natural world. God is not a scientific theory purported to describe the natural world, hence nobody is really trying to disprove that non-existent theory. A theory must make predictions that can be tested. There’s no way to predict what a god will do, is there? Such a theory could never be disproven, hence it does not qualify as a theory. To be valid, there must be a way to disprove the theory, by presenting evidence that contradicts it.

          • Jethro

            So scientifically, God can be neither proven nor disproven? Just the woo that people claim?

          • Patrick Gannon

            God could be disproven, if there was a God Theory that made predictions, and those predictions could be tested.

            The Big Bang theory, for example, makes predictions. It predicts among other things “gravitational waves.” Einstein also predicted gravitational waves as part of his theory of relativity but said we would never be able to prove them, however in 1974 they were indirectly proven by Hulse and Taylor, and on Feb 14, 2015, they were actually measured for the first time – giving more credence to the theory. With this discovery a prediction made by the theory of relativity was confirmed – Einstein was right. The Big Bang theory predicts gravitational waves were created by inflation of the early universe and these waves should be in the CMB (cosmic radiation background). The waves that were measured in 2015, which resulted in Nobel prizes to the scientists last week, were from colliding black holes, if I recall correctly. Additional gravitational waves were measured last month, this time by multiple detectors, further strengthening the theory, by confirming predictions. Relativity once again is confirmed, now to identify gravitational waves created at the Big Bang, and the theory of “inflation” will have another boost.

            What predictions would a Theory of God include, that if proven wrong, could invalidate the theory? If a theory does not include predictions that could be disproven if the theory was wrong – then you don’t have a theory.

            For example, scientists use the term “string theory,” at least in speaking with the public, because it’s how people speak – like the non-existent “Law of Attraction.” It’s not a “law” by any stretch of the imagination. (By the same token, “Moore’s Law” which predicts the rate that computer power increases, is not a “law” either). String theory is actually a hypothesis at this point. Nobody (that I’m aware of) has been able to come up with a prediction of string theory that if proven wrong, would confirm string theory is incorrect, so it’s still a hypothesis.

            A lot of people refer to the “multiverse” as a theory, but it’s not. The multiverse is actually a prediction of other theories. If the multiverse can be disprove, so too with those theories.

          • Craig

            God’s prediction love your neighbour (those who reach out to you) yourself and be amazed by the difference it will make when everyone applies this theory…

          • Patrick Gannon

            “Love your neighbor” is a command, (written by men on behalf of an imaginary god), not a prediction. It’s a great way to live one’s life, and most if not all belief systems or humanist (secular) systems, have some form of it. Humanists teach this all the time, without invoking magical beings.

          • Craig

            Humanists… Human is not this evolved animal but the correct mental attitude and knowledge. So we agree. Just use different terminology.

          • Jethro

            We had a discussion about the existence of God a while back. That one I can see changing the name to the proper description but I have no idea what name to use and you were no help as God does not exist is the only answer, but The idea of God has an origin and that origin is the beginning thought. The brain is involved. When it comes to the brain, nothing is today what it was yesterday, vanity won’t let it be. Everything must get more and more fantastic… And it did.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            I watched Sean Carroll’s “Why God is Not a Good Theory,” as well as the Q&A video and ended up going down a rabbit hole in the related videos listed.

            What I noticed (besides Carroll’s “blah blah blah” lecturing skills Jethro mentioned—and, no, it wasn’t over my head) is his admission that science knows far less than there is yet to be discovered, and his dismissing the question of “why” so easily. It’s obvious he’s a “how” scientist who has no interest in answering some of the “why” questions.

            I did find interesting a video of an interview with Neal DeGrasse Tyson on multiple dimensions, though. He said that we may well be living in higher dimensions, but that our physical human brains and senses can’t detect them—yet—although many theories suggest up to ten dimensions.

            He used an example of an ant, whose focus is on a two dimensional plane. If we were to come along and remove a crumb right in front of the ant, from the ant’s perspective the crumb will have magically disappeared because the ant doesn’t perceive our third dimension of up and down. Likewise, we live in a three dimensional reality (four, if time is counted separately). If there are, for argument’s sake, beings who live in a reality with additional dimensions and they were to pluck something out of our three dimensional reality into the fourth dimension, it would seem to magically disappear.

            We can’t even visualize extra dimensions. A line, which is one dimensional, has two end points. In the same way, a square, which is two dimensional, has four end points—one on each corner. A cube, which is made three dimensional by creating it from six squares, has six end points—one for each side. If we extend the emerging pattern—1 dimensionsion with 2 end points, 2 dimensions with 4 end points, 3 dimensions with 6 end points—then it follows that what would come next in 4 dimensions is a construct of 8 end points, each of which is a three dimensional cube. Because we’re used to our three dimensions, we can’t even imagine what that would look like.

            Like I said, I went down a rabbit hole, but it was an interesting trip.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Well, I am mightily impressed that you watched that! Bravo! I didn’t really think the science was that difficult, but figured the challenge might generate some interest. Glad it did.

            Answering “how” almost always explains the “why” of it. Answering how the earth goes around the sun, explains why it does so. This approach works, while asking “why” does not. If we go back in time, several centuries and ask “why” the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, we get answers like “angels direct it on its path around a flat earth” or “gods recreate the sun anew in the morning.” Asking “why” without understanding how, is pretty useless.

            That he admits science has much less to be discovered, is in direct contrast to religious woo-meisters of all flavors who seldom admit any doubts about what they believe, even though none of what they believe has ever been discovered. The scientific approach is honest, and it works. Without any evidence, the woo approach based entirely on belief, is arrogant self deception, in my view.

            Yes, physics is an interesting trip. I get more excited, the more I learn or come to understand. The real world is far more amazing than the (imaginary) spiritual world to those who begin to grasp it. The thing about all these theoretical dimensions, is that they are all physical. They offer no support for spirit worlds. I’m sure none of the scientific videos you watched suggested a spirit world, or souls or gods or anything of that nature.

            Keep watching those videos and we may come into closer agreement over time.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            My question about there being the possibility that there are dimensions that our human brains may not have the ability toconsciously sense or comprehend (yet), is whether our brains are already evolving the abiity to sense or comprehend but not make conscious informaton from other dimensons. Our brains are certainly capable of compartmentalizing information in our subconscous or unconscious (or, for me, supraconscious) and keeping from us those things it determines are too much for us to handle, whether intellectually or emotionally.

            And, what would be the difference between the magic of something disappearing into a dimension our conscious brains don’t sense or recognize, and some of the visualizations and revelations some have had (which we may all eventually be capable of) as some kind of “bleed-through” from another dimension? Couldn’t they be one and the same thing?

            In other words, just because our conscous brains can’t comprehend it, that doesn’t mean we’re not affected by it at other levels. Some of these could even be being accessed during those subjective experiences you so enjoy denigrating.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “the possibility that there are dimensions that our human brains may not have the ability toconsciously sense or comprehend (yet), is whether our brains are already evolving the abiity to sense or comprehend but not make conscious informaton from other dimensons.” (I won’t add the “sic’s” but your spelling is usually better than that – on a smartphone perhaps?)

            Did Neil DeGrasse Tyson or any other scientist whose video you might have watched, say anything that would remotely support that idea? In any event, this is still all physical – no spirits involved. The brain is wet and mushy; i.e. physical, and that’s what the mind comes from.

            The other question is one that Michio Kaku answered on a Big Think video I saw recently. It’s an interesting concept – the idea of universes that are right next to us, but unavailable to us. Here’s one: Youtube What Is Déjà Vu- – Dr. Kaku’s Universe – Big Think. I think it’s a cool idea – that there is some way to jump from universe to universe, but again -this is all physical – not a spirit thing. It’s quantum mechanics, and further it’s based on a multiverse that is not in and of itself a theory, but rather a prediction made by other theories, that has yet to devise experiments to test the theory.

            Your questions are good ones, Annie. Keep watching and reading. Get hooked of the excitement that is science and you’ll never look back. I am much more prepared to accept the tiny possibility that strange things happen because of a multiverse, than I am to accept that “God did it.”

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Neil DeGrasse Tyson was making the point that some of the things we do not yet understand might be because, in a scenario like the one presented, we are like the ant and things may look magical. He attributes that to our limited brains. Others attribute it to a God. Others attribute it to the same Divine Energy flowing into and as all creation.

            Actually, in one of Neale’s books, it’s explained that deja vu and “near misses” are choice points where we decide we’re not yet finished with life, and so re-enter it on another timeline or in an alternate reality or a parallel universe (I forget the specific book or wording–probably in Home With God.) Only it’s our essential essence, or Soul, or whatever one chooses to call it, that moves from one reality to another, allowing us to “survive” when in the other reality, we don’t. I believe the way it’s explained has to do with the number of alternate realities there are (I always thought the creation of one at each choice point was intriguing) rather than how many multiverses or parallel universes there might be.

            I’ve been hooked on science before, Patrick. And I do find science interesting–always have. But I’ve been more deeply hooked on people–how they act, why they act, who they are, what they believe–probably because I used to question my own behavors and the reasons behind them. I find people to be much more interesting than I ever will science. I’d much rather go to a Senior Center and listen to the well-worn stories of the old folks there than read about the latest scientific discovery.

            That’s just me.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I have an analogy….. You. For billions of years you were “nothing.” The potential for Jethro was extremely low, but not zero. When your parents were born the potential for Jethro went up by a huge magnitude. When they mated the potential for Jethro went up even higher, and when sperm hit egg, “Jethro” became something out of nothing.

          • Jethro

            I see the value in your statement. But Jethro came from an egg and sperm. To come from nothing I would have to of just appeared.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Well, it was just an analogy, not intended to be an explanation. For all intents and purposes we all came from nothing. Do you have any memories of before you were born? No – there was only nothingness.

            The subject is complicated enough that Lawrence Krauss wrote a book all about it, “A Universe From Nothing.” If you’re curious enough, I suggest you read the book. Steven Hawking’s book about time touches on this as well. I hate to answer like that, as I try to put these things in my own words, but in this case, the math and science is over my head, so I will have to pull a “Bruce” if you remember him – and tell you to read the book. (Bruce was in the same boat, I think. He took the work of other people that he didn’t understand and therefore could not put in his own words; but unlike me, he was unwilling to admit that!).

          • Jethro

            I hate adding to the confusion Pat but there was nothing as far as I was concerned before birth because there was no brain. If I had remembered anything before that it would be woo. I can’t record audio without something to put it on. My brain had no device to hold memories before it existed. My personality didn’t exist because of no brain, My brain and body came together through a biological process and I began to learn and have experiences at birth and maybe in the womb. Before that there were chemicals and something moving through my parents body that when put together forms life from something. To say I came from nothing is woo. If on the other hand my soul was wondering around out there but didn’t exist and then it did from nothing because my body was habitable that’s also woo but more believable. and I’m just being a little irritating now on purpose, because it’s making me smile. Hopefully you get that and it brings you a smile as well.
            There are arguments against Lawrence Krauss’ theory, and there will be arguments against all the theories until it’s proven one way or the other, which I don’t think it will. We are stuck on this little planet and can’t actually get out there and touch something. Any of their theories could be possible I’m sure. To me anyway, I’m totally ignorant to it all and I admit that.
            Now back to nothing…
            NOTHING – not anything; no single thing:
            “I said nothing” · “there’s nothing you can do” · “they found nothing wrong”. synonyms: not a thing · not anything · nil · zero · naught · zilch · zip · nada · diddly-squat · squat.
            Pat, how many times have we talked about definitions? I said Something from Nothing, not a vacuum, dominant matter, dark matter, energy-momentum, scalar fields… Nothing. From a point, a location without a location, the non existence, which by the way does not exist. No-thing. What does it really matter anyway? If it all began folding up to fit into a black hole, our galaxy (which they say has a black hole) would end our lives before we could get excited that we might find out the truth. I kinda prefer our sun continuing to keep it’s path around the earth! I probably won’t read the book, I don’t take the time to read books that I want to read. maybe after I get a few employees trained. First decent one starts Monday. He had to quit a job to start working here, owns his own transportation, has a family to support, and he’s dying to learn the business… Fingers are crossed.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “There are arguments against Lawrence Krauss’ theory, and there will be arguments against all the theories until it’s proven one way or the other, which I don’t think it will.”

            I would call them hypotheses, rather than theories, at this point. His objective was to show that there are a number of possible, rational explanations, that illustrate how the universe could have “come from nothing,” including a discussion of the concept of “nothing,” since, for example, we once thought space had “nothing” in it. We don’t know for sure that there is a state of “nothing.” Just as we discovered space was full of something – it could be that when it comes to the universe there was always something, and it never had a state of nothing. But if there was nothing – there are at least some hypotheses for how something might have come out of it. At one time, the universe was extremely small, and at the quantum layer, all sorts of crazy things happen!

            You are correct that this or any other theory is ever likely to become “proven” as scientists are always open to new evidence. We are still trying to prove that Einstein’s theory of relativity is wrong, and if 10,000 years from now, some new evidence illustrates that it was all an illusion or something, then scientists will modify or discard the theory. When do you ever see religious/woo people do this? We may provide enough objective evidence and mathematical support to get pretty confident about it – just as we are pretty confident about Newton’s and Einstein’s theories, germ theory, and so forth – enough so that we can act as if they were proven and make decisions based on that assumption.

            To be honest, if you were really interested, I’d suggest some other books first, so you’d have a better idea of what Krauss is talking about. I understand him when I’m reading (listening), but not well enough to put all of it into my own words to explain to someone else. I have to go over material repeatedly for some of the more difficult concepts to kick in. I saw a great clip about how to visualize “the collapse of the wave function” which I have wrestled with for a couple years now…. I can now visualize what’s going on – though that visual is still an analogy since the scales are too small to see. However an article I read earlier this week about the advances we’re making in microscopes…. pretty amazing. Apparently we can now take snapshots of atoms in motion.

            Good luck with the new employee. If you do a lot of driving, consider audible books or CDs you rent from the library. It’s a great way to “read” in your idle time.

          • Jethro

            Thanks for the wish of luck. I’m never gonna make the money for retirement doing it myself. If I get in a position for audio I will definitely consider it.
            “Apparently we can now take snapshots of atoms in motion.” Where can I find those snap shots? That I’d like to see!!

          • Patrick Gannon

            Google ‘Scientific American New Microscope Reveals the Shape of Atoms’ for a start. Here’s another one – Youtube Real atom structure viewed under electron microscope

          • Jethro

            Not what I expected. Pretty darn neat!

          • Jethro

            The id, ego and superego work together in creating a behavior. The id creates the demands, the ego adds the needs of reality and the superego adds morality to the action which is taken.

            The mind body and soul work together in creating a behavior. The body creates the demands, the mind adds the needs of reality and the soul adds morality to the action which is taken.

            Everything has a different name, but we have to stick with certain names for the sake of the discussion. We would of course need to know what other name is being used as well.

          • Patrick Gannon

            There is no soul that works with mind or body. All the science says this is wrong. If the soul exists, it has no impact here.

            If you are going to redefine “soul” to mean “morals” then please be clear about that. I disagree with that definition. A soul is an imaginary thing some people believe survives death. It is “the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.” (Wikipedia).

          • Jethro

            If you continue to eliminate the word because you have decided that the explanation of the soul that you were given is the only explanation then I can understand your rigid stance. From my point of view, my thoughts have no material or part of an animal regarded as immortal. The verbal expression of my thoughts may be remembered but may be forgotten.
            You must hang on to your understanding for the sake of arguing what I believe to be a misunderstood translation of the Soul.
            The body wants without concern.
            Body reacts: “Sally was thirsty. Rather than waiting for the server to refill her glass of water, she reached across the table and drank from Mr. Smith’s water glass, much to his surprise.”

            The mind understands there can be consequences.
            The mind reacts: “Even though Michael needed money, he decided not to steal the money from the cash register because he didn’t want to get in trouble.”

            The soul understands and considers other effects of action beyond personal consequences.
            The Soul reacts: The cashier only charged the couple for one meal even though they had eaten two. They could have gotten away with only paying for one, but they pointed out the cashier’s mistake and offered to pay for both meals. They wanted to be honest and they knew that the restaurant owner and employees needed to make a living.

            These are the separations of the thoughts we encounter. They were the separations until Freud declared the id, ego, superego. We can say as you stated, that a soul is a person, it’s an option because the soul “is” a person, the totality of you, the totality of your brain which is you. When you are in a coma, you are missing, people miss you and want “you” to wake up. Your body is there but you are not, the part of your brain that is your body cannot respond to your physical body so other people keep you fed and cleaned up, but the brain keeps the bodies minimal functions functioning. “You” can’t take care of that.

          • Patrick Gannon

            The “you” you refer to, is the brain. If the brain is damaged, there is no “you.”

            If by the word “soul” you mean a human being, and not some immaterial force or energy thing, then we can agree. If you are suggesting that there is some force or energy, some thing that makes “you” you, that is in addition to your brain – then you are not in agreement with the science.

            If you want to say, “That poor soul is in a coma,” that is an allegorical use of the word “soul” that is accurate. If you say, “That guy’s soul has left him,” there’s no evidence for anything like that.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Have you ever considered that there may be a “supraconsciousness?” That is (as I see it) a collective consciousness or a consciousness from somewhere beyond the Soul, from what some call “Source?” (I’m just being curious.)

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Jethro

            Supraconsciousness is a new word for me. Consciousness being awareness and the same as superego, supraconsciousness being the awareness of the combined? As I understand things at the moment, the supraconsciousness is the source. Humanity decides what’s best for humanity by indirectly deciding what is right and wrong together. That is, as a collective, we decide together.
            I don’t really understand source. Would that be an energy generator that keeps everything in the universe going? The brain is the generator of all thoughts and Ideas. Is the source of the collective thoughts a product of the collective or a product of the individuals within the collective? Two brains together share thoughts and decide based on differences, Billions of brains together are not as picky but still decide. The fewer the brains the more picky we get and the more complicated the interaction because we can focus on direct interaction or contact. The more related we are in thought the more we begin to decide if someone might be our bestest friend. From there we will begin to project that back out and share our experience and it is decided on yet again what is right and what is wrong.

          • Patrick Gannon

            You hit it again. Annie and other woo-meisters think there is an energy generator of some sort that is the source of consciousness. All the data to date, indicates that you are correct in noting that the brain is the generator of all thoughts and ideas.

            Group consciousness is important in our society. It led to the widescale cessation of smoking, the loosening of hostility to LGBTs, fashions and styles, etc. It also led to Donald Trump as our President!

          • Jethro

            Donald Trump as our President! Well humans aren’t perfect. It’s all in our brains, some more than others… but a product of our thoughts nonetheless. Product of our minds… enter spirituality and the debate continues.

          • Patrick Gannon

            If there was, we would have found it by now. In order for any force to interact with our brains – fire neurons that get us to do something in common, for example, this force would have to exhibit certain qualities which could not be hidden from us – otherwise how would it impact us?

            A “collective consciousness” can be a state of mind in which a number of people are essentially thinking, feeling, experiencing similar things. A SEAL team working as a single unit, is not linked by magical consciousness forces, but they’ve trained their brains to focus on the same thing in order to get the mission accomplished. This can make it seem almost like they are working as a single unit; but there’s no actual consciousness force connecting them, or we’d have found it.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            A question: how would one locate this “point” of prior to the universe coming into being? There would be no “space” in which it could be located.

          • Patrick Gannon

            That is correct, but that is a question for your (imaginary) soul to answer. Where does it go if there is no “space?”

          • Spiritual_Annie

            You’re avoiding answering the question. Again. By trying to distract. Again. And I alread answered that in a reply to Raphael.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Annie, I answered the question. I said you were correct. There would be no “space” prior to the universe coming into being. Why are you giving me a hard time for agreeing with you?

            I suggested that this is not a question we can currently answer, so you should ask one of your (imaginary) souls to fill you in, and share the answer with us. (A bit of sarcasm, in case you didn’t notice). If you folks can talk to the dead, go to heaven and come back, surely someone can ask this simple question and bring back a rational response??? Maybe not… LOL If that was remotely possible, we’d have already been so informed.

            “And I alread (sic) answered that in a reply to Raphael.”

            I’m sorry – was that in another thread? I see no responses from you to Raphael in this thread. Please enlighten me again. Where does the soul go if there isn’t any space? Where is the soul when there is space? Where is there any non-subjective evidence, whatsoever, that these souls even exist? Until someone produces some evidence, they are as “real” as unicorns and fairies, aren’t they?

          • Jethro

            The Soul occupies a place in the brain, whatever happens to the soul when the brain ceases to function is speculation. We have yet to communicate with the dead on a scientific stage. Some appear to be gifted but do not give specifics to the process.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Where exactly, in the brain, is this “soul” located? You tell me you don’t believe in gods and souls, and then you go and propose that the soul occupies a place in the brain – so what is this place? The cerebellum? The amygdala? The temporal lobe? Where exactly, and what is your source for this unscientific assertion?

            There is no soul, or if there is, it has absolutely no impact on the brain, or we’d know it. Since it has no impact, there’s no need for it to exist in any sort of “space” to begin with.

            I know, you’re trying again to define an imaginary thing as a real or allegorical concept. People believe they have souls, therefore they do, just as they believed the earth was flat, and so it was. Why can’t you decide what side of the fence you want to sit on? Why do you play these games? Is it just to annoy me?

          • Jethro

            Well you correct me every time I tell you, why don’t you just tell me the soul doesn’t exist again and save me some typing? But again.
            The soul is a part of thought. The idea of the soul is a part of our thought made separate from the mind and body by those who need to understand how they get to heaven, but its not separate from the mind and body. It’s the part that ponders God. Why do you keep describing it with a description that you don’t believe in? To annoy me? I do not believe the soul is a spiritual part of me, it is, for lack of a better description, reasoning. Someone told you it escaped death by leaving the body upon it’s death and relocated and your stuck on that. to the point that if it doesn’t go to heaven then it doesn’t exist. I don’t have a problem talking about the soul for what it really is.
            Everything comes in threes, a triune.

            One example you might like, reptilian complex, paleomammalian complex, neomammalian complex.

            and others…

            Shema’s 3 elements of man: Kardia (heart). nephesh/ Psyche (soul). Dynamis (power)

            Plotinus’ three principles: The One. The Intellect. The Soul.

            Aristotle’s 3 main modes of persuasion: Ethos (character) Pathos (experience) Logos (Logic)

            Aristotle’s 3 kinds of soul: Threptike (nutritive, vegetative). Aisthetike (sensitive, animal). Noetike (rational, human).

            Hegel’s 3 Spirits: Subjective Spirit. Objective Spirit. Absolute Spirit.

            C. S. Peirce’s 3 normatives: The good (esthetic). The right (ethical). The true (logical).

            Plato’ tripartite soul: Logistykon (logical, rational). Thymoeides (spirited, various animal qualities). Epithymetikon (appetitive, volitive, libidinous, desiring)

            Gottlob Frege’s 3 realms of sense: The external, (physical). The internal, (mental). The Platonic, (ideal but objective)

            Kant’s 3 higher faculties of cognition: Understanding. Judgment. Reason.

            Johannes Nikolaus Tetens’s 3 powers of mind: Feeling. Understanding. Will.

            Jacques Lacan’s 3 orders: Real, Symbolic, and Imaginary

            Sigmund Freud’s structural model: Id, ego, and superego

            And Plato’ 3 parts of man: Nous (mind, intellect). Soma (body). Psyche (SOUL!!!!!!!!!)

          • Patrick Gannon

            But practically everyone here, has a definition of the soul that includes some sort of entity, force, energy, intelligence, essential essence or whatever woo term they want to use, and that this entity, they believe, survives our physical death and interacts with us in impossible ways in this world.

            I get that you agree there is no soul that survives our physical death, but it seems to me you confuse the issue, when you try to agree with the woo-folks that there is a soul, (based on an alternative definition), and agree with me that the soul as these folks envision it, is not a real thing.

            I thought about this a little as I drifted off to sleep last night. Am I on the right track in thinking that perhaps you think of the soul as our “conscience?” Not consciousness – conscience – the part of the brain that tells us in part through evolution and in part through indoctrination and experience what is right and what is wrong, what is moral, what is ethical?

            If that’s basically what you mean by “soul” why can’t we just use the word “conscience?” Why do we have to pander to words like God and Soul when these refer to entities that you and I don’t think actually exist?

            I get it, that you’re a nicer, kinder, more empathetic person than I am, but does it help anyone to pander to ideas we know there is absolutely no non-subjective evidence for? Who are you helping by humoring people, instead of asking them to challenge themselves?

          • Jethro

            “If that’s basically what you mean by “soul” why can’t we just use the word “conscience?” Why do we have to pander to words like God and Soul when these refer to entities that you and I don’t think actually exist?”
            If we wish to guide people from one side of a river to reach the other side, we need a bridge or some vessel to carry us across. I leave the bridge intact. You are wanting everyone to jump in the water and swim now. I have accepted some people aren’t ready to cross, your shoving them into the water. People who get shoved in climb out on the same side in a panic. There goes the analogies again.

            Real quick question, are guns dangerous or are fully automatic guns dangerous.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Sink or swim.

            Guns are not dangerous. People are.

          • Jethro

            Yes Sir, sink or swim. We are different lifegaurds and that’s ok.

            “Guns are not dangerous. People are.”
            Your Damn Straight!!!!! Thank you!!

          • Craig

            Wow, some research…

          • Jethro

            Again, don’t get spoiled to it lol.

  • Raphael

    “Kaporos is a annual ritual in which ultra-Orthodox Jews swing live chickens around their heads while saying a prayer to transfer their sins to the animals. After the ritual, they give the birds to a butcher who slices their throats. The ritual is performed prior to Yom Kippur, the Jewish day of atonement.”
    From AlertNet “Animal rights” section.

    Wow…indeed Neale, there is definitively something religious people haven’t quite figured out about “God” or life or even themselves, yet! Some of us are still in the dark ages…

    • Kristen

      Hey…leave God out of that one…crazies always latch on to religion and put their sadistic ways against it!

      • Raphael

        Speaking of crazies, the few Hassidic Jews that I met always started speaking Yiddish to me, as they though I was one of them. Then Iranian gas stations owners think I am Syrian, Greeks think I am Palestinian, Navajo Indians think I am Navajo, American tourists in Mexico think I am Mexican, and Martians think I am from Jupiter. That’s what happens when you are mixed…and mixed up.

        I live right next to a live volcano that sits across a large lake…on an earthquake fault, in a wildfire prone area. Been through a few earthquakes in LA and San Francisco already…once stuck inside an elevator…it got very noisy as the elevator rocked back and forth while the lights went out.

        Here today, gone tomorrow…am just passing through and I am not that attached to physical life, whatever happens happens!

        I never think about such dangers..any more than I think about bears, mountain lions, scorpions or rattlesnakes when I hike…but people, that’s another story, they can be the most dangerous creatures on the planet, because of drugs, alcohol, and twisted minds.

        • Kristen

          Yip, Im a mongrel too, a true biarch when it suits me. There is no ‘Kiwi’ look other than maoris. Living in a multi country, I get what you mean. I can visually tell the difference between maoris, tongans, samoans, fijians etc plus chinese, japanese, korean, hong kong, filipinos, indonesians etc.
          If anything I get told I look French, I do have French great great grandparents so guess that shows.
          Arent you Spanish, Native American & Canadian or something?

    • Jethro

      So… chicken dinner for Yom Kippur is pretty common it sounds like.

      • Spiritual_Annie

        ROFL! Of course, the butcher would need to be a certified kosher butcher, and the chicken drained of its blood, rendering it kosher. (Maybe there’s more swinging involved to remove the blood by centrifugal force, once its throat is slit? Yuck! I wouldn’t want that job.)

        Maybe the sins are in the blood rather than the whole chicken, so that when it’s rendered kosher, the sins have been removed. Or maybe they’re removed during the cooking process by the heat, if they’re not in the blood.

        I like the “prior to the day of atonement” part. That way, they can atone for the sin of having abused an animal in such a manner!

        Love and Blessings Always,
        ~Annie

  • Sam

    So then, about “Awaken the Species”. Packed with inspiring words as always.
    I especially liked the first part, as for portraying awakening as an actually awakening, while the ending of the book, even though making a good point as well, had the awakening more as little moments you should practice to increasingly repeat. Well, yes, that is the painstaking process of life itself; slowly but surely making progress. But then it suddenly again, and because of it, felt far out of reach. Something that might happen someday, and eventually, as for completely.
    The ending was therefore more pessimistic, in my view, compared to the optimistic beginning, which had full awakening just around the corner, for anyone to have at any moment.
    But okay, it takes the time it takes. Sounds down to earth and sensible. However, not the kind of pep talk, and happy ending, I personally would have liked. But no big deal, of course. Just me.

    This from Awaken the Species: “Is the purpose of existence to just exist? Surely not.”

    In the deepest sense, surely yes, Neale. The origin of existence has no known purpose. To just exist, as we surely do, is therefore the whole point and story. The only question is how to do it best; what is the best possible way to exist? Turns out a make-believe process of evolution is the winning ticket. The best make-believe purpose, having the satisfaction of ongoing challenges and progress, a continuous drive forward to receive more of the award, which is increasingly glimpses of light, love, and joy of the ‘perfect absolute’, coming through and into view more and more, of that we really are, and fully again will be. We take this journey of experience, in the contrast of which we are not, to fully come alive, from what we call feelings, and so into BE-ing, as we fight our way back, overcoming every make-believe darkness and obstacles, until, once again, home free at last.

    I heard this phrase, ‘the road is the goal’, quite a few times before I actually made notice of it. I first had to come to the same conclusion on my own. I’m not sure if you yet made the same discovery, and the implication coming along with it, that this goal, being the road, is a never-ending circle and repetition?
    Your work is exceptional, bringing the world forward, as we leave this stage for a better one. And yes, becoming HEBs, and beyond. But do you in your wildest imagination understand that we will be here once again, doing pretty much the same thing over? And do you in your wildest imagination comprehend that we at this very stage has been countless times before, on our way to greatness again and again? That to make it through all the stages, from the foot of the mountain to the very top, over and over, is all that we do, being a never-ending story? Indeed, the road is the goal. With no possible way to die for an eternity, this is what we choose—wouldn’t you?

    This from Awaken the Species: “This is not easy, is it? I mean, this journey through life.”

    Life being hard is the whole point because easy is worse. Easy has no challenges or purpose. And for this to go on for too long, like, say an eternity, and no suicide made possible, you go insane, literary. This moment and place, here and now, is heaven itself. One only has to see it that way. The illusion of progress, with its flashes of god/light/love/joy/eureka, in between all what god is not, is by far the best way to exist, and why the physical realm was created in the first place.

    This from Awaken the Species: “Why go to all the trouble? Why not just get the guy, get the girl, get the car, get the job, get the spouse, get the house, get the kids, etc, and get on with a life that has no larger purpose beyond that? Because we came here to do more than this.”

    We do “more than this” already, all the time, and by default. How do you think we got this far? The grand design is foolproof. Countless wheels are in motion for your and everyone’s evolution. Relax. Nothing is left to chance. Forward and upwards is the only possible direction.
    I don’t have a huge problem with the current way of life, acquiring stuff, as to what this stage is all about; what we from where we came, to where we are going, had to pass through on the way. Objectively speaking just another and neutral stage among many, in a row, following the evolutionary roadmap to the top, just as foreseen and according to plan.

    Btw, some say that philosophy is the cause of all suffering (thinking too much), and that ignorance is bliss, so to speak. That to only live spontaneously in the moment is the key. Pretty much like innocent children. I am not sure if self-blame—”we came here to do more than this”—is that helpful.

    This from Awaken the Species: “If you find yourself energized by the Third Invitation […]”

    I sure did. It was, from start to finish, one inspiring moment and experience, reading it. And thank you very much.
    But then also, a few days ago, my niece of age 5 came by, all excited about this stone she found, and while taking it out of her backpack saying it has some small stars inside, sparkling, and furthermore that this stone was for me to have. Quite the inspiring moment as well, as you can imagine.
    Even without the ability to read or write, or the urge to philosophize, we would nevertheless and still receive every ingredient necessary to humanly evolve. That’s how well this system we call life is designed.

    This from Awaken the Species: “Did your father ever say to you, “Why would you do such a thing when you know better?” Of course. I heard that a hundred times.”

    To know better, and still don’t, was the whole point of making the physical world. Don’t you see? We don’t want to be absolutely perfect or just light all the time. We want to mess up, so to have the pleasure to again make it all shiny and crystal clear (progress/achievements). We want the dark, so we can enjoy the light. The point is not to evolve, as this is a given, but to enjoy the moment, to enjoy the process, and the here and now. This being the heaven, you know.

    Your father had no business criticizing you, or, on the other hand, yes, he had, as for doing the best he could, from being himself a part of the process of “try-and-fail”. Next time around, he will however, acknowledge that all experience is necessary and valuable, and with a compassionate smile and a clap on your shoulder understand, saying it will have you make great progress from the experience. Hmm, this actually made me think of a scene in the movie: “The Education of Little Tree”. Haven’t seen it for ages. But the very best.

    Thank you for all your inspiring work, Neale. Just don’t forget to spontaneously live and enjoy the moment too, as for what this never-ending life on repeat is really about. The rest is moving along all by itself, over, over, and over again.

    • As I understand CwG, life evolves to ever greater and more advanced versions of ourselves. So the next life we will create an even grander version of ourselves. We can create this now, depending on how much we decide to spiritually advance. We have our past lives that set in motion this life and future lives as well. All happening at once. We at this time, are primarily focused on this lifetime.

    • Spiritual_Annie

      Sam,

      I also found a great deal of CWG Book 4 inspiring, and have “self-selected.” (Have you been to the “Self Selected” area of CWG Connect yet? There are inspiring articles and conversations there, as well.)

      One thing that I noticed in your post was the following: “But do you in your wildest imagination understand that we will be here once again, doing pretty much the same thing over? And do you in your wildest imagination comprehend that we at this very stage has been countless times before, on our way to greatness again and again? That to make it through all the stages, from the foot of the mountain to the very top, over and over, is all that we do, being a never-ending story?”

      I don’t envision it that way, and that may be due in part to the influence of Barbara Marx Hubbard. Rather than seeing our development as circular, she has expressed it as an upward spiral. She goes into detail the varous areas of life we encounter, etc., which I won’t go into here. But she says, and I believe, that each time we encounter an area again, our experiences are at a higher level of evolution than we’ve previously experienced. It’s therefore not a repeat experience, but one that’s new because of our evolution since the last encounter.

      It’s kind of similar to how we experience love over a single lifetime. (I’m going to use just the idea of love and gross generalizations here. I understand we all have unique experienes, but for the sake of conversation, let’s assume they’re similar.) As a young child, our definition of love comes from close family, especially our parents. As pre-teens, we encounter love again, but this time as “puppy love,” or crushes. Somewhere in our teens, we also begin to experience sex and relate it to love. In early adulthood, we may again encounter love, this time at a more “serious relationship” level than we did as teens. By the middle years of our usual lifespan, we may encounter the deepening of love and our commitment to a chosen love partner, learning how to live in a relationship of love in our every day lives. A little later in life, we may encounter yet another evolution of what love means when we become “empty nesters” and find ourselves in companionship with our committed partner in ways not previously experienced. Hopefully, in our older years (I’m not there yet), there is an appreciation and gratitude for all the love that we’ve experienced in our lives. (Of course, we can appreciate this at any point in our lives, as well, if we choose to.)

      I believe that, having had those experinces as my physical self, my Soul, and Divinity, I will never live those experiences again in the same way. There would be little purpose because there would be no gain except to my physical self. But my Soul and Divinity have, I believe, an evolutionary impulse, as well. Therefore, in other lifetimes I will encounter different, unique experiences so that my physical self, my Soul and Divinity all grow and evolve from our shared experiences.

      Those are my thouhts, anyway…

      Love and Blessings Always,
      ~Annie

      • Sam

        “Rather than seeing our development as circular, she has expressed it as an upward spiral.”

        And I did say: “Forward and upwards is the only possible direction.” Sounds familiar? 🙂
        How you, in short, describes Barbara Marx Hubbard’s thoughts, I very much agree (and nothing new). But our development-ladder has an end, when again pure God. And from there we start over. We jump off the high clouds, and parachutes all the way down to the ground (some call it “a fall”), where we will have the pleasure to walk up the ladder once more.

  • Spiritual_Annie

    Off-topic (sort of) but just have to share…

    I signed up for what’s being called “The American Peace Intention Experience,” sponsored by Lynn McTaggert. I had honestly not heard of her before reading an email from another individual, with an invitation to join the event. It’s for six days, and it’s focused intention for 10 minutes each day at noon EST.

    I thought that this was going to be one of those mass experiences of focused meditation that I’ve been involved with leaders like the Dalai Lama, Deepak Chopra, Scott Hamilton, and others, which have generally been for world peace, or for peace where conflict is currently ocurring. I was surprised to find that it’s not.

    In the initial video for the first day (today), I was intrigued by the 20 minutes or so where Lynn McTaggert discussed the experiments that she had conducted over the years. I was surprised to find that, at least for the ones that she included in the video, they were run as scientific exeriments. The first were about a photoelectric light that’s emitted from leaves. The focused intention increased the light in the leaves, especially in areas where they had been damaged by pinpricks. They then moved onto seeds that were being sprouted, focusing their intention on the development of 30 seeds, with a control group of 90 seeds which were not intentionally focused on. The results showed remarkable growth of the seeds/sprouts compared to the control group.

    Other experiments were geared towards water and its properties. Physicists designed probes that monitored a low voltage electrical current that was released into beakers of water. The focused intention in those experiments, monitored by physicists (I think a Stanford team was involved in one), was to “energize” the water with thoughts. Those, too, showed remarkable results, most specifically in changes in the water’s properties and in the volume of the water in which the electrial current was detected.

    The current experiment was, much to my jaw-dropping surprise, a focused intention on lowering the violence in North St. Louis. The St. Louis metro area is where I was raised and spent most of my life. There was even a specific street mentioned that I used to travel on regularly, and stores on that street where I used to shop! I believe that I signed up for this particular not as a coincidence, because I don’t believe in coincidences. And the specific area was not mentioned in the email or during the signing up process. The stated intention of the experiment is specific. It’s not just to reduce violence (as measured by policing standards), but to specifically reduce it by 10%. If the result is less than or greater than 10%, the experiment will be considered unsuccessful.

    I just had to share that, especially since I’m still a bit amazed at the synchronicity of my signing up for something involving my home town for the majority of my life. We have five more days to go, and I don’t know when the results will be available (police reports take time to prepare, be reviewed and entered into a database before they’re available to the public–I know this from my previous work experience).

    Love and Blessings Always,
    ~Annie

    • James Twyman and James Redfield have down such things as well.

      I do the Peace Clock at 12:00pm along with millions of others to pray for world peace for a minute each day at noon where ever you are. I’ve been doing this for years and set my phone to give a little chime reminder.

      James Twyman does such things intermittently but for quite awhile, not lately James Redfield did it twice a month of world hot spots. So I’m very interested in such collective prayer/visualization meditations.

      • Spiritual_Annie

        I didn’t know that there was a Peace Clock prayer. I will start doing so myself.

      • Craig

        Blessed are they that trust on the Lord, if they acknowledge him in their undertakings he will smooth out their routes…
        No wonder I am struggling, I trust but do not acknowledge as everything I do is for the temporarily…

        • Check out CwG book one and others to further your study on God, Life and the Universe. 🙂 Oh, check out Neale’s book “What God Wants” too.

          Patrick would love chapter 13 which tells what God wants. Chap. 13 includes several blank pages. 😉

          • Patrick Gannon

            I know what God wants. Google: “George Carlin God loves you and he needs money”

          • Craig

            LOL California preachers…
            God needs zilch. Not even us defending or clarifying. It just keeps us preoccupied and busy to not do something that may or may not result in something we don’t want.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Do you have links or sources for these “scientific experiments?” Lynn McTaggert is not a physicist. She’s a rabid anti-vaxxer, anti medicine, pseudo-scientist whose views on quantum mechanics (for which she has no credentials to begin with), are essentially the same as those that Deepak Chopra was ridiculed for. I mentioned a story last week about an experiment, that if confirmed, pretty much kills the quantum woo upon which she depends.

      As you know, I’ve suggested that experiments like this would have value if they were run by scientists using careful adherence to scientific processes. From what I can see, all her “science” is subjective, which makes it useless to advancing human knowledge. Forget the “peace” intention, nonsense – that can’t be objectively measured in any meaningful way. Stop a clock. Manipulate a random number generator. There are any number of ways to provide an objective test to confirm whether or not all this “intention” has any effect. She’s just another woo-meister parting fools from their money.

      Simply google…. “Lynn McTaggert debunked” and enjoy…

      • Spiritual_Annie

        Maybe after the experiment is complete, as I didn’t go into it with anything other than curiosity. I wouldn’t want to dimish the experience while I’m going through it, as it’s something that’s become personal because of the specifics I discovered on the first day.

    • Spiritual_Annie

      On Day 2, I noticed that the intention is to reduce the violence by 10% or more, rather than 10% precisely. I may have misheard it in the first day’s video.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Given Las Vegas – not off to a good start….

        • Spiritual_Annie

          As stated in my initial post, the area of focus is North St. Louis, not worldwide or even nationwide. The area was chosen as it was named the most violent street (specifically, Natural Bridge Road) in 2016. This intention project is specific to that road and area.

          • Craig

            Watched hacksaw ridge? Now that is violence and brutality…

          • Patrick Gannon

            OK. How will they measure results?

          • Spiritual_Annie

            With police reports.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Let us know when they post the results. They won’t in any way be definitive; as there are way too many things that can contribute to crime rates; nevertheless it will be interesting to see what they come up with. Is there any specific time period in which the experiment will run?

          • Transcendental Mediators have done this for years, going to certain cities and posting positive results. My problem with the TM ers is they charge a lot of money to do this and usually do not stay for more than a few days.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I see lots of articles in “woo” magazines that already believe in this stuff, but can find nothing in anything remotely scientific in nature.

            TM claims to do this woo stuff using electromagnetism, but that idea has been debunked. That force field falls off drastically with distance. If the force was strong enough to actually do something, metal spoons would jump from the table when we entered the room.

            My problem with TM, is when they make unsubstantiated claims; the skeptics rip them apart, and James Randi a famous woo buster, has apparently debunked them in his video “Flim Flam.” (I haven’t watched it yet).

            On the other hand, parting fools from their money has a lot to be said for it – one I’m sure Neale appreciates! (grin)

          • Hi Patrick,

            I’ve read James Randi books, read parts of his “Skeptical Enquirer.”

            I don’t really give a rats as* about spoon bending. I’m interested in the meditative effects of larger groups helping the crime rate go down during their directed meditations. I’m not so quick to dismiss their value.

            But like you, I don’t find much validity in their levitation claims etc.

            My personal conclusion is that Randi and the like, help people from getting too far off the track of certain (but not all) unsubstantiated psychic claims and experiences.

            He’s a good balance to those who are crazy extreme about all things paranormal. But on this site, I feel people like myself and others who’ve had psychic experiences show more balance and flexibility in looking at such experiences.

            Randi and others for me are as rigid in their beliefs as fundamentalists. The difference I think, he/they do make valid claims to consider, but some things can’t be explained. In fact, some experiences can’t even be put into words.

            You, as I see it, and reading several posts you’ve wrote have gone from new ager CwG extremest to scientific extremist. There seems to be no middle ground or grey area, only the religion of science of which I and others here deeply respect. Is that a correct statement of your views?

            You remind me a bit of Rebecca Turner, founder of the world of lucid dreaming site. She too was originally a psychic waving lover & conservative Christian. (you were simply new age) She now is on the side of science. And writes science papers on I believe Zoology.

            However, unlike you, she still gives a nod to the OBE possibilities and other phenomenon. Not much mind you, but some, and that is a healthy flexibility that errs on the side of unknown possibility. Randi and others won’t even go there. That to me, is extremism and inflexibility.

            What you demand here for validation will never be found at this time. It’s something you need to experience as far as other phenomenon beyond the brain.

            Ya, I know, you don’t believe in that stuff. And that will cloud you from experiencing it and always explaining it away.

            Yes plenty of stuff can be explained away, and some can be from the brain. I don’t deny or argue with that fact. Yet, there is more and that is what we embrace here along side of the great value of science, technology etc.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Thank you for your comments, Marko. I don’t consider myself an extremist, or inflexible. I am open to any evidence that might manifest – but as you agree, there is none that can be relied upon to be objective. I’ve learned a lot about how the human brain works, and I know it can’t be relied on. Personal testimony is the least reliable evidence there is, scientifically speaking – but we give it the highest authority in courts of law where countless innocent people spend years in prison for things they didn’t do. Along with facing up to the realities of how our brain works, we need to change how much credence we give to personal testimony in court cases. So many lives ruined because of unreliable brains – and it can and does happen to all of us.

            I don’t see myself as inflexible. I went from cultural/traditional Christian to New Age apostle, to science advocate. That’s quite a bit of flexibility. If evidence is presented to show that science is wrong, I’m flexible enough to change, but I’m not holding my breath now that I understand the basics of how our natural world works.

            I started reading about astral travel and reincarnation and regression back in the 70’s, and the amount of evidence to support those things is no better today than it was then. I saw Uri Geller do a show bending spoons at the college I was attending. We know today how that is faked. On the other hand, our understanding of the natural world and how our brains work, has absolutely exploded over those decades. PSI has had plenty of time to prove itself. I’m convinced it’s a dud. You can spend all day long trying to meditate peace, or you can work on science to solve the energy crisis, end pollution, cure diseases, desalinate water, and many other things that can actually do something towards that goal.

            Just keep in mind, that you woo-people are on the same side as the fundamentalists, conservative Republicans, Trump supporters, etc. in their war on science.

          • “Just keep in mind, that you woo-people are on the same side as the fundamentalists, conservative Republicans, Trump supporters, etc. in their war on science.”

            It’s exaggerated rigid unfair statements like that, that lead me to consider that you have no real interest in furthering any more discussion with me.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Tell me why it’s unfair. Just like those other groups, you cherry pick the science you want to believe, but discard the most important pieces – the same pieces religionists discard; the pieces that debunk their beliefs. Sure you are for science when it gives us internet and smart phones and GPS technology, but that same science tells both New Age woo and fundy woo, that there are no magical forces. Please tell me how you are different.

          • Unfair, because, when you lump me as “you woo-people are on the same side as the fundamentalists, conservative
            Republicans, Trump supporters, etc. in their war on science.”…… Are you kidding me!!!

            No wait, you are not.

            WoW!

            You are so way off base as to not bar comment simply because of it’s absurdity.

            I have to repeat, some things can’t be proved by science at this time and that includes certain un explainable things in the psychic realm.

            Since you don’t give any of this any credence unless it can be physically proved, that’s where you stand. It’s (in my view) a narrow, limited and rigid stance. But it’s okay to disagree in peace and go our separate ways.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Please… Spare me your righteous indignation. You CwG folks, aside from evolution, deny the exact same science as fundagelicals, Catholics and other religionists. Many deny or doubt evolution as well. When it comes to magical forces you are in the exact same anti science camp and you know it….. or should. The science is settled, you apparently aren’t scientifically knowledgeable enough to know it.

          • Kristen

            Patrick….where have you ever seen anyone in here deny science or evolution? Who could deny proven science…no one. The point is there is a lot more unproven to scientists and you BUT we’ve never denied science or its important role in the world.

          • Patrick Gannon

            You deny science in claiming there is a god who interacts with our natural world. If that was happening, we’d know it by now. The established science says that if your god exists, he has absolutely nothing to do with us. Do you deny that? Of course you do. That means you deny the established science, that says the standard model, the core theory of physics has ruled out these imaginary forces.

          • Craig

            Patrick,
            Science is 100% correct towards everything measurable God is 100% not measurable and how can He be…
            Reread Jethro’s comment on the light, the truth, the way. Forget the religious convictions and dogmas you have debunk. They are not for you. Try another paradigm about God. In CwG Neale explains that God apparently confirms that thoughts creates desires desires creates commitment and commitment the results prayed for. Have you heard of prayer deeds that is Job, that is Yeshua which you’ve debunked because of your paradigm.
            Science will take us past the situations or predicaments or circumstances. Faith in the unknown or God will take you further..as. Try it…

          • Patrick Gannon

            No thanks.

            First, I had “faith” in God for at least the first four decades of my life – and it made me miserable. My joy of life improved considerably after I dumped that god nonsense.

            Second, “faith” is pretending to know things you don’t know. I would much rather “trust” people who have based their knowledge on compelling, objective, empirical data – and not on ancient, mythological, story books

            You ask how can God be measurable. Most of the people on this blog and in any church of almost any religion, will insist that this God interacts with us in this world in various ways. If that was so, it would be measurable – but it is not so, or we would have learned this by now.

            Having faith in the unknown is self-delusion. I’ll pass, thank you very much.

          • Craig

            Come now a second bash at doing what you trust to be correct and the right thing to do. After all faith is works revealing ones conviction. That is the paradigm I am referring to.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “…faith is works revealing ones (sic) conviction.”

            In this case, the word “conviction” means “belief.” One can also have a conviction based on trust, but trust comes with prior evidence. Few of us automatically trust someone or something unless there’s some valid, supported, reason to do so.

            Faith is pretending to know things you don’t know. It’s that simple. If you knew them, you wouldn’t need faith. Faith is one of the dirtiest words I know, and the source of so much of the world’s misery.

          • Craig

            That is an interesting view… Straight from the Hebraic teachings. One generation convincing the next of the relationship of prior generations…
            Now I can understand why faith is failing do many… No experience of the relationship…

          • Patrick Gannon

            I applaud the decline of faith! My hope is for humans to become more rational, and to base decisions on things that have evidence. Basing our lives on truth, may be more difficult for the weak-minded, but truth is always the better path, in my view.

          • Kristen

            Ok, thanks for telling me how I think.
            And for yet again saying the opposite to something else you’ve said in this thread, from stating science hasnt discovered a lot yet, to now determining science has confirmed there is no God.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Kristen, you deny evolution. You have claimed, have you not, that 6000 years ago your god introduced white people to the planet. That’s about as anti-science as you can get, and just a tad racist.

            I never said that science hasn’t discovered a lot yet. That’s absurd. Quote please. What I’ve said is that science has discovered a lot, there is much yet to be discovered, but there are some things we know very, very well, and one of those things is how the particles in our world work; and they leave no room for interactive gods.

          • Kristen

            Ill look later for what I read, at work at the mo. Science DOES NOT dismiss Gods or likewise, everything is by design.
            Stating I think the Genesis story is the introduction of ‘white man’ doesnt dismiss evolution at all, every species has evolved, why is the concept that some were ‘put’ here at different times seen unplausible. How can anything like that be racist…it states the people then were created in Gods image.
            There are lots of Gods and lots of different people in the human race. Thinking its racism is akin to saying the Lion King movie is racist because its about one species of feline only.

          • Patrick Gannon

            If you understood the physics, you would understand that science has indeed dismissed interactive gods. It’s still possible that there’s a deist god, one who created the universe and then left us completely alone. It makes the creation far more complicated than it needs to be, but nevertheless, a deist god is still possible, if not at all probable. A theist god, such as Yahweh, or Neale’s god – someone who interacts with us in this natural world – that has been debunked; whether you accept it or not.

            Yes, of course, saying that Genesis is the introduction of white man is anti-science. Evolution tells us how we got our white skin, over hundreds of thousands of years, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with gods. To suggest that gods intentionally created white people, is racist in my view. It’s a suggestion that whites are somehow better because they were purposely introduced by a god. Why would a god do that? So if we white people were made in your god’s image – whose image were the black people made from? All us white people have black ancestors if you go back far enough. We lost the skin pigment as our ancestors migrated north, and we needed to absorb more vitamin D, and needed less protection from the sun’s UV rays. You are anti-science on all counts here. Your analogy about Lion King is too absurd to respond to.

          • Kristen

            Hey, works busy so I cant type or read much, cakes to decorate!
            But in no way have I ever implied rascism or similar. I think all different races were introduced to Earth deliberately at different times, no matter whether its people or animals, Remember s riptures are just one families stories all mashed together, not even necessarily in chronological order, especially Revelation, thats one heck of a time mess for a start, whether true prophecies or not.
            I assume Indians, Asians, Africans and other humans all have similar stories of their history and introduction to Earth.
            Im not anti science at all, science still cant explain how we all got here in the firsty place…as you said there is no plausible way without Dieties (Creator and The Source).
            AND not Ive never said it was God in the beginning of Genesis or Eden, old scriptures dont state that, they say Creator, then later started calling on the name of God.
            Revelation states God actually starts His rule of Earth at some point, if He was also Creator surely He would have ruled the entire time? We probably havnt even started the time of Gods rule yet, you’re still thinking as a Christian where they think God is Creator and has always ruled Earth. Other than Israel, everything else has been peoples CHOICE to exalt God, almost as a democracy, a freewill choice NOT His doing. His Laws were for Israelites on their family farm Israel, He specifically used the term ‘amongst you’ many times.
            As far as Im concerned, all the wrongs of Christians and others over the years is people acting on their own, nothing to do with Gods instructions to them, he gave no one instructions other than Israelites in Israel.
            K

          • Patrick Gannon

            “science still cant explain how we all got here in the firsty place…as you said there is no plausible way without Dieties (Creator and The Source).”

            I absolutely, positively, never said anything of the sort! I recently had a discussion with Jethro in which we discussed a book by Lawrence Krauss that suggests several plausible ways that the universe could have come into existence without any gods. I NEVER said there was no plausible way without deities. I would never say that without a major typing error.

            Creator, God, Elohim, Jehovah, Yahweh, Source – it makes no difference what you call imaginary invisible beings that live in the sky, until you demonstrate that they exist. My bible says, “In the beginning, God created heaven and earth.” Which of the over 3000 gods humans have invented is being referred to, I don’t care in the least until one of these gods demonstrates its existence, beyond reasonable doubt.

            You say the “old scriptures” say this or that, but we have no way to know that. There are no originals of any “old scriptures.” None. Not in the OT or NT. There’s no way for us to know. The old scriptures apparently weren’t “inspired” enough for whichever of the gods that inspired them, to see to their survival.

            I’m not going to get into a debate about what imaginary gods might do, any more than I’m going to debate what unicorns prefer for breakfast. (Purple popsicles)

            I will agree with you, that the OT scriptures (at least the ones that made it into what we call the OT, as there are a lot of others), indicate that the Law was given to the Israelites, and not to the rest of us. What a vicious god the Jews had. Good thing he died on July 4, 2012, along with the rest of the gods….

          • Jethro

            YES!! It’s Purple Popsicles… Vickie said so.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Spare us your condescension. You “science folks” deny the subjective experiences of a growing “body of knowledge” of thousands of people having similar metaphysical experiences by stating with a great deal of hubris that we already know absolutely everything that could possibly interact with a human being. But that’s only on a material, particle-based, scientific level. Others of us here know that there is more to being human than what occurs at a particle-based level.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Subjective experiences are of practically no value, and you know that. Subjective experiences told us that the gods were responsible for storms and floods and drought and volcanoes, and earthquakes, and a flat earth and a sun that goes around it. All that was subjective. Subjective experiences have a terrible track record, and you know that; yet you cling to it like a leach; no different from the primitive cave people who experienced the gods raining down hail stones.

            There is no body of knowledge regarding woo. I’ve been studying this stuff since the 70’s and no progress whatsoever has been made in those 40 years. Nothing, zip, nada. Please show me this “body of knowledge.”

            You are at a severe disadvantage in this debate. Science has libraries full of evidence, labs full of experiments, particle accelerators full of information that describes our natural world in precise detail. I get it, that you don’t want to believe this stuff, or that you want to leave open a tiny hole of hope that there’s some place for these god forces to squeak in, but those doors are slammed shut, unless you can demonstrate otherwise. Where are the theories? Where are the peer-reviewed reports indicating that the laws of physics are all wrong, and that every one of them gave false results?

            Nobody is saying that there isn’t more to being human than what occurs at a particle-based level, any more than one would say there’s no more to being wind than the individual atoms that it is comprised of. What is being said, is that there are no magical forces acting on humans. Being human, being conscious is apparently an emergent quality of human physicality, but none of it depends on magical forces.

          • Craig

            Try visiting the African tribal villages and be amazed how they and the American Indians have more in common than science thinks. Especially the woo factors…
            Seems like the evolution through the ice age and living in the dark for so long made the whiteys forget their factual pasts their neutral instincts on woo not voodoo. So they started seeking answers for the natural reality forgetting the mystical reality… Just my assumption not a fact…

          • Jethro

            “So many lives ruined because of unreliable brains” Quite the opposite! The mind is very reliable and can be manipulated, lawyers rely on that. They play with the minds of people quite easily. Playing with what people believe to be right and wrong, appealing to decency and all that crap. it’s “almost” predictable.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Jethro, I hope you are being facetious. The fact that the brain can be manipulated by lawyers is a clear indication that the brain is NOT reliable, unless it is your contention that the brain is reliably unreliable – in which case you would be in agreement with neurologists.

            Our brains are extremely unreliable, and subjective experiences are the least reliable thing of all. Courts will disagree – and send innocent people to prison – but neurologists know that depending on subjective witness testimony is the least reliable evidence there is, when trying to solve a crime, for example.

            I’m guessing that you are being facetious or sarcastic.

          • Jethro

            the brain is reliably unreliable… Yeah you said it better. but that’s what I mean.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Actually, you just said it better than I did!

          • Jethro

            Huh?

          • Patrick Gannon

            Oops. I guess I did say that first… “unless it is your contention that the brain is reliably unreliable.”

          • Jethro

            Agreed. Reliably unreliable

          • Spiritual_Annie

            “Just keep in mind, that you woo-people are on the same side as the fundamentalists, conservative Republicans, Trump supporters, etc. in their war on science.”

            I haven’t observed a war on science here. What I have observed is that there are people here who respect science, but believe that there is much more yet to be discovered than is already known.

          • Patrick Gannon

            There are people here who respect the products that science gives them. Some even trust science when it tells them things they want to believe, like climate change; but there are many here who don’t respect what science has already discovered, but which contradicts their personal beliefs.

            There is absolutely, much more yet to be discovered, than is already known, but we do know some things, and we know them with exquisite precision – and it is these things that many of the folks here reject out of hand, for no other reason than it contradicts their personal beliefs in various sorts of woo.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            And it doesn’t bother you in the least that your entire particle-modeled material reality rests on quantum fields where a quantum particle is said to exist as all possibilities until it is obsesrved? For me, that sounds like the San Andreas fault line underneath all of your particle science.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Nope. Doesn’t bother me a bit. When a theory produces predictions that are proved to be accurate to 12 or 13 decimal places (I forget – might be even better than that), I have to give it credence.

            Besides quantum field theory can be demonstrated with incredible reliability through experiment. Name me a single experiment that demonstrates the existence of gods, souls or afterlives.

            If you will continue to research this, you’ll begin to see why scientists are so confident in quantum field theory. If you’re up for it, you might want to try: Youtube Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe – with David Tong

          • Spiritual_Annie

            There are six days where there is focused intention. I believe, but can’t recall precisely, that what will be used are specific types of police reports for specific types of violent crimes. They will be definitive as they are quantifiable.

          • Patrick Gannon

            No, they absolutely won’t be definitive. Even a study conducted by real scientists wouldn’t be definitive – at best it would add to the knowledge base. The opportunity for coincidence is very high, as well as riding the trend, that at least till recently showed declines in crime and violence across most of the US. Why is it that one never finds these results in scientific publications – they are always in woo magazines.

            If focused attention actually worked – it would be demonstrated in ways I’ve suggested – stop a clock, affect the output of a random generator, provide a mind-reading test, etc. There are lots of ways that would be far more “definitive” than this so-called “experiment.” What are the controls? How do you prove that focused attention is actually doing something, when the objective is so nebulous. You could have a rise in crime and violence, while still having fewer arrests – the arrests might take weeks following the violence or crime.

            Yesterday 143 people were arrested at Compton/US 64 which isn’t far from Natural Bridge Ave., so it doesn’t seem to be working. I’m sure you’ll tell me that the area they are focusing on, isn’t in that exact spot, but it sure seems like there is no “spill-over” in these focused intention effects, doesn’t it?

            I would also love to see sources for the other “experiments” you listed above.

          • Craig

            From past experience it is when the petty crimes are policed vigorously the felonies decline. So there is proof that changing the little mistakes in life help prevent and counter the occurrences of the big mistakes… Unfortunately this is not a once off approach but a joint effort to change perceptions concerning the wrongs being done against societies.
            Maybe Patrick the decline in principle indoctrination is contributing to crime commissioning.. And maybe the uniting in prayer etc could just be the attitude to help others change their behaviours to help instead of abuse.
            But as you said research on this field is not easy to prove irrespective of how we measure it. As social wellness and acceptance also influences crime trends…

          • Patrick Gannon

            That is all well and good, but there is no compelling, empirical evidence that a bunch of people (who are not necessarily part of the community involved) can have any effect whatsoever on the crime rates using some sort of intentional mind power. If it works, it means that the core theory of physics is wrong, so they have a tremendous burden of proof to overcome.

            We can “believe” Lynn McTaggert, who has no scientific credentials I am able to find, and who has been adjudicated against for illegally advertising as scientific, a bunch of bogus “health” products not evaluated by any scientific organization or government facility, or we can “trust” some of the most intelligent people on our planet, who have demonstrated that their scientific process provides the most reliable results of any others in human history.

            That’s pretty simple for me. I’m going with the smart people, until the con artists prove them wrong.

          • Patrick Gannon

            What “principle indoctrination” do you refer to? Bible stuff? How well has that worked for the last few thousand years? LOL. Actually, at least till recently US crime rates were steadily decreasing. That line might be flattening out though, probably due to the opioid epidemic.

            When has prayer ever worked to unite anyone? When has prayer actually worked? See the Templeton Foundation Prayer study – complete failure. Pray back an amputated limb and then come talk to me about prayer.

            Who is supposed to unite in prayer? If you’re suggesting prayer as a way to bring people together, I don’t see that happening. Blacks go to black churches, and whites go to white churches. Churches divide and separate people, as do belief systems. Victims and criminals are unlikely to pray together in any event. I’m open to trying all sorts of things, but meditating or praying crime away is a waste of time, since it violates the laws of physics, and they’ve yet to be shown to be wrong.

          • Craig

            Mural caring and support to form a growing community… Is biblical but not religion…
            Well let’s ask what is prayer. This outreach from Neale, the various welfare NGO, npo are all prayers. Not verbal recitations. In fact I think recitations never worked as life is passing. What was needed yesterday is no longer a necessity today…
            But yes if everyone units to verbalize common social desires… It may just work…. An ancient proverb goes. When you come across something good intended for some else, share it with everyone that crosses your path until you personally can convey the message to the person it was intended for. This way it is no telling how far the good will go.
            That is religion, biblical Hebraic view. Not deut. 6. Or other prayer. If the proverb is the outcome of the gathering to pray then you may just witness a positive impact. But because the only prayer being down is upwards it cannot change the horizontal circumstances…
            Paradigms are powerful misleading misconceptions just ask the scientists proven wrong…

          • Spiritual_Annie

            How is a count of the number of specific types of violent crimes—as tallied by police reports which indicate the specific type of crime committed—before, during and after the intentions end, not scientific?

            The reports include the specific code and even paragraph of the crime to the point where they can be entered in a database and easily retrieved. They can be compared to the exact same types of crimes in the surrounding area. They can be compared to national trends, although that gets more difficult as each state or region may use different coding of their penal laws.

            I don’t know what publications the results are going to be published in, if any, but you’re assuming that it won’t be a scientific journal when you don’t know that.

            It’s not anyone’s responsibility to prove anything to you, or for you to dictate what parameters you would find acceptable.

            I didn’t say they’ll be tallied immediately after the experiment. I don’t know how long it will be followed. I already indicated I don’t expect it to be immediate due to my work experience and familiarity with the processing of police reports.

            The experiment was specifically for Natural Bridge Road because it was named the most violent street in America, based on the same kinds of police reports that are being used for the data during and after. Compton at 64/40 is near downtown St. Louis. Natural Bridge Road runs north from 70 in North St. Louis. Different areas, completely different types of neighborhoods.

            The only way for me to get the specific information you’re asking about the prior experiments would be to go back and listen to each day’s video, all about an hour long, transcribing each to ensure I had every detail you would like to know. I’m not inclined to do so.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “How is a count of the number of specific types of violent crimes—as tallied by police reports which indicate the specific type of crime committed—before, during and after the intentions end, not scientific?”

            Because there are too many other things that could explain the results. Perhaps the weather was bad so the robbers stayed indoors. Perhaps the data is riding on top of a trend that affects the entire nation. Perhaps a single event like the people I mentioned who were arrested will skew the results, and all you have to do is start with those inflated numbers to show a reduction. There are any number of reasons why the statistics could change that have nothing to do with any prayers or intention meditation.

            If intention meditation works, why not test it on something that is not so subjective, and not subject to so many other influences that might affect the results. If it works – stop a clock, or do something that has as much subjectivity as possible removed from the equation.

            Having done a little research on Lynn McTaggert, I can be pretty confident in expressing the opinion that her results will not end up in a scientific publication, but if they do – please refer it to me. Her credibility is already shot.

            “It’s not anyone’s responsibility to prove anything to you, or for you to dictate what parameters you would find acceptable.”

            If she wants to prove something to the scientific community – the only ones who matter when it comes to understanding how our natural world works, then by all means, she does have the responsibility to support her assertions with objective data, and for that data to be taken seriously it MUST follow certain parameters that are based on the scientific process. Without that, it’s of no value when it comes to improving our knowledge of our natural world.

            “I didn’t say they’ll be tallied immediately after the experiment.”

            I didn’t say you did. I merely pointed out that if you are praying for crime to go down next week, you could get results that show a decrease in arrests, while crimes actually went up and the crimes weren’t solved ever or until later. It’s all too nebulous. Nobody will take the results seriously except those who already believe it. If you want to convince society that intention meditation works, you don’t prove it to people who already believe it, you figure out a way to work with those who don’t believe it and come up with experiments whose results they will support, should they happen to provide the evidence you believe (hope) they will provide.

            If this was truly being operated as a scientific experiment in accord with the scientific process, you wouldn’t have to transcribe videos – you could point me to a full description of the experiment, with the processes and controls all fully explained.

            McTaggert has the full weight of burden of proof, because her assertion if true, would invalidate the laws of physics. That’s a pretty big hurdle to overcome, and her evidence is going to have to be rock solid, with perfect adherence to the scientific process, or it’s a meaningless waste of time, and of benefit only to those who already believe in this woo.

            To disprove a theory, one need only disprove a predictions the theory makes. At least she’s semi-honest, in sharing her failed predictions. I just pulled up and read her reviews of several of her experiments:

            The Clean Water Experiment June 13, 2009. FAIL.

            The Roy Water Experiment: April 26, 2008 FAIL

            The Heal America Intention Experiments June 6, 2012 and September 21, 2012 INCONCLUSIVE. She gives us this nonsense as evidence:

            “Nevertheless, we were encouraged that we might be on the right track by one other demonstration of greater peace in the Capitol building itself. The then Speaker of the House John Boehner and Minority Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi are sworn enemies. The very day after our Intention Experiment, Boehner was photographed giving Pelosi a hug and wishing her ‘congratulations’ on her 25 years of congressional service.”

            That’s her “evidence?” My prior credence for Lynn McTaggert’s reliability has dropped significantly as a result of these few minutes of research. She’s a con artist. Don’t send her any money. If you signed up to participate, she’s going to fill your inbox with requests for money, sooner or later. Woo is big business.

  • Here are some of my current observations I’ve made regarding some of the numerous questions raised through the years. Get a mug or glass of your favorite beverage, it’s a long post.

    How your life is at the moment has a great deal to do with how you see yourself. Your own personal self esteem and self worth are in my opinion the greatest contributors to how your life is, the friends you have, work, money, love, etc. Y/our life to a large degree is a result and shaped by our self worth.

    Murders, rapists, child molesters, animal abusers, etc. are wounded traumatized unhealed children inside men’s (and sometimes women’s) bodies. Low self worth is behind the wounds and trauma.

    Self worth & self esteem then are one of the most important factors to consider in creating the life you/we desire. You will never see a talk show with a panel of people with great self esteem and self worth, only the opposite. Why is that?

    If we nurture great self esteem and self worth we will dis-create dysfunction and unhealthiness in all, most or at minimum.— many areas of life. Good self worth is the beginning of a great and happy world.

    Positive thinking is not the answer.

    That is, If it means ignoring or airbrushing over the troubles of the world and our own individual problems and troubles. I don’t see this much in CwG if at all. But I do see it in some aspects of the Abraham people who follow Esther Hicks. And a lot of that depends on the maturity of the individual. Some people in that group are afraid to think or have negative stuff happen, rather than acknowledge it and work through it to see it’s gift. In fact,—

    Negativity is a great gift, it’s divine. If gives us the contrast we need to move us closer, faster to what we do desire.

    We eventually out grow negativity, violence, poverty etc. And if we desire, we can create what ever drama we feel we want to keep things interesting. However.

    I tend to feel good drama and differ degrees of positive aspects in life do not need negative drama to keep things interesting, but that’s simply my opinion.

    We will always have contrasts, but they don’t have to be negative. We can have contrasts of good. Example. A good day, a great day, a fantastic, day, a transcendent day back to a good day. All are contrasts, but good contrasts.

    Positive thinking then, is a great part of the answer and top of the list importance. But only if that means feeling all feelings good, bad, horrible and blissful. In doing so, we integrate all aspects of life in a healthy way.

    How we handle the negative is one of the reasons for our being here now & our advancement. That is the grand gift that psychology, spirituality etc. can give us and help us with.

    Learning to respond rather then react to the negativity is key.

    Perfection is having the physical world be the contextual field into how we experience life.

    It’s “Perfectly set up” to experience life on multiple levels. My good friend Therese says “Life is perfect and when life sucks, it sucks perfectly.”

    Life then, is perfectly set up to live the life of our dreams or our nightmares. It’s called free will.

    The greatest gift we can give our selves is the practice and cultivation of our own positive self talk. Eliminating negative thoughts as well as working through them is key.

    This is part of the greatest secret of all. That we create and co create our own reality. There is our own individual reality and the larger collective reality.

    I believe there is another LARGER reality still that I call the cosmic reality, the greater universe, planets, stars etc.

    We create unconscious negative experiences until we don’t. Education on this subject will correct that.

    Being more gentle soft on our imperfections as individuals and society is of tremendous value. As we become softer on life, we see this helps us heal more thoroughly.

    Cultivating more compassion and appreciation in ourselves, others and life is a simple but incredibly effective way to happiness and health.

    Included in this is the power of our own self talk.

    Positive self talk is a major practice to creating a better reality for us and being a positive influence to others and the world.

    Great self worth & self esteem are the building blocks needed for a healthy happy world. With great self worth we will eliminate one of the greatest problem in western society. Loneliness.

    I speculate that Science & spirituality will commingle creating a symbiosis of science and psychic blending, creating a new way to look at the world, God, science etc.

    I sum up the CwG cosmology to one word. “Beingness” What we are being is the most effective way to live, create, move & breathe in the world.

    Collective world prayer visualization meditation has the potential power to create massive change.

    Finally, and I love this. We are born in original blessing. Live in the solution not the problem. Have fun!

    • Craig

      Hi Marco a good philosophical view.
      I understand this as our response to life events will determine (reveal) our attitude towards life, society and others. The more supportive or positive and uplifting we can make it the better the impact. If we permit it to bring us down we will start distancing ourselves and it is this approach to deal with life that causes mental and physical breakdowns.
      We cannot all write books or be business owners but we can all be cultivating positive supporting and uplifting cultures in society…

    • Jethro

      Awesome post Marko! I hope you share this wisdom often.

      • Thanks Jethro, these are some of the points of wisdom I’ve come to over the years. Always happy to share….

    • Spiritual_Annie

      Marko,

      As I began reading your post, I found there were statements to which I wanted to quote and reply, mostly in the affirmative. As I continued reading, I realized that I would have to quote nearly every statement that you made.

      Instead, I will simply thank you for sharing and state that I have many of the same attitudes and beliefs that you have shared.

      Love and Blessings Always,
      ~Annie

      • Thanks Annie, and you’re welcome. These are main focal points that I use in my life now, so they are easy to access and share.

        • Craig

          Are these the views on your website? I have not read anything yet but quickly scanned the home page…

          • Yes, but I don’t promote my site here. I don’t want to take away from Neale’s blog or use it as a promotional vehicle for it.

  • Bishop Hollywood

    It’s going to be a great discussion for sure. I like how you set it up where the discussion is based on individual beliefs and ideologies. Now me personally, I call it individual Revelations from God for each individual for their particular life. In that context, there’s no such things as right or wrong. It’s only what works for that individual’s life. I personally know from the Revelation that I have received is that we all chose to come here to experience life in the physical. Based on my own Revelation from God is that when we are done here, we will return Home, and re experience the glory, beauty, perfection and love of being back Home . Now I know some brothers and sisters out there may think I’m crazy and that’s cool, but remember that’s my own Revelation, yours will be different. But you see I have learned that since others Revelation from God are different from my own, I still respect theirs and Im not ashamed to express my own. That’s what it’s all about. Expressing what we know but also respecting what others know even though it different from what we know. I feel that if everyone did and thought the same, the world will be boring but because we have differ that’s what makes the world more interesting and fun. May God to continue to bless everyone.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Why does revelation never tell us anything new about our natural world? Why has every prophet who ever lived, not been given any information about future developments, that would confirm that these revelations could be trusted? Why do revelations never come with reliable evidence?

      While of course people can believe whatever they want, that doesn’t mean they have to be taken seriously, does it? If a person tells you they have an invisible, pink polka dotted unicorn in their backyard that they care for, are rational people required to respect this belief?

      • Craig

        If I may unfulfilled prophecies are considered false until fulfilled as prophesies were not intended futuristic but as applicable at the time, religious dogmas have made every prophesy futuristic… Wonder why, I think because everything’s “falls in place” if focussed on long enough.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Yeah, but you’re talking about prophecies related to wars, and such. That was a given. Who could ever go wrong predicting wars in the middle east! Predicting a young maiden would have a child and certain things would occur during that child’s life, is not the same as predicting that microorganisms that kill people exist, and you should wash your hands. Neale’s god could have given us some real insights into quantum mechanics, dark matter (does it even exist?) or even a prediction back in the mid-90s with his first book, that today we would all have computers in our pockets that are far, far, far more powerful than the computers that sent man to the moon. Revelation never gives us anything like that. Why not? Why should we trust it, if it never delivers anything that can be confirmed?

          It’s a delusion. (Or a scam).

          • Craig

            A young maden normally has children. In context this would actually say an unmarried or not yet betrothed girl will get pregnant…
            Generally Revelations provided everything needed at the time. Consider when Revelation’s was written and when the gospel accounts were documented. Fully unfolded I would say.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I’m not sure this is the right place to debate Isaiah or The Revelation. However…. We know Matthew was working from a Greek translation and if being a “virgin” was so important to the story, they’d have used a different word – betulah instead of almah.

            Rev was written after Paul, Mark and probably Matthew, but most likely before John and Luke/Acts. It’s placed last in the NT, because the NT is laid out to tell a particular story. It is not in chronological order. Did you know that? I figured you did, but not so sure now.

            The NT story goes like this, for those who might not know… Matthew tells a great story, so he goes first. He has a better opening than Mark. Mark is provided as supplemental, almost secondary, to support Matthew. Luke comes along and embellishes Matthew, and John ties all the competing pieces together (because those gospels disagree on some key things), and gives us the Christian theology. Acts, then tells us what happened after the supposed crucifixion, followed by the stories of Paul and the other apostles spreading the word…. It’s all wrapped up in the end by The Revelation, to complete a nice, tidy story.

            What really happened is that Paul (50s AD) wrote about a celestial Jesus. He clearly did not know a historical Jesus. Mark (70 AD) gave us the first gospel and both Matthew and Luke copied most of their material from it. Mark invented Jesus, the others filled in the blanks. John tied up loose ends, and gave us the theology. The Revelation came somewhere in the middle of all this, but after the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. The last books are the Tims, Titus and 2 Peter according to Bart Ehrman and other notable scholars.

            Rev was about the Roman Empire. Yeah, it fell. That’s a prophecy we can rely on? That’s a reliable prediction for any empire over a long enough period of time. I want something solid and concrete. If these freaking gods are all-powerful, then they should be able to prove themselves. Why are they so hell-bent on hiding from us? It gets frustrating…. (grin).

            BTW you can’t say the gospel accounts were “documented.” They were revised and edited for centuries. They weren’t really “documented” until the printing press made it possible to print one version, in enough copies that it would end up being accepted over all the hundreds of other conflicting copies. There is very little in the NT that is “documented” other than a few historical figures pulled in, as they are in most mythologies.

          • Craig

            A yes, we are frustrated. I believe I am more than you as I actually preached the gospel and lost all interest from a small difference in interpretation. The problem my paradigm still prevails in all my searches I find hooks to attach my views to. That Patrick is why I most probably only provide a little info at a time for I am still learning and discovering as a read. You provide so much fun to my reading for I can then question and redress my own paradigms.
            Just think how boring it would be if we actually read the NT as Greeks would. Very imaginative and philosophical. That may be the reason why we do not find much reality in it.
            Jesus is said to be from the seed of David which would be Joseph had he impregnated Mary… Mary well she was from the same clan but did not farther Jesus…
            Jethro commented you may be a believer hiding behind a front or veil I add. Testing and seeking. Well I need to agree with Jethro’s assumption. You know and defend a lot for someone not really interested.
            Till next blog keep up the interesting modern rabbinical teaching ways.

          • Patrick Gannon

            LOL. Jethro said I might be a believer? A religious believer? How did I miss that! Yeah, they really miss me at Sunday mass! Too funny. What makes me different is that I use my real identity. You can find me. If you do, you’ll see the post I made in our local paper (Richmond Times) in the “Faith and Values” column yesterday, for which I am a regular gadfly! It wasn’t a post the believers will appreciate!

            It’s a fair concern – most people hide behind avatars; so you can’t really know if they are who they say they are.

            You mention reading the scriptures as the Greeks did – looking for hidden meanings and such. Some scholars say there are reasons to believe that the gospels were written for the common man, and that the original “secrets” were held closely by a handful of original adherents, carried mouth to ear by people like Paul. Over time, they died out, and the secrets with them, and we were left with the story book for the unwashed (ignorant) masses. Richard Carrier talks about this in his book about the historicity of Jesus. Paul’s Jesus was surely celestial, but the common folks wanted their heroes to be in physical form, like Hercules, so Mark made him human…. or so the supposition goes.

            I show up here, as an advocate for science, since nobody else will. I do it for the same reason you do – to be challenged, so I can see if what I think is supportable; and to help figure out how to put difficult concepts into my own words, such that others can understand me. I know how difficult this is, because years ago I had people throwing science at me, and I closed my mind to it, until I didn’t anymore; and then the amazement started.

          • Jethro

            I believe my statement was made some time ago… to you. Remember when I was wasn’t me and nobody else was anyone who they said they were as if it really matters? I believe that’s when the statement was made but unsure.

          • Patrick Gannon

            LOL. I’m guessing there isn’t a lot of doubt any longer! Craig wasn’t around then – unless he went back in archives or was lurking.

            I am deeply religious. I am pastor of the “Church of the Holy Pat.” My girlfriend ordered a banner with a logo that included a shamrock, etc. as a joke some time ago. I wish I could post a picture of it here. I really should create a church. I could use the tax break.

          • Jethro

            We could go to the source and find out lol. Let’s ask Craig… I don’t remember making that statement anytime recently.

          • Kristen

            Hey….Ive always been me.

          • Jethro

            Well, surrrre you have, I get it, I believe you, no really, I believe you…. LOL.

            I don’t know why it matters honestly. We are merely words on a computer screen that interact with each other… with emotions of course.

          • Jethro

            Was you digging through archive statements or did I make the statement recently? I don’t really remember. I’m getting old unfortunately, not as old as Patrick but….

          • Craig

            Maybe I was hallucinating or prophesying or just throwing a stone in the bush. Unfortunately I think I read it on this blogs comments… Or am I confusing you with Raphael…

          • Jethro

            You’re right Craig maybe I haven’t said it yet but I’m going to 😎. The funny thing is I remember saying something like that but it was quite sometime ago. Maybe Raphael said it. I’ll let him confirm. I’m done thinking about it thank you

        • Kristen

          I assume you know God states that any prophecises that do not come true are not from him……ie, prophets were getting false information from the very beginning.

          • Craig

            Let me answer all…
            Jethro read your posts for the past 15 days, either you stated directly maybe implying something else or you you never said it and I read between the lines as I often read more into something but not by habit… Maybe my sixth sense… Woo.
            Patrick I would like to hear about your church. A gathering discussing scientific truths debating the truth or falisy of of the existence of a divine reality. You know what, convictions shared and discussed are the only why to confirm or change them. There are a lot of people wanting to debate or discuss without reproof as nobody likes to be blamed, but everyone likes to be helped or guided to make their own unique decision. Good click with this venture.
            Kirsten we are all prophets or rather messengers with a truth in our message. There is no problem with that. It is when we sneak the message in with a sprinkle reality and perceptions of the intended message that things get messed up…
            Look what happened on Neale’s true experience if he stopped with book 1 more people would have experienced more truth…
            As the saying goes you can always fool someone, but you cannot fool everyone all the time… Or something like that.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “Patrick I would like to hear about your church.”

            What church? I haven’t been to church except marriages and funerals since I was 17. I was a cultural Christian until I read the bible, and then decided being a Christian was no longer something I wanted to be connected to.

            If you are trying to insinuate that atheism and agnosticism are belief systems with churches, please do a full stop and look up the definition for those words.

          • Craig

            Now Patrick, just testing the field… I was using church in its original meaning. A gathering for what ever reason it does not matter. I also understood it to only imply religious congregations…
            Agnostic was a new word for me when you first mentioned after reading up on it I realized that I was reading about myself.
            Teacher keep informing it keeps filling my mind.

          • Jethro

            It doesn’t matter Craig, I was just curious. If anyone is giving you a hard time over it, ignore it. It’s not a problem.

          • Craig

            Thank you for being so tolerant.

          • Jethro

            Your welcome… I have a moment or two now and then. Don’t get spoiled to it.

          • Craig

            Won’t get attached…

          • Jethro

            You have a good heart my friend.

          • Craig

            You do not know the real cold hearted me…
            This is a facade the conditioned mental or spiritual me. The actual living me is none tolerant, unforgiving rude and a bully.
            Old Sigmund warned me to stop using alcohol or I will continue revealing me instead of I.

          • Jethro

            I was a heavy drinker for 17 years my friend. We are all intolerant, rude, unforgiving, and bullies in our own right. Old Sigmund can warn you and warn you all he wants, it’s you warning yourself that you might listen to because you are the only one who really knows. The part you express to others is your expressed illusion. I stated you have a good heart, not a good façade. I will stick to my statement. Inside you are a good person. Everyone is. We cannot hate something without loving something, we do not attack something without protecting something, we become angry to protect happiness.

          • Craig

            That choice is a life long reminder to work on self.

          • Craig

            Correct, so we are all mostly false prophets. So maybe we need to focus on the truth as Patrick keeps reminding. The tangible truth that is…

          • Kristen

            Hi Craig,
            I completely agree, thats the very problem….we all have different proven truths, as many individuals do.
            I have high functioning autism, I need things proven to me and things have been before I voice them, otherwise I would use the word ‘think’ as I often do, we all do.
            We’re all working with God, science, ourselves and our own expereinces PROVEN to us, therefore we believe in different truths. The word truth doesnt mean it’s tangible and can be proven to others, thats the philosophy of science…they’re the ones that are brainwashed into thinking something is only the truth if it can be proven to others and backed by others, and until proven to others it must be a lie or untruth.
            We arent on trial as liars….each person speaks of their own proven truth. And this isnt a science website, its one of peoples experiences with God, or a God, starting with Neale. Non paranoid people who believe others experiences.

      • Spiritual_Annie

        I’ve been meaning to ask, seriously, about your repeated inquiry regarding revelations not revealing “reliable evidence.”

        From a scientific standpoint, if one were to observe a process or event time and again, always with the same result (in this case, revelations without “reliable evidence”), wouldn’t it be reasonably concluded that revelations aren’t meant to reveal “reliable evidence,” since they don’t?

        I mean, if you saw any other event or process always having the same characteristics and results, wouldn’t it be a reasonable conclusion that it will continue to have the same characteristics and results? Why would you expect the results to change? Why would you ever expect revelations to change their nature?

        • Patrick Gannon

          Of course, I don’t ever expect revelations to change their nature, because they are delusional experiences. If they were based on something real, they would have real evidence. That they don’t provide any evidence at all indicates that they are nothing but subjective delusions (or scams), which means they should be given absolutely no credence.

          Obviously I’m asking a loaded question. I know that revelations have never revealed anything that confirms their veracity, so I know that the person facing the question cannot answer it, without admitting the total lack of evidence, which they don’t generally want to admit.

          “I mean, if you saw any other event or process always having the same characteristics and results, wouldn’t it be a reasonable conclusion that it will continue to have the same characteristics and results? Why would you expect the results to change?”

          Exactly my point. We see that the laws of physics always give us the same characteristics and results. They never change due to influences from imaginary soul forces or whatever. Why would we ever expect those experiments to change?

          • Spiritual_Annie

            No, that was my point, and you diverted away from answering questions–something you do regularly.

            Why would you continue to expect the results of revelations to include whatever would fit your definition of scientific proof when they never have? And, in case you miss it, this point is that maybe that’s the nature of revelations. Maybe they’re not meant to be scientifically examined, but rather experienced and, with our free will, determine what they mean to us. Maybe they’re meant to be personal and subjective experiences.

          • Patrick Gannon

            In other words, revelations are of absolutely no value in adding to our knowledge of the natural world. OK. Why does your god hide himself so carefully? What is she afraid of? Why does your god select a method of revelation that should not be taken seriously by rational people?

            If revelatory experiences are meant to be personal and subjective, then your god wants them to be distrusted, since we know that subjective, and personal experiences are the least reliable testimony there is. In other words, your god is a yellow-bellied sapsucker, afraid to show himself. Gutless cowardly god – go home. You have no power here in this natural world. In other words, he’s abandoned you to ridicule. Nice god.

            Annie, since you’ve taken a step in the right direction by watching the Sean Carroll video, I sure would like to figure out how to get a copy of “Brain Myths Exploded” to you. I could find you, but if you’re in FL, it’s under an assumed name, right? Otherwise I’d have already sent you a copy. I know how to find people on the web, and you dropped a big clue a while back.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Wow. I’m not even sure where to begin. Revelations add much to the human experience, and I do believe that human beings are part of the “natural world,” ergo revelations affect the natural world. Just because they may not add to the human understanding of the particle-based view you have of the world doesn’t mean they have no value. Our experiences have, I believe, great value. That doesn’t exclude those that aren’t able to be explained by physicists.

            I don’t believe that God’s hiding anywhere. As I’ve previously stated, I believe in a nonpersonal Divinity, which is everywhere. How could that be seen as “[my] God is hiding” or “is afraid?” You’re confusing me with the “fundies” (as you call them) who believe in a Judeo-Christian God. That’s not what I believe.

            I don’t believe that Divinity provides revelations to people for the purpose of having their beliefs made fun of, denigrated, or made to feel that their own personal experiences are less valid because some scientist tells them so. And how can a Divinity that is everything and is in everything not affect the natural world, since it is the natural world?

            I know I dropped a big clue, and I had to think about the possibility of your somehow deciding to use it and what for before I made that post. Isn’t that sad? Here there were, people who knew me from nowhere but here, who were concerned about me and wanting to help if I needed it, and I had to stop and think twice about it because it wasn’t information it felt safe to make available to you. Think about that, Patrick. Seriously.

  • Raphael

    May I add another question? I think it might be an important one as well.

    Is human nature inherently evil?

    This idea has been perpetuated by Judeo-Christiannity in particular:
    “This myth claims that man is, in the inherent nature that he shares with other animals, essentially evil-and man, being evil, must be governed.”
    (From the book Word Controlled Humans by John Harland).

    Man must then not only be governed by a body politic, but by the supreme lawmaker and law enforcer, the Biblical God, or Allah, the God of the Koran.

    The myth of man being inherently evil is deeply ingrained in Middle Eastern and Western cultures, and can be frequently seen clearly expressed in post apocalyptic movies in which humanity is portrayed as having reverted to abject savagery following the collapse of civilization. Those who prepare for such an event in real life accumulate weapons and ammunition while expecting such inhumanity on the part of their contemporaries.

    The conditioning is so effective and so deep that the obvious is missed by most: in a world of polarities, the potential for “evil” in humanity is perfectly balanced by an equal and complementary potential for “good”.

    However, the concepts of man’s innately sinful, immoral and destructive nature requiring subjugation, control and punishment by supreme authorities (God and government) has been embraced by most, and have led to the following absurd conditions:

    “Laws are made in such profusion that clear law does not exist. “Authority” is arbitrarily exercised by persons in “positions of authority”. The “authority” of the position exists “by the grace of the positions” as in earlier times “authority” in a monarch existed “by the grace of a group-god”. The fact that there are many such positions, whose incumbents compete with each others, simply turns law into a garbage heap from which “government aid” and “government penalty” come about in underhanded maneuvers-underhanded maneuvers by, and in a conspiracy with, individuals in “authoritative” positions. This condition makes underhanded dealings the most expedient, if not the only method of accomplishing anything-good or bad. The fact that the practice is fully accepted makes those who respect and adhere to the facade of written law totally ineffectual. They are seen as naive fools, and looked upon with snickering contempt by those who “know how to get things done””.
    (From the same book, Word Controlled Humans by John Harland).

    What is also clearly missing is the understanding that restrictions imposed on individuals lead to irresponsibility. The more a government treats people as if they were irresponsible children, the more they react, think and behave as if they were. We can see examples of this daily…

    As in the mind of an overly controlled and disciplined child, in the mind of the oppressed, freedom becomes associated with cheating authority and with antisocial behaviors which, in a vicious cycle, reinforce the myth of a need for tight control and a strict law and order type of authoritarian system.

    Not surprisingly, we (those of us who have eyes to see and ears to hear) are witnessing a rise in authoritarianism worldwide, as well as within the United States.

    On the other and, within a sovereign population, freedom and responsibility (meaning fully assuming all the consequences of one’s thoughts and actions) would not be separable: responsibility would lead to freedom and freedom to responsibility. This would be the adult state.

    Such is also, from what I understand, the case in the spirit world, where absolute freedom is the governing principle, and where it is said that one instantly experiences the consequences or effects or creations of his own thoughts, beliefs and feelings, learning responsibility rather quickly.

    If humans can master this in the spiritual realm, why not in the physical? Because humanity appears to fear its own creative power when manifested in the physical, where things seem very final and pain and death can be the frightful consequences of making bad choices or of being “victimized” by others making bad choices.

    This fear of destruction is the hoax that keeps all of humanity willing to surrender its native sovereignty to authority, and to accept and embrace subjugation and a certain degree of slavery and powerlessness.

    Unfortunately, this distrust towards its own nature and this fear of destruction is also and precisely what is leading humanity to destruction, as beliefs and expectations become our creations and experiences, in any dimension.

    • Jethro

      Evil is a creation of humanity. Is it evil for someone who is starving and thirsty to drink your water and eat your food without asking, or is it evil to stop them? In this question many other conditions would be examined to decide one way or another. To the person starving, he/she feels blessed to receive the food and water by whatever means. It becomes an evil act when the person who has the food and water decides it is an evil act.
      We are not born evil, we learn evil and define evil, and evil is relative to time and place.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Like Neale, you remind us of how horrid and corrupt our existence is, and offer the promise of a spirit world where all will be wine and roses. How can we ever make this a better place if we can’t understand how lucky we are to be here in the first place.

      Imagine a group of people in a spaceship, fleeing the earth as a comet comes to destroy it. At the speed of light they will spend millions of years before they have even a sliver of a chance to land on a planet like this one. It would be the rarest, most unimaginable luck for them to land on such a planet as we have.

      And all of us were lucky enough to do so. The only difference between us and those weary travelers is that they would recognize their amazing luck in an instant, whereas we had to evolve the awareness to understand how lucky we are.

      This is what we get. There is no spirit world. We had better take note of just how lucky we are to have a sliver of time; for there are uncounted trillions of people who will never be born and never have any opportunity to experience such a planet as this. For all its faults – we’re here. They never will be.

      • Raphael

        Patrick, I think that you might have misunderstood me. Have you read the entire text? I do just the opposite: I state that unlike Judeo-Christians, I do not believe that man’s nature is inherently sinful or evil, and that consequently there is no need for control either from a God or from government. I propose freedom and responsibility.

        • Patrick Gannon

          But aren’t you suggesting that there is a spirit world where this freedom and responsibility exists, while it does not here on this world? Sorry, if I’m not following you. I read it again, and it still seems like a comparison is being made between something real – this world, and something not real – the spirit world. Just as Neale makes up HEBs so we can compare our inferior selves with these imaginary superheroes.

          I object to comparing our current circumstances to imaginary circumstances. Otherwise I agree, that of course we weren’t born inherently sinful. The ‘fall from grace’ story is completely debunked. What we are is animals, mammals, primates, who have evolved from a more animalistic, to less animalistic state, and we’ve foolishly chosen to refer to our former animalistic state as evil.

          • Raphael

            I understand your objection…because we do not agree about the spirit world. But I also mention most Native American nations living in freedom by practicing responsibility. This condition is basically and fundamentally one that comes with maturity. Unfortunately an overly controlled population cannot develop such maturity, as it is kept in a relative state of infantilism by being so controlled.

            Basically, one of my point is this: it is already understood by most that an irresponsible people cannot be free (as they need to be supervised and controlled, to some degree). But the reverse is true, and not yet understood: a controlled population cannot easily develop a sense of responsibility. We then have a vicious cycle that leads, most likely, to ever more control and ever more irresponsibility.

            Just as responsibility and freedom enhance each other positively, control and irresponsibility do the same negatively.

          • Patrick Gannon

            How do we obtain this maturity, other than good old fashioned evolution? The irresponsible will eventually be weeded out unless evolution favors that trait as favorable to survival.

            I don’t know what the solution is, but I feel like we should try something we’ve never tried before – and that’s a search for truth; for the facts about how our world works. Once we accept that we understand how it works, then perhaps we can plan with uncorrupted thought, about how best to leverage this amazing world we have.

            For thousands of years, all our decisions have had at their root, belief systems that are mythical and not related to how things really are. It’s like a complicated assembly manual where all the words are in some indecipherable, babble language. You can’t put the thing together right, until you have a manual with the right language. We have that now. We should try it and see if it gets us anywhere.

            I agree with you that things are dire. We have nothing to lose by turning to truth, defined as such by scientific evidence, and like it or not, that does not come from religions, including CwG.

          • Raphael

            Myths can be interesting when seen as a creation of the human psyche and an expression of the unconscious…they should however never be taken literally. They are meant to inform us about ourselves, about our inner world and states of consciousness, as do dreams, which also come from the unconscious (mostly past states, although some myths are still relevant). Joseph Campbell had a good handle on this…you might have heard of him.

            Those who take their “holy” books literally (most fundamentalists, evangelists, etc) are obviously not the brightest lights on the chandelier. These people should have been bred out of existence long ago…yet here they are, back with a vengeance!

            About maturity…as I wrote previously, we are caught in a vicious circle, with top down control (which seems necessary because of people’s irresponsible behaviors) leading to more irresponsibility and lack of maturation. Where this will lead is anyone’s guess, but as always humanity might have to learn the hard way.

            I agree with you, our world is amazing, and should be loved and appreciated by all, as if it were “heaven”, because it could be. Unfortunately the religious (and some spiritual individuals) have not interest in this world, as their attention is fixed on the great beyond.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Sorry, but according to neurologists, it does not appear that dreams are meant to inform us about ourselves. Dreams are the way the brain cleans away clutter, detoxes the brain and lays down memories.

            Valid point about how fundies should have bred themselves out of existence. In fact, it is the more educated who have fewer children. This is a real concern. The weak-minded are reproducing at greater rates than the intelligent and educated. Eventually this will lead to strife, and depending on the outcome, possibly a caste system in which the less intelligent are relegated to more mundane tasks, and their fertility managed and restricted. As you have said, it may require authoritarianism to prevent total chaos.

            “Unfortunately the religious (and some spiritual individuals) have not interest in this world, as their attention is fixed on the great beyond.”

            Absolutely agree. They don’t care to improve and educate themselves, because Sky Daddy is going to give them another chance. I think we’ll make progress when we require an IQ test in order to reproduce. That may not be freedom, but it may mean survival!

          • Raphael

            In my opinion, one of the worst things about the Christian doctrine is the notion that you can do pretty much anything in your life…lie, steal, cheat, abuse, murder, rape…whatever. As long as, before you die, you “find Jesus” and repent (by taking part in some sort of religious mambo jambo), because “he bled” for all you and everyone else did that was potentially horrible.

            I find all of this repugnant on so many levels, not to mention primitive to the extreme! But of course it is a myth that assuages human guilt, as were animal and human sacrifices in the past (we did something that makes us feel guilty and rotten which means our deity must be angry at us, plus the crops are failing so deity is really pissed, let’s find a young innocent virgin to sacrifice)…yep, how logical!

          • Jethro

            For what it’s worth, it all comes down to being able to change yourself during your life. To decide that what you have been doing is wrong and make it right. To not believe you are condemned from your first wrong which binds you to a life without change. Forgiveness is possible and most important if it’s self forgiveness. An unhappy person will struggle to have a happy life. The horrible acts of a person do not go away, just the desire to continue them. That one has confused me for years as well.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Why do you humor Kristen, and her mythical, fantastical, primitive beliefs?

            Don’t get me started on Christianity! The only religion that is worse is Islam.

            Don’t forget that “indigenous” people include folks like the Aztecs who also sacrificed humans to gods.

          • Kristen

            I agree, but more manmade crock. Y’shua replaced animals as sacrifices for the few religious ‘sins’ in the OT. He actually told people to bear their own cross, the cross is righteousness with justice.
            As a high priest he is bound by a Law or vow stating that if a priest fails to prevent a known crime from happening, then God may charge them with that crime. They were the first police force, and were also judges. There were safe places anyone could go before a trial where they were not to be persecuted, and everyone was to be given a fair trial including a jury if a reputable person was not a witness…our court system today.
            Corruption was absolutely forbidden.
            Christianity is completely manmade, theyre full of crock, its just a money making cult.

          • Craig

            Just a reminder that pagan religions used animals long before Moshe introduced them… Using the known to introduce the unknown. As Patrick is introducing evolution into spirituality while I think it works the other way round.
            Become your best so that you can help others be their best…
            Be a fully evolved physical and mentally sound person then take this weirdo Craig and help him return to sanity…

          • Patrick Gannon

            New study on sleep just released… “Sleep helps the brain reorganize, new study shows”

          • Craig

            So there is good in sleeping. When does this reorganizing turn into that draining activity that results in us waking up more tired than when we went to sleep…
            I want to wake up just before this happens.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Not only is there good in sleeping, but if you deprive someone of sleep for long enough it will kill them.

            I’m sorry I can’t help with your waking issue. I wake up refreshed and ready to go. Perhaps you aren’t getting enough sleep, or not dreaming enough (REM sleep is critical), or have some sort of sleep disorder.

          • Craig

            Sleep disorder sounds logic.
            We refer to it as “Killed someone…”
            Maybe in my previous lives…
            Or just plain overactive and underused mind.
            Thanks for the response. Soup from Kirsten and sleep deprivation. I may soon discover I am insane… That will explain even more…

          • Jethro

            Insane…. HERE, HERE!

          • Spiritual_Annie

            I have documentation from more than one facility that says I’m “sane,” or at least not a danger to myself or society. If they only knew what dangerous, damaging thoughts and actions I’m having by being my Spirituality expressed. 😉

          • Jethro

            Oh the shame of it all!! Well I’m sure you will be tolerated for the moment.
            I think the sanity of humanity today should be compared to humanity on different points on our time line just to find out when humanity lost its sanity and regained it. problem is, it’s a matter of opinion what sanity really is. The results of such a study would be fascinating for sure in any case.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            It’s also a question of whether we ever had it to begin with in order to lose and regain it. (Hunh?)

            My Mama thought I would be so affected by watching Elvis on TV that she banned me from it. She was certain it would get me “all worked up” and think his behavor was acceptable in public, thus ruining my morals forevermore. Was that a “sane” thought at the time? It sure was a popular one! All I will say about its effects is that banning me from watching it merely made it a more interesting challenge to disobey. It certainly didn’t affect my morals as a teen, although it may have helped me accept others as they are.

            But I wasn’t a swooning Elvis fan, either. I grew up with all kinds of music because my Mama loved it. She even liked some Elvis songs, like his gospel and blues. She played classical on the piano, and introduced the guitar, flute and trumpet (played by her and my siblings) to the parish she attended, much to the aggravation of the Pastor but loved by the congregants. A rebel before her time.

            I grew up in an oddly mixed area where my friends listened to rock, country, and Motown. I liked some of all three. Music is wonderful. It can easily move me from one state of being to another, from energetic to relaxed to deep within. It’s affected my pain level in that, when it’s high, I play upbeat music I love to sing out loud to, which serves both as distraction and a trigger for the brain to produce dopamine, which lowers physical pain.

            Have you ever heard of treating a window shaker by putting bleach in the pan, waiting, then blowing it out with high-powered water from the outside? Mine’s leaning properly, but there’s a lot of water coming inside. My redneck alcoholic neighbor recommended doing it, but he’d been into the vodka for a while.

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Jethro

            I drill a 3/8 hole in the base against all recommendations. be careful where you drill. Simply hosing it out can help. Bleach rusts steal so I never put bleach in a window unit. If it’s really dirty, you may need to remove the shroud, which means removing the unit. Sad face!!! pain in the butt!! just wash it out, no bleach.

          • Kristen

            Do you know that Revelation at the end of scriptures do have Earth as Heaven. Consequences take place then Heaven is bought down to Earth, “Eden is restored” and all positive happy traits are nurtured and in place. It states there are no temples as religion is no longer required, and it all becomes about love, happiness and a commitment to continuing the human race. God rules with love, light and joy, and Y’shuas role is to lead people down the road to maturity until he is no longer needed, the city described is defined as a prepared bride for him.
            There is nothing about Heaven in the sky, the Heaven is on Earth.
            Just curious if you ever read that? The very end.

          • Raphael

            That sounds very good and accurate to me, and it matches that spontaneous vision that I had in ’94…the end of the vision (first the world goes through tremendous upheavals). No I never read it or heard about it…

          • Kristen

            Oh, I just suddenly realised you may not have. Its just the last few pages in a bible. Just look up all the gems and things on a dream interpretation website. What has bees in bonnets is it excludes all believers BUT that doesnt refer to non christians, it refers to staunch athiests etc, those whom have no beliefs beyond a physical planet. Plus the sexually immoral cant get that great life hence Christian attitudes.
            No idea where all the info about Heaven in the sky comes from, everyone returns to Earth in the end for either consequences (hell) or blessings (heaven) but both are on Earth, Christians never quite explain that, but thats what their 2nd coming of Christ is about…consequenes and Heaven/Eden restored for those who pass the grade. One of the consequences is ‘time to destroy those who destroy the Earth, that is the start of it all.
            K

          • Raphael

            Those who destroy the earth will destroy themselves, but unfortunately they will take many others down with them as well as countless animal species.
            Ultimately it looks like there will be a “new earth” (the “heavenly earth” I saw in my vision, perhaps in another dimension?), but to tell you the truth I haven’t figured out the details. I have a general road map, but I do not know how everything will exactly work out.

          • Kristen

            Yip, but based on God taking very few, only righteous people. Everyone else rises fof judgements on Earth, which has to be via reincarnation, and I suspect thats now…freewill given so people show true colours.
            I personally think there will be many new Heavens or Edens in the end, from Gods perspective, possibly one Archangel in charge of each. Im under Raphael, the Archangel affiliated to beauty, perfection, medical matters, healing, colour green, young couples, alchemy, music, humour, french fashion, sort of steampunk stuff. Hes one of the cool ones without being fallen. His logo is a triangle, representation the sun and sign is the Kabbalic xx.
            Thats why I laughed at your name.

          • Raphael

            Hey that’s actually my real name…I knew I was special ha ha…especially with my 4 hands and 50 lbs head. But beauty/truth are my focus…and I find them inseparable (except potentially in people).

            Yes there are many dimensions, many “places”. As far as now is concerned, this human world looks more like hell than heaven. It is becoming stranger and weirder, to the point of being actually unbelievable, but not in a good way. Humanity is going down a very dark path.

            About being “righteous” (I would call it being in harmony with universal laws)…I think that it is inborn…it can’t be learnt or mimicked, one cannot pretend, you have it or you don’t, it’s in you, in your DNA (or not). Very few fit the righteous description indeed…most people appear to me to be lost, disconnected from truth, without an inner compass, and opened to any crap that comes along.

          • Kristen

            Yip, agree.
            About a year ago I asked if you, as Mewabe, had an Archangel name, I thought Gabriel or Raphael, just a hunch.
            Wow, you only have 4 hands? Wierdo. I wouldnt function with just 4.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            “Unfortunately an overcontrolled population cannot develop such maturity, as it is kept in a relative state of infantilism by being so controlled.”

            Yes, when our actions are so tightly controlled, it can be very difficult to mature into wisdom. We start being controlled in our families and by our schools when we are children, being taught their beliefs and a whitewashed version of our history.

            Being so controlled as adults limits our actions because of the consequences of the state of militarization of law and order. One need only look to the ongoing sale of surplus military equipment to local law and order to see how militarized some police agencies have become. We have the right to protest, but with it come the consequences of rubber bullets and tear gas coming from law enforcement in armored vehicles, such as in the peaceful protests to protect our water at DAPL. (Or the infant-in-chief assaulting us on Twitter, if that matters to us.)

            However, the one thing that cannot truly be controlled by another is our ability to go within. Some can maintain this even while being pelted with rubber bullets and tear gas. But the more one practices this connection with the depth of beingness, the more one is able to maintain it while others attempt to enforce their control over us. That, to me, is how we mature–by going within, and by choosing to learn outside that which we have been told is true.

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Raphael

            Do you know the latest? Surplus grenades and bayonets for police departments! And when the police goes out in the streets chanting “Whose streets? Our streets!”, it doesn’t take a huge stretch of the imagination to start thinking “police state” (not to mention surveillance, etc).

            What might be happening is that with an overwhelming majority of police chiefs throughout the nation being for gun control (of course guns everywhere makes police work more difficult and dangerous), the government had the bright idea of bribing them with surplus military toys…to get them to shut up about gun control. Have you noticed? Not a peep from them about the shooting in Las Vegas, fully automatic assault weapons and unlimited ammunition.

            It might get worse before it gets better, and going within, as well as communing with nature, will become a survival necessity in an increasingly chaotic world, if it is not already.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Yes, I’ve heard the latest. I find it appalling. It’s bad enough that what used to be SWAT gear seems to be the “norm,” now they have armored vehicles and real grenades, not flash grenades or tear gas. And what the heck does a law enforcement officer need with a bayonet?

            I’ve noticed a lot of reporters and even the usual sarcastic comedians have stood up and said, “If now’s not the time to have a discussion about gun control, when is?” I’ve heard not nearly as much as I’d like from the legislators who could actually do something about gun control. If only they had Kirsten’s balls.

            What I also find frightening is that it takes a mass murder like the one in Las Vegas to shock us. How many other Americans died that night across our country, especially in Puerto Rico? Or those in the service, which aren’t even reported anymore?

            Trump is doing (mostly) what Bannon and the Heritage Foundation set him up to do–dismantle the government. I mean, Betsy DeVoss in Education, a climate change denier in charge of the EPA, a billionaire with no clue about what the term “health and human services” means to the average American (now resigned over flying by jet everywhere)… The list goes on. And the more chaos that can be created, the more power can be exerted in the name of keeping us safe. Why do you think Trump rules by Executiive Order?

            Meanwhile, Trump’s appointing conservative judges across the country who will hold their positions until their death. Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, yes, but there are many federal courts acrosss the country. He’s good at misdirection. Pay attention to the flag, not the protest by men on bended knee bringing attention to black men being killed by the police. Pay attention to the tweet streams, not the news that many of Trump’s hgh officials (including family) have been using private servers for official government business.

            He’s a magician and a clown and a puppet and a narcissist all rolled into one. So, yes, it mght very well get more chaotic. But birthing pains are called that for a reason, and I still believe there are more Americans with compassion for their fellow Americans than there are disrupters and haters.

          • Raphael

            I just came across this:
            We need Congress to pass the Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act. Have you heard of it?

            Have you also heard that a journalist and cameraman (from TYT) were arrested by St Louis Police, removed from the site of a protest they were covering, and detained overnight without charges? The Journalists, who had not broken any laws and were standing on a sidewalk, were removed before the police arrested the protesters who were blocking a highway.

            Arrested journalists? Are we living in Turkey?

            Interestingly, here’s some context for the slogan “whose streets, our streets” chanted by the police:
            Last month, St. Louis residents protested in the streets after another white police officer was acquitted in the murder of a black man. Police armed with military-grade weapons abused protesters, while officers repeated the chant used by white supremacists in Charlottesville: “Whose streets? Our streets!”

            Now we clearly know where the police stands…with white supremacists against people of color. Any pretense at decency is rapidly fading away under this execrable presidency, and the hidden ugliness and hatred that had been simmering all along are being revealed for all to see.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            No, I hadn’t seen this one yet. But I can’t say I’m surprised. If you’ll recall the treatment of the journalists during the original Ferguson protests, they were cordoned off in an area that gave them no access to what was actually happening. When a couple of them journeyed outside their little area, they were treated like criminals. Over time, they were viewed by the police as if they were protesters themselves. Some of them crossed that line when it became obvious they weren’t going to be allowed to cover the story.

            Then entered the age of the phone camera. Every protester who had a cell phone was to turn it on and either video or audio record everything that was going on.

            If this is the “usual” protest where the highway was shut down by a human chain of people, I can only imagine the police reation. Growing up in St. Louis, I remember the first time decades ago when closing the highway down was the brainchild of the Rev. Al Sharpton, who always added fueld to the fire. He, of course, chose a morning rush hour when people were trying to get into the city for work. He also chose Highway 70, which leads to the airport, leaving people stranded in the city if they were out-of-towners.

            I was against it then, but that was mostly due to Sharpton’s involvement. He had connections in St. Louis–I can’t remember if he grew up there or what–but he’d long been a thorn in both the city’s behind and in the surrounding areas. He’s a man who can turn anything into an argument about race. That’s not to say some of his arguments weren’t or aren’t valid. It’s just to say that everyone knew he’d blow in like a tornado, stir things up, then leave. He and Clay, the long-time rep for northern St.Louis, have always had rumors about back-room dealings involving money.

            I am so torn about this. I love St. Louis. I love its diversity, I love its architecture, and I love the people of the city, who are rabid baseball fans, hard workers, and even harder drinkers. But they always come through. I just hate that it’s my hometown that’s again in the news over the Black Lives Matter movement. Black lives have always mattered to me and those I knew, but even back when I was growing up, there were stereotypes and profiling and bad feelings between the police and black men. And some of the police were still of a mindset that any black man was willing and able to rape any white woman, given the chance.

            The city’s police have it the hardest, more than the surrounding metro area. They are required to live within the city limits–an attempt to keep neighborhoods safe that didn’t work but hasn’t been lifted. Some became targets of vandalism in their own homes. I can’t imagine how many good cops moved on as the city went downhill, no longer willing to put their family’s lives at risk.

            There have always been controversial white cops and the killing of young black males, at least since I lived there. Usually, they never even reached the stage of disciplinary action, much less a trial. Things do change. People are now watching, and recording everything. I hope every protester who blocked the highway had their cell phones on, as it’s obvious that the news isn’t going to be allowed to have access to protest sites anymore. Which I find not only as appalling as the militarization of the police, but even more alarming. Without the press to hold both sides accountable for their actions, we instead get viral videos from phone cams and (sometimes) ususally much later, video feeds from police cams.

            I guess I’ll keep the city and all its citizens in my heart and prayers, as I have since I left.

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Craig

            I think that spiritual world is a mental attitude…
            Words and thoughts will forever create our realities…

          • Well Craig I’d add to what degree? Because I see 3 constructs to our reality. Our own personal creations, Collective creations in the world. The 3rd is the Cosmic creation of the Universe, planets, stars etc.

          • Craig

            You are right and well high lighted. I trust we view things the same concerning your response.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I can definitely go along with that.

            Note that we can strive to create mental realities that are in line with physical realities – that is, what is truly real about our natural world.

          • Jethro

            Exactly!!

    • I love promoting the concept of “Original Blessing” and “Live in the solution not the problem.”

      • Raphael

        The original blessing idea was started by Matthew Fox, who wrote a book of the same name in the mid 90’s…it’s a self evident idea, but in our Judeo-Christian influenced world it needed to be brought forth.

        • Yes I like Matthew Fox and did a workshop with him in Chicago in the 90’s. His book “Original Blessing” was a disappoint me to me, even while I took this concept and ran with it.

          His perspective did not excite me. As I recall, the book was more pedantic, academic and not as spiritual or metaphysical. I didn’t even finish reading it.

          I did like his book “The coming of the cosmic Christ” Much better.

          • Raphael

            I wasn’t exited with these books either…too rooted in Christian theology for me, this kind of thing doesn’t resonate with me.

          • Ya, I really like that he’s more liberated and poetic. I’ve not read any thing of his for years. But that book title OB really knocked me out! 🙂

    • Spiritual_Annie

      As you would probably guess, I don’t believe that anyone is born “inherently evil.” I used to believe that, but the thoughts about it were placed in my brain by others. When I took a serous look at it, I came to my own understanding. (Of course, what is considered “evil” varies from society to society, so using that particular term begins with a bit of nebulousness.)

      I don’t consider people to be evil at all. I believe that people are capable of acts others would call “evil”. There is a difference, which is choice in perspective. If one were inherently evil, there would be little choice in the matter as evil would be the default whenever a situation arose that required a solution.

      Sometimes what people define as “evil” is someone acting from a place of need (stealing food when starving, for example). Sometimes someone’s acting from a place of mental health conditions (like narcissism, which is the personal form of authoritarianism).

      Does it do any good to label even these acts as “evil”? I don’t believe so. When we do, that judgment can be inernalized by the person who does the “evil” deed. (And, of course, I’m not talking about what’s legal or illegal here.) Do we really want people believing they are evil, by calling their acts evil?

      No, I believe people are born inherently blessed. Blessed with this life. Blessed to be here, now, even at their birth. They are also born as a blessing. They are a blessing to others who become part of their lives. This, too, is a choice in perception. Even when it seems a relationship with another seems to be more of a curse, we can choose to see the blessing in the relationship, and in the person.

      Love and Blessings Always,
      ~Annie

    • Craig

      Raphael
      Long discussion, I missed out the definition of evil… What is deemed good, does not imply the opposite is evil maybe just less desired due to our indoctrinated view of good versus evil.
      I see everything that is natural and done with consent as good.
      Evil is law breaking, refusing to be inferior, denying a request that is acceptable for all parties… So yes evil is very subjective but not a human nature, everything that comes natural cannot be evil, rather a human choice as you have said makes these natural activities evil!

      • Kristen

        I define evil as knowingly causing the suffering of others.

  • Patrick Gannon

    I’d like to move a question back to the top, since we often have little discussion about the questions or issues Neale raises:

    “….., are humans simply two-part beings, comprised of Body and Mind and nothing more? Within that context, if we hold this to be true, what is the best, the most fruitful, the most fulfilling, the most joyful way to live our lives? Is there any reason to behave in a certain way, other than to avoid the punishments or consequences of civil law or the disapprobation of our friends, relatives, and peers?”

    As I interpret this, Neale is asking a hypothetical. If Pat is right and this is all there is, what is the best way to live our lives? Or should we all just kill ourselves and be done with it because life has absolutely no purpose?

    • Spiritual_Annie

      Already answered this in my original post, I do believe.

    • Raphael

      Whether one believes in the spirit world and in a divine source or not should not make any difference to anyone whose heart is centered on love and appreciation, here and now.

      Loving, respecting and celebrating the earth, all life including animal life, all humans has nothing to do with the future (as anticipated by anyone who believe in life after death) and everything to do with here and now.

      Dismissing here and now, we dismiss life and our own being, as in absolute terms there is no life apart from here and now, the past and future being merely thoughts (memories and anticipations), and mostly distorted thoughts.

      This dismissal is the dark side of religion and even of some spiritual schools of thought, as too many among the religious and spiritual focus on life after death and regard physical life (including the earth itself) as a temporary illusion or unimportant in the greater scheme, irrelevant.

      In my view, a spirituality that does not focus on the here and now is a mistake and irrelevant. This focus on the present is where the atheist and the truly spiritual can meet and agree that a deeply loving appreciation for all life, here and now, is the answer to many of our personal human and social problems.

      Only by being present and taking care of here and now can the future be taken care of…and only then can we be assured to be equally present at a future date.

      • Spiritual_Annie

        You have such an incredible way of making simple that which is not. Puts me in mind of a friend who used to frequent here, mewabe. It’s almost as if you’re channeling him. 🙂

        I agree with all that you have said. In my instance, my Spirituality includes life after we pass through death’s door, but that’s not where my focus is. Actually, I think the only time it ever was, was when I was suicidal, thinking that “anything is better than this.” But then I healed and found the gifts and blessings in what I had only previously seen as a hopeless attempt to prove my father (and others who followed) wrong–that I am not inherently evil and deserve to be loved.

        But it’s not the hereafter where my focus lies. The farthest I look to the future anymore is when I’m making sure Biscuit and I have what we need for the month. Once I’m sure, I go back to being here, now. Those of us who believe that this life serves a purpose sometimes have to look just a bit into the future (When is that project due? Isn’t what’s-her-name’s birthday coming up?). I’m most joyous, though, when I am being me, here, now–whether with friends, alone, at home, our out and about.

        I think my connection with nature started very young as one of my hiding places was under the low hanging branches of an old evergreen in our yard. I could sit for hours on a rock that I managed to move inside as a seat (had to keep my clothes clean or Mama threw a fit) just watching the insects, or pulling apart a piece of moss to better understand it, or just being. Unfortunately, I miss that here. I’ve not yet finished the long process where I can get a bus pass at the monthly disabled rate, but probably the first place I will go is to the beach, just to watch the waves and investigate for any interesting looking shells. (Christie took me once, but it was before I had glasses or was prepared for the heat of the sand.)

        I first began meditating as a teen when TM was a “new” (actually, recycled) idea. I’ve stopped intermittently, and those are the times when my life feels more chaotic. But when I take the time to go deeply inside, when I make a connection with what I call my Soul, or even Divinity itself when I go very deep, the rest of my life seemingly just flows. For me, that is the purest form of being totally here, now, in the moment of infinity.

        The only addition I would make to what you’ve shared is that those people who carry woundedness inside do need to focus, at times, on the past in order to heal that which feels wounded. Without resolving those pains and their effects, one moves forward always carrying that woundedness, even when one isn’t focused on it directly. It’s that direct focus on the past and coming to a new understanding about it that is the essence of healing.

        I have no expectations of a Heaven (other than the one that exists here, now) or a Hell (except the one we experience when our wounds are not yet healed), although I know life continues after death because of personal experiences which have shown me that it is true. I think that, in and of itself, helps me keep my focus here, now, because I’m not looking for a reward or punishment on the other side–just a larger understanding. That can either wait, or I can find it in those moments when I go very deeply inside.

        Thank you for putting things so succintly and simply.

        Love and Blessings Always,
        ~Annie

        • Kristen

          Hi Annie,
          Can I just clarify something….you live in Florida (I think you know that)…do you mean that you’ve only ever been to the beach once?
          I read years ago that many Americans have never been to the ocean because its so huge and they live inland, were you like that until you moved to Florida? Its a Kiwi right of passage to learn that running dance down the beach to the water without burning your feet, and body surfing from probably age 6 (free swimming lessons are compulsary in all schools from age 5, we need them on an island where rips are rife).
          Just curious, you know how I need to follow peoples stories!
          Yip that guy Raphael is sounding a bit like Professor Mewabe, his death was so suspicious…somethings definately up there.
          Take care,
          K

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Ummm… yeah. But remember, it was within the first two weeks that I got here a couple years ago that Christie and I were made homeless, so we had other things to think about. I kept asking what the point was because I can only see clearly about 3″ in front of my nose.

            We did go once shortly after we moved in here, me still without glasses. Had my first taste of alligator tail after, too, while I was cursing her out for not having warned me about the hot “sand,” which is actually crushed shells. (I hadn’t been on a beach since I was a kid, back when I used to run around everywhere without shoes and could walk across asphalt streets barefoot. My Grandmother had a cottage on Lake Eerie. Went every summer until I was 10. Loved bodysurfing!) Christie thought it was funny ’til she realized the bottom of my feet were actually burned beyond just a little and I couldn’t walk well for about a week. As I understand it, it’s part of the hazing that “transplants” go through after moving here.

            I haven’t made it back since getting my glasses about a year ago because I don’t do well with crowded buses, and there’s only one dog beach nearby, which Christie said she’d never take Biscuit back to because it wasn’t safe. Jeff was going to go with me, but then Jeff was going to do a lot of things….

            Poor mewabe, I do miss him at times. That was a mysterious death, was it not? Do you think it may have been Colonel Mustard in the Dining Room with the wrench?

            Love and Blessings Always,
            ~Annie

          • Kristen

            Ahhh, yip I have to sand my feet with one of those battery operated gadgets on TV so they arent solid callouses from heat. I hate ugly feet especially cracked heels, butt ugly!
            All beaches in NZ generally have liquor bans year round and in Summer, or late Oct to late March are closed to dogs between 10am and 6pm I think.

            Nope re Professor Mewabe…I think it was that new guy Raphael, in the art studio with the redneck neighbours gun. Remember when Raphael first appeared he was painting the studio, has been landscaping and rednecks moved in next door. He also said smoke from wildfires was everywhere so he couldnt see across the lake….which means no one could see him either. I think he either buried him under the landscaping or has him taxidermied in the name of art. Probably in a shop right now disguised as one of those life sized native Americans or cowboys, perhaps even in a suit of armour.
            Take care,
            K

        • Raphael

          Thank you Annie…no it’s Mewabe, the scoundrel, who was channeling me. We traded places, his ghost is now haunting the attic.
          I agree with you…and so does Mewabe, if those grunts I hear from the attic mean anything.

      • Patrick Gannon

        I agree with most of that, and thank you for your comments. Obviously, since I understand that consciousness arises from the brain, I don’t buy into any divine presence or power or other woo. Life is not an essence; it’s a process. I’m certainly not disputing the benefits of meditation, as I do it regularly. The idea is to clear the brain of clutter so that new connections can be made, which might lead to better insights. That loss of self, or oneness, that we get when we meditate (sometimes), is simply the feeling or experience of having tamped back certain areas of brain activity. Daniel Dennett describes consciousness as a never ending flow of drafts, giving the brain quick access to an array of possible actions, and in meditating, you slow down or stop that flow of drafts.

        The only other thing I’d comment on is the idea of nature as being timeless. I know by “nature” you aren’t referring to our “natural world” or universe, but to the wilds, the forests, the rivers, the prairies, etc. Yes, being in that sort of nature can feel timeless, but of course it’s a never-ending cycle of life, a process that is always creating change.

        Aside from these details, I agree that we should live as though this natural world is all we get, because the odds of it being otherwise are infinitesimally small.

    • Craig

      If Pat is he wins, if NDW is right he wins.
      If both are wrong nobody wins. No need to win as this is not a contest. People share ideas and concepts, some find comfort in these others as Pat and Craig seek something more observable. It does not make anyone’s life worthless to just surrender all views shape someone’s life somewhere. I trust for the good.
      Marco commented today if it does not resonate move on. You remarkably declined.
      We remain flesh and blood with some unused electrons between the ears that create a grey sluggish substance which if sparked enough forms five unique lobes and three unique cortex’s.
      The cortex’s somehow playing a major role in thoughts, bodily control and focussed or reflexed action… This Patrick is basic science. Ancient individuals did not know this as a lot of us today are still discovering. But they had clear understanding of 5 ways to get people to change. The used terms Father, Son, Holy Ghost as the three dominant attributes that get people moving the cortex’s. They also used the 5 attributes of apostle, shepherd, prophet, evangelist and teacher to get people into action. Notice similarities. Well that was the creation of man unto the image and likeness of God, evolution, mystical realities etc.
      Nothing mystical about the bible, it is early developing science demonstrating the evolution of mankind into a worthy soul… They that make a difference in others lives. You are also such a soul so why… To evolve into a caring and supportive animal which we originally were. Evolution physical or mentally has not brought peace and harmony it shattered it even more…
      The wake up call is to acknowledge what was done wrong in the past so that we can prevent it from happening again. Do you want everyone to take their lives because they have no purpose or do you want people to embrace their lives to discover and reveal their purpose.
      That is what I read in answers concerning the questions asked and as you said maybe ignored because what is what we are good at doing… Ignoring so that we do not need to see exposed so that we do not need to change…
      Your questions are valid and worth discussing let’s just work on common grounds. Soul lifestyle. Life evolved form of revealing thoughts, desires and ideas. God the reality of the human brain. More than this well we will not really know unless we embrace our completeness and live it out without harming ourselves others and the things we need to survive…

      • Patrick Gannon

        Not sure what you are getting at. Neale’s original question, as I understand it, is: if science is right (and there’s no evidence that it is wrong), and this is all we get, then what is the best way to live our lives? It’s a good question, because this is all we get, so we should consider that question in some detail.

        You seem to suggest we need to have Fathers, sons and holy ghosts, prophets and apostles and evangelists in order to lead a joyful life, and I reject that out of hand. The history is clear about what happened when those people had control of mankind’s knowledge base. They used it to enrich themselves, and they still do. They used it to impose their beliefs on others, and killed millions in the process. They were so morally bankrupt they wrote stories glorifying genocide.

        “Nothing mystical about the bible, it is early developing science demonstrating the evolution of mankind into a worthy soul…”

        Precious little science involved in that! When were these imaginary souls unworthy? The story says the souls were created as gods, (presumably worthy) but they fell from grace, thanks to a talking snake, and became unworthy; thus providing a mechanism for religions to sell us back our “worthiness” in exchange for turning control of our brains over to them. No thanks.

        The bit about taking our own lives if we recognize that there is no afterlife was rhetorical. However for those who decide their lives have no purpose, and who are tired of putting up with all the crap that life often entails – I say more power to them. If you want to bail out, bail out. There is no penalty, because there is nothing beyond this. Our minds can’t exist without a brain (or maybe a computer in the future).

        I may not understand your point, as I struggle with your writing style at times, but it seems to me you are saying if we want to live joyful lives we should go back in time well over 2000 years when primitive barbarism ruled. I’ll pass. I like indoor plumbing.

        • Craig

          Paradigm is keeping us blind…
          Thoughts, processed into actions provide comforts… Father son holy ghost…
          Messengers that have witnessed, motivators that keep focussed, advisors that provide guidance, teachers that provide knowledge and coaches that help us practise that is what brings about change.
          You see when there is a good worthy talented individual that makes a different others have processes to create that in you…
          That is religion in action. Nothing mystical a supporting positive attitude towards life and all living beings.
          I am not debunking God I am debunking the fallacy of something beyond our comprehension. We just need to read the message not the in accurate records of folklore used to remind others of the message…
          Science is processes of establishing truth… Or is this incorrect.
          Paradigms keep us seeking the unexplainable when in fact simplicity clarifies logic.
          Jethro’s comment on soul is one reality of how things remain in line with basic humanistic insight.

        • Craig

          Change of paradigm is needed.
          Truth will set us free. The question which truth sets free in what…

          • Patrick Gannon

            That strikes me as a “Jethro” response. Which truth? There is only one truth when it comes to the natural world we live in. That truth, unfortunately for those who prefer it were otherwise, is that this is all we get. There’s no evidence to suggest otherwise.

            I imagine you will go along with Jethro and insist that if something is believed to be true for an individual, that makes it true for them, and I suppose to some extent that’s “true.” However it isn’t the “truth” if the belief is wrong. If the belief is wrong, and has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt to be so, then isn’t the person simply lying to themselves? And lying is not truth.

          • Craig

            I accept that what someone else saw and experience is their reality, and only their later experience can change their perceived reality. The same as further studies on theories confirm or disprove it.
            Is truth the message or the reality leading to the message.
            Beliefs are often formed on half truths or misunderstood truths. It does not make the conviction a lie.
            It requires further assessment of the perceived reality or truth. And if it was only a once off experience not I or you can say it is false, it was not our experience. The individual must experience the perceived reality as false before his or her conviction will change.
            It seems as if you accept that only what others witness and can confirm is reality…
            Many realities in life are still unconfirmed and yet the theories keep people accepting them as truths…
            Love is a fallacy.
            Death is a life event.
            Intelligent or wise people have high sexual desires.

            Which is the truth no one knows until they experience it for themselves.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “Beliefs are often formed on half truths or misunderstood truths. It does not make the conviction a lie.”

            I know, that’s a harsh word, but our brains know what they know and what they don’t know. Our brains know that we have no evidence for gods and afterlives. If we go and tell ourselves that we believe in gods and afterlives, aren’t we lying to our brains, which means we’re lying to ourselves?

            I’ve said this many times in this forum, so others will be tired of hearing it, but I don’t think this lying to our brains is good for us. I think, that it is responsible for the cognitive dissonance that brings us so much angst and anxiety, which leads to all the anger, hate and bad behavior, as this conflict is manifested into our day to day lives.

            I think we have to face the truth, stop lying to ourselves, and let the chips fall where they may. I’m not convinced that this will lead to a world full of disillusioned people wondering around like zombies because their life has no purpose. We will still give our lives purpose. And if it’s too painful for some people – let them go if they want to go. Improve the genome.

            “And if it was only a once off experience not I or you can say it is false, it was not our experience.”

            Sure we can. If someone tells me they rode across the Grand Canyon on a flying unicorn, I can certainly call that experience false.

            “It seems as if you accept that only what others witness and can confirm is reality…”

            Others, or myself, using objective evidence. Why would anyone want to do anything different? If I can’t confirm that something is reality, why on earth should I believe it? Why should I lie to my brain which knows it doesn’t have the evidence to confirm this “reality.” Why would I want to make myself ill?

            “Which is the truth no one knows until they experience it for themselves.”

            Nonsense. I have never seen the far planets in our solar system, yet I know they are there. I have never seen an electron, but I know they flow through my body. I have never seen a species adapt to its environment in evolutionary time – all these things are real and true. I need not be a specialist in every single field of study in order to experience it in person in order to know something is true. What I do need to do is exercise open minded skepticism.

            Love is real. It’s an emotion, produced and fed by electrochemical reactions in the brain. “Love” is the name we give to the circumstances that create that particular physical reaction.

            Death is a life event…. well, what does that mean to you. A final death is a life event to me. I’m born, I live, I die. If you mean a life event, on the way to future events, there is of course no evidence for that, and it would violate the laws of physics if our minds were to go anywhere after we die.

            “Intelligent or wise people have high sexual desires.”
            An obvious truism! Actually I have no idea if there’s any truth to that. What I know is that intelligent and wise people are reproducing at lower rates than the less wise and less intelligent among us, and this gives us evolutionary issues to be concerned about.

          • Craig

            Sound factual response as usual, thank you Pat.
            I tried to provide alternative possibilities which I perceive to be true. I actually finished reading CwG 3 and found the thoughts very reflective of many I have had myself since I started questioning my convictions. Then I read the part on the claim God inspired and help write science fiction series and film scripts. At first this was a laugh and my response was someone must be an idiot to believe that is true. Then after some comments I later made on this forum about God being a word I had to accept if that idea could be true then Neale’s comments could also be…
            You see Patrick reflective discussions helped me clear the mind of truths and perceptions of which those contributing on this forum all contributed. Maybe that could be the approach to follow on a dialogue concerning woo.
            A fact is also that today’s truths may be disproven tomorrow.
            As for lies. Satan those sellf justified thoughts on mans views is historically referred to as the father of lies….

          • Jethro

            The more you talk to Craig, the more you will say that he sounds like me. I spotted that one in the beginning. I’m a little surprised your just now catching it. Sink or swim… different lifeguards… I think I mentioned that earlier. Philosophies are pretty much the same. He’s working on it. Give it time.

            Whoops! Sounds like me in his next post too.

          • Craig

            Hell no I have much research to still do before I can speak at your level. I am just too lazy to read so I jump from forum to forum catching up on ideas that sound logic as nature is nature and we cannot change that, we can use of subdue it, or is it toil the earth…
            As for prof Pat I am still amazed at his knowledge level. Either he has lived a few lifetimes or he really knows how to use the technological tools that I am just getting accustomed to. Damn it takes me hours to even stay up to date on this blog…

          • Jethro

            Well, Hell yes! You do speak at my level, and at the level of anyone here. You speak at the level of being human. You speak at the level of sharing your experiences. You speak at the level of a life lived that has life still yet to live.

            Neale Donald Walsch speaks at a level of his experiences, and has had the ability to organize those experiences in several books which I enjoyed a great deal. His books are very focused and represent a man of great thought, with great ideals. I found in him through personal experience and communication with him, a man who is very human. He speaks at a human level yet with great insight to his experiences.

            Pat speaks at a level of his experiences. He has turned to proven fact in self learned physics, as a belief in God let him down years ago. He is sharing his experience with a God that let him down because he could not find the truth in God or the truth in the claims about God on any level, but his experiences are with an Abrahamic version of God. He is letting people know how he believes and is challenging anyone to prove God. He is insulted by the term “believe”, so scratch that. Pat “thinks with a high degree of probability”. It is not proper to state that he “knows” either. He speaks at a human level yet with great insight to his experiences.

            It would take me a great deal of time to give my personal description of each person communicating here, so I will state that I have a great deal of respect for any person who can come to this space and be human and share their experiences of being human. I am thankful that Neale had the desire to create this site that has been so beneficial to each one of us as it creates even more experiences that produces thoughts about something everyone is thinking about but in my experience is not willing to discuss face to face without anger, anger that is easier to deal with in written words.

            About me? Jethro, speaks at a level of his experiences, at a human level. A level of questioning, a level of self truth, A level of knowing and not knowing. A level of acceptance for others who believe what they believe because it works for them and that’s ok. Like you, I lost faith in an Abrahamic God due to conflicts in things stated and the lives lived by those stating it, the words of the book do not make sense and speak in riddles, metaphors and analogies that can be twisted into almost any truth. I have found truth in psychology as it is a study in thought which I have to this point found to be the origin of God and everything that conducts how we live either personally or through the interactions with others. I’m wondering “why” people believe what they believe and I remain in a state of learning. It baffles me that so many claim to be in a state of knowing… knowing something that cannot be known.

            What do you think you need to know, and what level do you wish to achieve, to know you’re at a human level and sharing human experiences? Not one of us are more or less than the other. Just keep reading and sharing your thoughts. You will learn more about yourself than you will someone else. That is the purpose of being here isn’t it? Your self?

          • Craig

            Thank you for the kind words…
            I want to live in the moment communicate in the moment and bring changes to the moment… Any suggestions as I keep repeating the same mistakes therefore I do jot pass the moment…

          • Jethro

            Right back at you…

          • Jethro

            Repeating the same mistakes? Such as what?

          • Craig

            Becoming angry and intolerant because people keep claiming the know what to do then keep doing nothing…

          • Jethro

            Sounds like your saying you have the same reaction to the same action over and over. How could you benefit from changing yourself if those who are making claims won’t change anything?

          • Craig

            If I change the way I react others reactions could change… Wishful thinking or purpose of being…

          • Jethro

            Other reactions “will” change. Wishful thinking is only thinking not in action. Experiment with the possibilities and see if the results are satisfying. I’d like to know what you find out.

          • Craig

            Found out that honest denial and frankness towards misunderstandings kind of open the door to a better dialogue.

          • Jethro

            honest denial?

          • Craig

            Ye, this language barrier, different understanding and use of words may be the reason why I struggle to get the message across. 😕 I meant not accepting to tolerate the issue and state why, seems to clear things quickly…

  • Short Las Vegas commentary on current mass shooting.

    As we evolve these extremes will be unnecessary & unneeded. For now, one way to look at this is that without these extremes we don’t wake uP. Extremes are like people who suppress anger, when we don’t deal with certain problems, they loom back or grow much larger & explode to get our attention!

    We eventually out grow violence, pain & suffering. Work & play toward that. For now, also have great love & compassion on our sleepy unconscious ways. We are in transition to a new way of life. The mind can’t make much sense of it, but the soul can. Transitions can be painful, but they can teach us powerful lessons we can grow from if we allow it to. If we don’t, the extremes will continue until we wake up.

    Have love & compassion on our less than enlightened ways. We are children who have not grown up. Having compassion & love toward our less than beneficial ways, is a start toward being & living a more enlightened life.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Perfect – except that one line: “The mind can’t make much sense of it, but the soul can.”

      Who cares about that soul? If it exists, we aren’t going with it… That which we refer to as “we” or “me” is the mind, and that comes from the brain which is part of the body, which will return to carbon when we die. The soul, if it exists, has no way to communicate with the mind, since that requires adherence to the laws of physics.

      Sorry – nice post actually. I really do like you spiritual folks when you are exercising compassion towards individuals and our (or other) species; but I don’t see why you can’t make your points without woo. Would leaving out an imaginary soul make your words any less powerful or change their meaning? What this says to me, is say that “we” aren’t strong enough. Our minds will never be able to figure this out. We humans are broken and fallen, just like the Abrahamic religions tell us, but it’s OK. There’s this magical thing that will eventually make it alright if only we believe in it. We don’t have to figure it out; the magical thing is looking out for us, and will lead us to the answer… But there is no magical thing… Our minds have to figure this out, or it ain’t gonna happen any time soon.

      Keep in mind that “out grow” refers to rather long evolutionary periods, and some patience will be required. Centuries, probably. We may never completely outgrow our basic nature, unless we are able to remove or reconstruct that part of our DNA manually, rather than waiting for evolutionary time scales to do the job; and it could turn out that those animalistic traits are what survives in the long run. Evolution, like the universe, simply doesn’t care. We may decide that thinking is counterproductive… a lot of people seem to be on that evolutionary path.

      • Well thanks Pat. I would however, point out that this is a spiritual blog created by NDW. So it has a lot of metaphysical stuff with it along with what you see as some practical applications.

        I doubt none of us here will convince you of a soul, or, a part of us that extends beyond the physical senses. So I can’t help you there anymore than what I’ve said in some of our rather long discourses in the past months. It’ would all be repetition of what I’ve said earlier.

        You certainly can continue criticizing the non physical stuff you call woo. However, you don’t have to with me. As I see it, we’ve have come to an impasse as far as that’s concern.

        Like NDW says of any and all of this CwG stuff. Take what resonates with you and if something doesn’t, don’t use it. You seem to like a part of it and skip the metaphysics. That seems to work fine for you.

        As for the endless criticizing of the metaphysical aspects, others here seem happy to continue that part with you, and I’ll let them continue. But as for me, I said all I can to you on the subject. But I think you already know that. Peace.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Thank you for your “permission” to continue to question New Age religious woo. I understand that you already know my position, as do most people, here, nevertheless for those who may read these blogs but not participate, I figure it can’t hurt to continue to make the point, given that you and others continue to insist on woo. It’s a “global conversation!” As Neale has made abundantly clear – it’s all about repetition.

          What I’m more interested in, is why you felt you had to include the woo in order to make your points, which from my perspective, were certainly valid enough without that superfluous addition.

          • Raphael

            I find it interesting Patrick that you agree with Neale on repetition. That’s one of the things on which I disagree with him. Repetition is also a part of brain washing experiments. It is, to some degree, a form of abuse, or at the very least seems to be indicative of presumption (“I am right and everyone else is wrong, I found the way and everyone else is lost…and deaf and dumb. I will therefore keep repeating my mantra until everyone sees the light”).

            It is one thing to offer and idea, and quite another to keep repeating things over and over until the listener, out of boredom or exhaustion, yells in capitulation “no more, I surrender, whatever you want but please shut up!”

            I understand that Neale has good intentions…why else would he keep putting so much efforts in this at his age when he could just sit back and listen to the crickets? I am not sure what your intentions are, as you are constantly on the attack mode, and intensely driven to attempt not to have a conversation but to knock down anyone’s idea that doesn’t fit your opinions, and to prove them wrong. You are on the war path…are you as intense on Christian, Hindu and Muslim websites? If so you must be a busy man.

            Repetition is often not a response to another person’s deafness but a symptom of our own, when we don’t hear ourselves and how unbearable we have become.

          • Patrick Gannon

            For some reason I am unable to directly respond to your “unbearable” comment, Raphael. Repetition is a valuable learning tool. It’s how we learn just about everything.

            I get that you disapprove of my participation in what was previously a Kumbaya site, and one that is now a forum for discussing much more in-depth and difficult issue, and I’d point out that people continue to engage me, while some others who apparently did make themselves “unbearable” are not responded to. At times, I find your knee-jerk liberal responses to be rather “unbearable,” so I guess we’ll both have to deal with that as best we can.

      • Craig

        Patrick…
        Soul, love it, its unreal. So you will not waste the love.
        Hate it, its mystic and you are accepting an unwanted burden to prove a point.
        If the soul does not impact you, use it as I do as a reference to a way of living, that which you also support. It makes your burden lighter…
        Remember the Hebrews and first century believers also did not believe in a soul, you die your body goes and rests with the others, and the work you done soon follows suite and is forgotten… Unless someone eons later reads about it and is amazed by the wisdom revealed. And the life cycle of evolutionary conditioning continues…

        • Patrick Gannon

          How do you love or hate something that doesn’t exist? I don’t love or hate souls, any more than I love or hate unicorns or fairies.

          Even though the concept of Sheol is still mystical and includes the idea that somehow there is still some part of the original human who might one day be brought back to life in order to be judged, it is, admittedly, a much better concept than that of the Christian heaven.

          Most Christians don’t understand that nobody went to Hell until after Jesus came. I’ve never been able to figure out how that was the “good news.”

          • Craig

            Love hate manner of referenced speech. What we feed our minds we start doing, if this creates positive results we perceive it to be the correct thing to do… That is were woo begins.
            We just need to reflect to understand it is in the doing with the correct attitude that results are achieved…
            The good news paradigm is a mystical empowered individual. Not to save us 2000 years later but to change the incorrect conviction that repetition of words create faith. Faith is only created through actions…. Success breeds success is a more modern view.
            Yeshua result driven deeds brings about changes.
            Paradigms create followers…
            Even the paradigm that no woo exists… I wasn’t there I cannot confirm nor deny but I can share my understanding as I have just done.

          • Patrick Gannon

            So what if we feed out minds with truth for a change? What if we start facing the very difficult truth that this is all we get, instead of hiding from it or denying it? How can there be and progress without truth? The rise of mankind goes hand in hand with the discoveries of truth, that the enlightened have given us with their proven processes. Why hang on to all this mystical mumbo jumbo? What benefit do you expect it to provide, other than to continue hiding from that which we know today?

            I don’t want to be a “mystical empowered individual.” I want to be an enlightened, rational, knowledge-empowered individual, and I struggle to understand why so many people are opposed to this. The only explanation that makes sense to me is fear.

          • Craig

            Well stated a truly worth considering these questions with Neale’s 21…

    • Spiritual_Annie

      I’m a firm believer in the power of unconditional love and compassion for everyone. However, there’s also a time and place for action.

      The facts are still being investigated as to the shooter’s motivation. Some facts are known.

      The shooter had multiple semi-automatic rifles, purchased legally, which were modified with kits, also legal to purchase and regularly available at gun shows, that turned them into automatic weapons.

      A semi-automatic or automatic weapon has no use in hunting or self-protection. They’re meant to fire bullets in rapid succession to kill or maim as many people as possible, such as by a soldier in war. There’s no reasonable explanation as to why our society allows these guns to be purchased by civilians, except for the gun lobbyists who make large contributions to our legislators.

      We have the power to change those laws, either through a grass-roots movement that applies more pressure than the lobbyists, or by voting those legislators out of office.

      This, in my opinion, is a way to put my Spirituality into action. I believe that all life is sacred. In order to reduce the loss of life due to mass shootings, it’s a reasonable step to ban the sale of semi-automatic and automatic weapons to civilians. It’s a reasonable step to ban the sale of the kits that modify semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons. My legislators have already heard from me about my willingness to vote them out of office if they are unwilling to ban these items by law. They will continue to hear from me on a regular basis, not just in the aftermath of the latest domestic terrorist attack.

      I meditate, and I visualize for peace everywhere, regularly. Sometimes I need to take other actions, as well.

      Love and Blessings Always,
      ~Annie

      • Of course, our visualizations, prayers and meditations also inspire us to whatever action we take. I would add that visualizations, prayers, and meditations are powerful actions in themselves.

        I have little doubt that some regulations of modified rifles will be changed quite quickly as a result of this tragedy.

        People have fought tooth and nail to get gun laws changed and have lost, but that does not mean they won’t eventually change, it simply takes longer or a tragedy. And sometimes a tragedy doesn’t spur enough change so another one is created until the change a majority of the collective desire surpasses the power and money of the governing elite.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Not sure that this is the place to debate gun control, but you’ve got a genie you won’t put back in a bottle without a police state that would be worse than the cure. There are millions of semi-automatic weapons out there. I agree that the bump-stocks need to be regulated more or less out of existence before they become too widely dispersed. I never heard of one until this shooting, so I don’t think many people have them, though I’m sure that “good Christians” are currently ordering them up as quickly as they can, before they are banned.

        “…it’s a reasonable step to ban the sale of semi-automatic and automatic weapons to civilians.”

        Sorry, but no, that is not reasonable. Banning the sale of semi-autos is not feasible, and full-auto has been illegal for a long time (1986) – aside from a handful of people who can get a license if they are willing to go through a bureaucratic nightmare to get a permit – which means we know who has them. Nobody knows who has semi-autos, and there are millions of them out there. Most weapons are semi-auto today, including hunting rifles.

        • Spiritual_Annie

          Why would one need a semi-automatic rifle for hunting? Because one has bad aim? Because one wants to dig out all those bullets and eat the holey meat? Seriously, why would any serious hunter want to use a semi-automatic rifle?

          Your argument fails. Just because the sales of semi-automatic weapons aren’t currently banned, that doesn’t mean all future sales cannot be banned. We can at least stop adding to the number of semi-automatic weapons sales in this country. It’s not an either/or situation. It could also be a phasing in process, where the types of weapons used in mass shootings are banned first, before we even begin to argue about the rest of them.

          • Patrick Gannon

            You’ve obviously never been a hunter. There are all sorts of things in the woods that can deflect a bullet. Being able to fire a follow-up shot to take the animal down humanely is a big advantage of a semi-auto.

            Speaking for myself, I was primarily a bow hunter – which is definitely a single shot deal, and when I hunted with a weapon I used black powder which is also single shot. However I’m hunting in thick Virginia brush. If I was hunting in wide open plains, or had long distance shots, I’d want to be able to make a follow up shot quickly.

            And of course a semi-auto pistol has obvious advantages in a self defense situation.

            Hey, I don’t care. I don’t hunt anymore; but I know people who do, and in many parts of the country, candidates who try to restrict their gun rights will not be elected, and that’s pretty much all there is to it. Even democrats in rural Virginia will not curtail gun rights if they want to get elected or stay in office. Democracy still works whether we like it or not.

            I would ban the large clips, these adapters that turn them into fully auto, and open carry in most places. If you are in FL, the first state in the country to pass concealed weapon permits back in the days of the Cocaine Cowboys (that’s when I got my training and permit), then you have people around you all the time who are armed, and most of them would probably come to your defense if the need. arose.

          • Raphael

            There are 13.7 million hunters in the United States over age 16 — 12.7 million of whom use rifles, shotguns or handguns for hunting, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

            More than a third of Americans say they or someone in their household owns a gun. There are by various estimates anywhere from 270 million to 310 million guns in the United States — close to one firearm for every man, woman and child.

            If hunting was the purpose of owning a gun, that would mean that 13.7 million hunters own over 20 guns each…which, apart for some exceptions, I doubt.

            So bringing up the idea that semi automatic weapons should be allowed and are necessary because hunters need to hunt “humanly” is unrealistic and a false argument used by the NRA and others extremists, given the small number of hunters.

            Most people do not buy guns to hunt. They buy gun because they are paranoid (afraid of their own shadow or of other shadows) or possibly because they think that it is a missing part of their male anatomy and that they feel more “manly” with one.

            The “gun culture” is part of a pathological popular culture which glorifies violence and brutality and scoffs at anything that is not violent or brutal or using force to dominate and subdue everything in sight. The popularity of guns here is merely the symptom of a very sick and ignorant culture that deifies brute force. Without a change of culture, knuckles draggers will indeed never give up their cherished guns.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I was addressing Annie’s question about why hunters often prefer a semi-automatic. As an advocate of native Americans, I think you would agree that their creed would call for killing an animal as quickly and humanely as possible, and if they’d had access to them, they would have used them.

            As for the rest – sure, it’s self-protection, or protection of family. I prefer a single-shot for hunting, for the challenge of it, but a semi for protection. I wasn’t paranoid – I was realistic. It’s a bad old world out there. I only pulled mine once, but it did the trick.

            I think there’s something to the idea of substituting guns for testicles when it comes to these numbnuts parading around in public with open display of significant weaponry, but most people quietly carry concealed without such ostentatious displays, and these are only a handful of idiot people, who inadvertently turn public opinion against guns.

            As for the rest – that certainly doesn’t apply to me or any of the many gun owners I know. None of them would agree with your “pathological popular culture glorifying violence and brutality, blah, blah, blah. You pick a few rejects from society and set them up as though they represent all of us…

            So, aside from a police state, how do you propose getting the knuckle draggers, of which I guess I am a member, given your description, to give up our guns? I don’t think buybacks will do it, but I’m open to your ideas. I will keep one, no matter what, for the day I need it for myself, should that day ever arrive.

          • Jethro

            Everything you have stated here (about guns) is very much the truth. Though I will state People in the heartland don’t have much appreciation for the status chasing California types either. There are more people here in touch with the needs of nature and the cycles of nature than most Californians who tend to just jump on band wagons to keep appearances up. That is, being vegan is a fad and Californians love fads. I grew up in California and I am witness to the number of people in California who own guns for the soul purpose of defense or ill intent. In some neighborhoods I worked in California, there was more than one occasion in which I “hit the dirt” due to bullets flying overhead. I have yet to feel the need to dodge a bullet here. People in the heartland quit setting on there front porches plucking a banjo a few years ago. Approximately 3 years after Californians did. People in the heartland aren’t half as angry about life as most Californians either. Without a change of culture, the “California” knuckle draggers will never give up their cherished guns either.

            A gun is only dangerous when in the hands of dangerous people. In the hands of a hunter, it’s a means of retrieving meat which is a crime only to vegetarians. A fully automatic gun has no purpose on earth. More than three bullets in a gun is too many and more than one is only required for a person who made a miscalculation in the first shot, the second shot or third shot is humane only given the circumstances. Put a steering wheel in the hands of a nut job and they run those cars into crowds of people which has happened on several occasions here lately, but I haven’t heard anyone screaming for Car control. Slower, smaller, softer, cars that won’t hurt anyone. Cars are screwing up the air we breath and causing respiratory problems around the world. Oils and fuels are screwing up the water and destroying the land. Still, like a gun, a car is just a chunk of metal that becomes dangerous because a human made it so. Remove all the weapons in the world and humans will kill humans with their hands. Remove a humans need to kill and all weapons become “Not weapons”.

            For the record, I don’t have a need for guns, I hunt with a bow and arrow. Equally deadly for the purpose, in the hands of a responsible person.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            I’ve not been a hunter, no. But I’ve been around plenty, and I’ve helped dress deers and clean rifles (yes, I was that trusted). When the men hunted, I camped at the site. Those hunters carried no semi-automatic rifles as they saw no need.

            They also followed strict rules. The ammo was taken out of all rifles and all rifles locked up before any alcohol came out. Some were bow hunters, like my brother. (A purist, he never even used a crossbow.) He and I had this discussion a very long time ago. His point was that if you weren’t a good enouogh shot–by bow or rifle–to take the animal down, then you shouldn’t be taking the shot. If it’s down but not dead, you slit it’s throat. (They’re bled out anyway, if they’re for food.) If you’re so bad a shot that the animal walks away injured, it deserves a second chance.

            These hunters lived by what they called a “code.” Semi-automatics were for those who didn’t even belong in the forest, hunting.

            I had the opportunity to learn to use a gun in self-defense, and I declined. I’ve been around handguns, but not like rifles. I saw rifles used as a tool to provide food. Handguns are used only to kill, maim or threaten humans. I could not personally take another’s life, even if it meant saving my own, and I say that as someone who’s had a handgun held to my head.

          • Jethro

            Follow up shops can be very humane. more than 3 rounds is useless and most capacities are 5. 30 rounds is just testosterone and a small penis conflict.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Is that why my ex had so many long-barrell rifles? I did notice how he handled them with such tenderness… LOL!

          • Jethro

            Yes lol. As a hunter, there is only need for three different guns depending on the animal being hunted. Large caliber, small caliber, and a shot gun. Like any tool they must be cared for but fondling them is a bit weird. Watch out for anyone who does that, there’s a problem.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Well, that advice is about 25 years too late! ROFL… and the least of his problems. He wasn’t legally allowed to own any gun other than a black powder rifle. I won’t say how many he showed me or told me about, but it was in the double digits. He liked revolvers and shotguns, but when he put together a black powder rifle from a kit, there was definitely a problem.

            My alcoholic redneck neighbor with the pit bull that’s not quite all there has already told me more than once that if he ever hears Biscuit or me (in that order, LOL) seriously alarmed, he and his Magnum and his pit bull will be through the front door in seconds and he’ll pay for the damage later. He legally owns it, has a carry permit because he puts it in the glove box while traveling, and he has said I’m surrounded by guns. But, then, I was surrounded by them in St. Louis, too, when I was in public housing. Two entirely different reasons for people to have guns. Unnerving in both situations. I trusted the hunters I went camping with, though.

            A drill is still on my wishlist, but I know a couple of people I can ask about a 3/8″ drill bit for the window shaker. They like to feel useful. One will probably turn it into something lewd, but that’s just his way.

          • Kristen

            All tenderness is penile replacement isnt it? Perhaps swapping guns for those creepy Japanese robot dolls may solve the gun problem, as well as spouse abuse when theyre trained as a slave.
            Boy…you sure know how to pick your men! LOL

          • Kristen

            I find follow up shops humane as well. In a country where only hunters, farmers and presumably drug dealers have guns (our police are unarmed as well), I always feel so much better if I pop into a few follow up shops after the real shopping session.
            Maybe you’re onto something there, or was that done years ago with the amnesty swapping guns for Toys R Us vouchers? (BTW their Sea Monkeys were duds, mine were never trainable and my x ray glasses didnt work either!).

          • Jethro

            My sea monkeys were trainable with aquatic bananas. I bought the sea monkeys and then the bananas during a follow up shop. I think they were lying about the x-ray glasses to begin with. I missed the toys r us vouchers or I’d have more hula hoops! Dang news stations never tell the good stuff. Of course it may have been excluding in American stores under the circumstances.

          • Kristen

            The anmesty of guns for toy vouchers was in America about ten years ago I think.
            We were in America in about 1979, all I wanted was Sea Monkeys and x ray glasses, I should have figured they were duds when I’d read about them in Mad magazines.
            Wow, they never told me I could get aquatic bananas. Boy I was ripped off. Should have just kept some maggots in a jar.

          • Jethro

            Maggots are easier to see and they eat left overs from the fridge but they draw flies so…

          • Kristen

            Haha…thats not drawing flies, theyre just inviting the in laws over for dinner.

          • Jethro

            That is a great looking Lamp for it’s age. Great looking regardless. We have several like it made by Deitz. I really like English lamps, I don’t know if we have any Australia made. I assume they would be made as well as English lamps. My favorites mariners lamps. Hard to find with the nearest ocean being 9hrs away and that’s the gulf coast so not much there. East coast may have more of a selection.

          • Kristen

            Most antiques here are English or Australian. Google Howick Historical Village, my fav place in the world, just at the bottom of the hills I live on. I actually got married there many moons ago, Ive loved it since I was a kid, antique Heaven! I pop down there to hang out and take cool photos sometimes, I think you and Vickie would love it. You can even read all the shipping and medical records of people arriving in Victorian times. Since its community ownedm I pretend I own the place!

        • Jethro

          I’ve been aware of the bump stock for some time now. very popular. useless but popular. Rednecks like crap that make them feel tough. Like Rambo.

      • Raphael

        I totally agree Annie, no one needs military style assault weapons (or silencers, for that matter, or unlimited ammunition). All we need to know how to resolve this problem is what the government did in Australia…it worked!

        The NRA has become a criminal organization…at the very least criminally idiotic, just lately comparing guns with “equally lethal” swimming pools and feet. Let’s see when the next mass footing occurs!

        94% of Americans want gun control…but as we can plainly see our government no longer represents the will of the people, but that of lobbyists, campaign contributors and in this case of weapon manufacturers.

        Many Americans love their guns, which are toys to them (or in some cases, it seems, penile extensions). People seem to forget that guns are not designed to play but to kill. Unless you have a sick desire to kill a person or an animal, why the hell would anyone need a gun?

        Where I live, many hillbillies illegally shoot their guns at any time of the day or night, in residential neighborhoods. This is a new problem…created by certifiably insane paranoid schizophrenics as Alex Jones, who scared American rednecks into stocking up on guns and ammo because Obama or Hillary was “going to take their guns away” (which was apparently akin to castrating them).

        The deluded who argue that guns are necessary to keep the power of the government in check and protect our individual freedoms are still living in the 18th century or have watched the movie “Red Dawn” too many times…they haven’t caught up with the reality of the unfortunately overwhelming power of the US military, which would cause them to wet their pants in the first few minutes of any armed conflict.

        This problem is uniquely American…no other nation has this many guns in circulation, and this many mass shootings this often. Perhaps it is time for American politicians to catch up with the rest of the civilized world and with the 21st century!

        And we can also plainly see that guns do not “protect our freedoms” in any way. All one needs to do is read Battlefield America: The War On The American People, to understand that our freedoms are taken away daily while the only people who fight for freedom are not gun toters but activists!

        • Patrick Gannon

          First, let it be noted that I think some controls on guns are reasonable, however…. “94% of Americans want gun control,” requires a source. That’s nonsense. Even when it comes to denying guns to the mentally ill, only 89% agree. Where does that 94% number come from? You weaken your credibility when you put up figures like that, which aren’t supported. Maybe it was a typo, and you meant something like 54%, which would be more accurate???

          Even among Democrats alone, I doubt that stat is true, and for the US as a whole, it most certainly isn’t true. “About half of all adults say US gun laws should be stricter.” (Pew Research Center, July 22, 2017)

          As for comparing a country of 24 million with a country of 320 million, you can only take that so far. America is not Austrailia. If you put the kind of police state in place that it would require to get Americans to turn in their guns, we will no longer be a free country. (Free, being a relative term). If you think we have bloodshed now, you ain’t seen nothing yet, as the saying goes – if we turn into a dictatorial police state.

          I don’t deny that Australia had some good success, but their way is highly unlikely to work for us, so we will need to figure out how to get people to voluntarily give up their weapons. I’m not sure how to go about that, given that our belief and political systems have put us at each other’s throats, and we create new criminals by putting drug users in jail, where they learn the tricks of the trade. Nevertheless, when you look at the total number of guns out there, the number of people killed are miniscule, and most gun deaths as I understand it, are suicides because we won’t help people leave this world gracefully as we do for our pets. “The U.S. Department of Justice reports that approximately 60% of all adult firearm deaths are by suicide, 61% more than deaths by homicide.” (Wikipedia)

          I agree that if ordinary citizens get into a contest with the US military they will be removed from this plane of existence, but if the government puts the kind of dictatorship in place that would be required to make this happen, how many soldiers are going to stay in the military to defend a dictatorship? I don’t know, but I suspect the military might turn against that new government, given that a lot of those people come from the very heartland where these guns are so prevalent to begin with.

          I also take issue with the idea that these “activists” have any interest in our freedoms – or at least freedom of speech as they shout down, attack and deny views that they disagree with to be voiced on universities, for example. The activists who do this are far more dangerous to our democracy than the rednecks who like to fire off a handful of rounds from time to time.

          I agree that we have a gun problem – but I’ve seen no good suggestions for how to deal with it, and until assisted suicide is supported, I certainly won’t be giving up mine! I may need to use one some day, for that or any other reason, such as self-defense.

          • Raphael

            Patrick, I wouldn’t look at Wikipedia as a reliable source.

            Here are the results of official polls. I meant background checks when I wrote gun control. Background checks are an effective way to control guns and keep them away from certain individuals.
            Obviously unlimited ammunition, silencers and military-style semi-automatic assault weapons have no place in a civilized society.

            Quinnipiac University
            June 2017
            Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?
            94%
            Washington University American Panel Survey
            July 2016
            Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers, no matter where the gun is purchased?
            84%
            CBS News
            June 2016
            Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?
            89%
            Morning Consult
            June 2016
            Do you support requiring all sellers to run background checks on anyone who buys a gun?
            86%*
            Public Policy Polling
            Mar. 2016
            Do you support or oppose requiring a criminal background check of every person who wants to buy a firearm?
            84%
            CBS News/New York Times
            Jan.2016
            Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?
            88%

            I don’t equate a government asking people to voluntarily turn in their guns in a buyback program with a police state or dictatorship. That would be the NRA and Alex Jones (and his ilk) narratives, which are extremist, absurd and completely distort reality.

            Now, as far as your claim that the number of people killed by guns are minuscules, guns killed more Americans in the past 50 years than every US war ever; from 2001 to 2013 alone:

            All injuries by guns: 401,779
            Unintentional: 8,383
            Suicide: 237,052
            Homicide: 153,144
            Undetermined: 3,200

            We went to war against Iraq (under false pretenses) for far less deaths than this, and to the victims of these shootings, I wouldn’t call these deaths insignificant, that’s rather callous!

            60% of deaths by suicide as you claim isn’t “A lot more”, it is merely “more”, 10% more than half to be exact.

            As far as activists, you are putting all activists in one basket, as does the corporate mainstream media (including local newspapers). There are many kinds of activists, and not all are antifa members, or bent on suppressing offensive speech by irrelevant rightwing extremist trolls at universities.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I only quoted Wikipedia with regard to suicide deaths. The rest of it comes from Pew Research in a poll only a few months old.

            You misrepresented that 94% figure. You said, “94% of Americans want gun control.” Your own source does not say that. It just says 94% want something that is already in place – background checks.

            Sorry, but that’s a ding on your credibility.

            You also incorrectly quoted me. You said that I wrote 60% of deaths is “A lot more.” You even put quotes around it. I never said that. Do a word search. I said, “most gun deaths as I understand it, are suicides” and I backed that up with a statistic. 10% over 50% is a lot more, however. It’s a lot more than the number killed unintentionally; it’s even a lot more than the number killed by homicide, but we’re quibbling – the point is you misrepresented what I said. Credibility counts.

            So, let’s do some math… Leaving out the injured, that’s 401,779 people killed over 50 years, or an average of 8,036 per year, out of a population of 324,000,000 means 2.48% which, while terrible, is still a pretty small percentage. Let’s also note that of those 8000 people who die, 59% chose to kill themselves, because we treat our pets better than humans. So, in my view, we’re really down to about 3300 people per year – as compared with the over 10,000 per year who die because of drunk drivers.

            Paint me as callous if you will, but I’d rather do something about drunk driving first – and now cellphone use… I drove up to the DC area last week to meet a client, and holy crap! I trust my nutty fundagelical next door neighbor and his arsenal more than I trust any driver on the road in northern VA!

            We agree on the definition of a useful and valid activist; however I will support the most “irrelevant rightwing extremist trolls” their First Amendment right to say their piece in peace. We’re not talking about a handful of antifa people, the problem is clearly greater than that, and just as fundies aren’t policed well by mainstream believers, so too it appears that responsible activists are not condemning this activity – or at least I’m not seeing much of that.

          • Raphael

            Is one of us drunk?

            Really, Patrick. I understand that you love to quibble to no end, but let’s go over this, quoting you: “You said that I wrote 60% of deaths is “A lot more.” You even put quotes around it. I never said that.”…and then quoting you again: “10% over 50% is a lot more, however.”

            Isn’t 10% over 50% 60%, and didn’t you just write that it is a lot more? Are we speaking the same language?

            Next. No, you read too fast and do not understand what you read: the 401,779 deaths are not over 50 years but from 2001 to 2013, as clearly indicated.

            Your next arguments do not stand: alcohol, cell phones and guns are not equivalent. Guns are designed specifically to kill. Taking care of the gun problem doesn’t imply in any way that the alcohol, drug and using a cell phone while driving problems cannot also be taking care of, at the same time. Furthermore all of these things are already illegal, while owning semi automatics, unlimited ammunition and soon silencers (if Republicans have their way) is not.

            Reasonable activists are not supporting any efforts at speech suppression. If you are not seeing much of this it is because you are not looking past the mainstream press. Even the ACLU (which is demonized by conservatives) supports any and all free speech.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I guess it’s you who is drunk. I took my original post, which begins, “First, let it be noted that…” which is the post you commented on, and I copy/pasted it to a text editor and did another word search, in the event the search engine here didn’t perform. According to the word search, I did not use the phrase “A lot more” in the post that you accuse me of saying it in.

            Your quotation, “10% over 50% is a lot more, however” comes from a subsequent post.

            Have another drink, on that one.

            On the next one – you score a point. So, I guess I’m drunk too! You said, without any sources, that “guns killed more Americans in the past 50 years than every US war ever..” I confess, I took the next stats to be sources for that claim. (I thought those numbers seemed low, but too busy fitting in work emails to double-check. My bad). I just checked, and it appears that your info is accurate. I guess that means the military did a good job winning wars with limited casualties!

            I’ll have another drink for that one. (A first, actually – normally a bourbon man, but on Fridays I go tropical – usually tequila, but Captain Morgan’s and Coke for a change this evening! I’m toasting Raphael catching Pat Gannon in an error. Well done, sir, well done!

            Despite our quarrel, I do agree that we need more controls on guns, but it’s not an easy thing to solve. I might sell back a gun or two if the price was right, but there’s no way I’d give all of them up, no matter the price, and I’m a guy who left the NRA when they abandoned promotion of gun safety in favor of becoming a lobby for gun manufacturers.. Ranting and raving doesn’t solve anything. What is a concrete proposal for reducing gun violence that is feasible? I’ll provide one: Stop putting decent people in prison for drug offenses, and they will stop coming out as hardened criminals who need guns. In other words – do something to counter our Vice President and Attorney General.

          • Raphael

            I never drink, so I must have been hallucinating. Or else I was rushing and misread something. Never trust a man who doesn’t drink ha ha…

            There are many issues to be resolved in this world. But despite the many divisions and different ideologies, there is one thing, the very thing no one discusses, that all people in America and even throughout the world could agree on, if they actually were solution/reason rather than problem/emotions oriented: restoring honest government. After that, which seems basic, issues could be discussed honestly rather than distorted by commercial interests (such as by a lobby for gun manufacturers).

            No solutions will be provided for any problem as long as government is allowed to be dishonest and to draw ever more power and control from the chaos it is allowing to take place (or creating in many instances).

            Restoring honest government would be rather easy, by having elections that are exclusively publicly funded, with the exact same amount for every candidate, and the same amount of media exposure and opportunity for debates. And possibly getting rid of lobbying. These ideas could be fined tuned, but not compromised to allow for more corruption.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Much I agree with, regarding your solutions – but to get there you have to convince your fellow citizens to elect representatives who will change the laws…. You would think social media would be a place to do that, but instead it is a place for us to further divide ourselves. At least we are fighting with words, so far…

          • Patrick Gannon

            Google: Editorial: In silencing the ACLU, BLM shut down an important ally Richmond Times.

          • Raphael

            I would not call these specific students reasonable activists. This does not necessarily reflect on the entire BLM movement, contrary to what rightwing websites are attempting to imply.

  • Kristen

    Mmmmmmmm, was just scrolling through looking for something and found a comment from Patrick to someone…”why do you humour Kristen, and her mythological, fantastical, primitive beliefs?”.
    For someone who gets annoyed when comments get personal, or turn the focus on him thats rather a random comment!
    Nice Patrick, and thanks for the laugh, plus a true insight depths of your narcissism that you not only dismess peoples views or experiences as crock, bit also dismiss them as a person. Pathetic, are you a 10 year old girl?
    Smiling as always,
    K

    • Patrick Gannon

      I meant the question seriously, Kristen. I don’t humor you, as you know; whereas Jethro who claims to agree with me regarding the existence of gods and souls, does humor you, far more than I do. In fact, I’m pretty confident that most of the people here have no belief whatsoever in your Jewish religious beliefs. You have called Neale some pretty awful things in past years, so I’m surprised they humor you as much as they do. I’m pretty sure you’ve said that Neale’s god may be one of the evil ones, right? You have trashed CwG many times over the years here – at times agreeing with me, when I challenged his religion, so don’t get all huffy at having your beliefs challenged. You’ve cast a stone or two at Neale, in your own time here, and you know it.

      I’m really curious as to why he (and others) humor you. Your beliefs ARE mythical, fantastical and primitive. You should at least agree with the “primitive” part, since you harp on your Jewish connection all the time, and Judaism is a primitive religion you love associating with, at least in part, for that very reason – or am I wrong?

      I am dismissing your views and experiences, but I’m not dismissing you as a person; in fact, I’m actively engaging you regarding your mythical, fantastical and primitive beliefs, while Jethro and others, do not. Who is being more honest? Who is taking you seriously, and who is blowing you off? (American idiom – means intentionally ignoring you).

      I got tired of your insults, so I fired back when you said I looked like an idiot, suggesting it was better to look like one, than be one, and then you whined about it (like a 10 year old girl?) You are the one with the “mythical, fantastical and primitive” beliefs – such as we might expect from a 10 year old girl, maybe? I’m under constant attack here on this blog, for having the audacity to challenge the guru. I only bail out when the discussion turns to personal insults. Insult my ideas to your heart’s content, but try to have something to back up the insults.

      I felt a momentary pang of remorse when you said you were a high functioning autistic person, but it passed quickly. (grin) Someone gave me crap for talking with Annie the same way I would talk to a man, (that might have been you), but I’m not about to demean her by treating her special because she’s a woman. Therefore, I’m going to treat you the same way I would treat any other normal, healthy human, male or female, with mythical, fantastical and primitive beliefs.

      Or would you prefer that I “humor” you, and treat you as a lesser person because of your autism?

      • Jethro

        It’s not humoring, it acceptance. There may not be a difference, but I enjoy comments and beliefs from everyone. If Kristen wishes to believe in something that improves her life and does not harm another, why should I have a complaint? I have never heard of her religion before her and I’m very curious about it quite honestly. I feel no need to bash any persons belief system until they try to bash mine. Kristen has not. I find her to be a very pleasant person to address actually. I avoid Mateia and Sam. Not sure they are all there.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Fair enough.

        • Kristen

          Thanks Roy, I wasnt trying to get support, but thanks.
          The old family lamp is Lanora Australia…the cool antiques here are all Australian or English, everything was bought here.
          xx

      • Kristen

        It doesnt bother me at all, I just thought that your true colours are better up the top for all to see rather than hidden as a casual comment near the bottom….in a conversation I wasnt even in. The hypocrisy is a joke.
        It was a comment to Raphael, not Jethro. And a comment you started, not even in context with your discussion. Note he didnt even bother replying to you.

        Dont tell lies thanks…when you said I was an idiot I didnt whine like a ten year old girl, that was weeks ago. I actually joked with Annie that I was apparently an idiot…its still funny.

        Why would I expect to be treated differently because I have high functioning autism, most female doctors do, its not even noticeable, I just think a bit differently? Actually I think quite male, black and white, those books on differences between male and female brains say I have a boy brain but am uber sensitive.!
        Yes it was me who bought up that I think you should have spoken to Annie as you would a female, and see she writes as a female. Face to face you would speak to a female differently to a male, females are more gentle and sensitive. Speaking to females differently to males is basic respect, not demeaning, its respecting people are different in whatever form. Note in that comment others agreed with me…..they got the point that you missed. Its demeaning to speak to people as if they are all the same..do you speak to your sisters the same as you do with males online where you are in that site just to argue, as you are in here? You were at loggerheads because you were misinterpreting Annies ‘female speaking’.

        Your comment is a joke when you would know Raphael and I get along in spite of a million differences, so was just stupid, plus you’re the one that people have said they wont engage with, dismiss more than anyone and people have blocked you…get the joke? In 5 or so years in here Ive never had that once.

        Yes, I do think Neales God is the one prophecised about as He Of Lawlessness, whom impersonated the God of scriptures in the beginning….Neale knows I think that, and Ive also told him he can delete any of my posts. I acknowledge there are many Gods, and Neales is one from the Afterlife. Ffs, years ago I even told Neale not to do his worldwide Peace campaign as it would endanger his family and fans, since Christian fanatics are aware the Antichrist they believe will start his rule with peace, and that 666 is King Solomon whos name means Peace! Go figure, would I have warned about that if I was here being mean? But if you personally have a need to want me to look like the bad guy in here, go for it.
        Happy now, you have another chat all about you?

      • Raphael

        Patrick, I do not “humor” Kristen, I agree with her on many issues. She is very perceptive and she has, by the way, a wicked off the wall sense of humor which I really enjoy and which actually makes me laugh.

        I do not agree with you on the issues of souls and the afterlife, or the divine. I can agree with you on some issues, such as on religion or on the idea that the here and now are actually all there is in absolute “spiritual” terms, but that’s more of a philosophical point for me, however it is, I think, a practical idea that so-called spiritual individuals and atheists could agree on, and which could benefit our world.

        I often write here to present ideas, but not to convert anyone (to what?). You however are a driven man, as you already know…out to “save” us from our foolish ways. You must be feeling very sorry for us poor deluded ignoramus, so there might be a part of you that, beside the obvious need to prove yourself right at all time, perhaps cares about us lost souls. That’s nice…but truly, I personally do not need “saving”, either from fanatic religious freaks or science addicts. Science has many valid and fascinating answers, but it is not the answer to absolutely everything. It is actually the wrong answer to some things.

        We have already gone over the “equality” issue you raised about Annie…That’s where many get confused. Equality never meant sameness. Men and women are obviously equal, but not the same. Would you get into a fist fight with a woman? Perhaps you would….that’s how some men (and some women occasionally) interpret equality. That’s unrealistic, in my view. Honestly with a woman does not have to mean brutality (it doesn’t have to mean brutality with another man either, but many men either enjoy a testosterone filled exchange or shrug it off).

        Look at the natural world: it is in the nature of the males of a majority of species to be more aggressive and to fight, and in the females to be more gentle and nurturing…given of course some exceptions, such as hyenas, lionesses, etc. Of course you can choose to go against nature, but don’t be surprised if you encounter wind resistance.

        • Kristen

          Thanks Raphbobinski.

        • Patrick Gannon

          We all have our axes to grind. You rail against corporations, government and non-New Age religions, and I rail against woo. To each his own… Neither of us would be here a) if we didn’t enjoy it, and b) if we weren’t trying to influence others.

          I will endeavor to treat all humans the same, regardless of race, creed, sex, etc. If women are obviously equal, then they can hold their own in a debate – as I have seen many times.

          Would I get in a fight with a woman? I do it on a weekly basis in karate; kids too! Male or female, I would give what I get. If a woman has the intent and ability to hurt me or others, and I can stop it, I will. We have more than one woman in our organization, quite capable of putting me into the hospital or a grave. It’s about giving what you get. If a 200 lb, muscular woman is beating the crap out of a 100 lb man, I’m going to come to his assistance.

        • Patrick Gannon

          I thought I posted the “why do you humor” her question to Jethro.

      • Kristen

        Well, this went well for you!
        I’ll be nice, and refer you on to someone whom Im sure will be happy to find the time to discuss everything with you, especially my ‘mythical, fantastical and primitive beliefs’.
        His site www kabbalah info why do people hate Jews? is quite good, Mateia could discuss it all with you as well.
        Prof Michael Laitman ia a Professor of Ontology, with a PhD in Kabbalah and Philosophy, and MSc in Medical Bio Cybermetrics. Hes written over 40 books and is founder of the Bnie Baruch Kabbalah Education and Research Institute, and a speaker. He also works with the UN Secretary General as a member of the World Wisdom Council. He’ll be patient, I’m sure, after all he’s spent years studying ‘haters’, his book Like A Bundle Of Reeds explains the roots, cause and solution to anti-semitism, which includes hatred of Gods religions.
        He can probably explain our ‘mythical, fantastical and primitive’ beliefs a bit better than anyone else, since you dedicate a lot of your time obsessing with us and our God. Nut it out with an academic scientist, and be sure to use those same terms to him.
        Take care,
        K

    • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

      Pretty high and mighty coming from someone who called a someone psychopath since he killed a cat by accident when he was 6 years old and wants to turn back time itself in order to save her.
      I know understand why the internet hates jews their shitty personality makes them pretty much detestable.

      • Kristen

        Erm….nope. No idea what you’re talking about.
        I was the one who asked why you wanted to turn back time Mateia, rather than dismissing your requests for a time machine. You listed about 20 things and I thanked you for being open and honest. If you mentioned accidently killing a cat my heart would break for you, the 6 year old you. If psychopaths have been discussed it would be that its known psychopaths often start behaviors by tormenting animals for their own pleasure or entertainment. If you indicated it was deliberate then I would have acknowledged that your remorse was a good thing so you havnt taken that path IF it was deliberate. That has absolutely nothing to do with a kid accidently killing his cat. The only contextual link could be if you said you tortured an animal.
        Im thinking wtf??
        I understood you wanted to turn back time mainly so you wouldnt break someones toy at kindergarten.

        High and mighty…nope!

        “Internet hates Jews, their shitty personality makes them pretty much detestable”……….WOW, racism at its finest. I assume then you dont use Google, Facebook, Dell, wear Levis or support the thousands and thousands of successful Jewish companies that really are the backbone of the Western world, including the advent of suits as I see you wear in your photo. If you think Im detestable thats fine, but why bring Jewish people into it? Im not even Jewish by the way. My family hasnt been Jewish for over 100 years, and you’re only Jewish if born to a Jewish mother. Im a Levite Israelite on my fathers side.

      • Kristen

        Mateia,
        Youve deleted your other reply.
        Nope psychology doesnt define children as psychopaths, it can only point out that most murdering or sadistic psychopaths can be spotted and helped early if they are observed knowingly harming animals, often starting small like spiders or birds. We even have TV ads on here about it, as a part of anti abuse TV campaigns. Its a childs nature to nurture animals in general.
        I agree with you that no-one asks to be born how they are, thats one of the many reasons I’m opposed to reincarnation. But like Mewabe, I believe that loving parents, especially mothers, and positive relationships with animals will create different brainwaves, therefore can override natural negative behaviours to that person. The grassroots of all species are with loving mothers, especially in the first 5 years.
        You bought up a child who races a stroller with a cat strapped in it when its clearly terrifying to the animal but the child doesnt have awareness that the cat is terrified. Um, Ive had cats my entire life, they have claws and can bite, if the cat is terrified being strapped in a stroller or anything then the cat will make it known in no uncertain terms, and the cat will win the battle UNLESS the child is able to use enough physical force to restrain the cat. Im not sure of the context, or if thats what happened, so hypothetically could only say perhaps the cat trusted the child and was fine being in the stroller, so you mean to would be terrified when the child raced, and was unable to escape?. Im not quite sure what you’re asking of me about this.

        I see you’re angry with God. My personal view is that God’s not our slave, WE are the ones in charge of Earth, hence being an intelligent species. There is a Universal Law that no one can intervene in human affairs, and that we must all have access to Law and Freewill. Scriptures state in Revelation that Gods rule would start after the Earth is destroyed “it’s time to destroy those who destroy the Earth and for the dead to be judged for their deeds”, therefore that prophesy, whether true or not, makes it clear that God doesnt rule Earth. In fact in Revelation it states the one identified as the Serpent, plus He of Lawlessness rule Earth for periods of time before God does. Thats all I have on it sorry, when it comes to matters regarding God I only have scriptures to read plus personal experience and scriptures forbid putting words into God’s mouth. The point is, you can’t blame God for much more than you can blame anyone else.

        If you didnt erase your post, then try not swearing so much or change one letter.

        • Craig

          Darn Kristen you have just identified my attributes a psychopath… I kill beasts without thought. Do not tolerate animals in a human interacting group. Is there medicine for this???
          As for God not being our crutch well said, I like.
          As for Jews well they shall inherit the earth. Christians no saying what they will inherit although the claim heaven that firmament between earth and the rain clouds… Living without gravity or is it living in high rises…
          As for swearing, sticks and stones will break our bones but words can never harm… Those using words that are not appropriate need education on manners and acceptable language usage. They will not change other wise…

          • Kristen

            Jews inheriting the Earth….I havnt heard of that. I know the Pearly Gates prophesy at the end of Revelation has the names of the 12 Israelite tribes on them, but Ive never read anything of Jews inheriting Earth. The Pearls represent female principles, justice etc, all Kabbalah, the Binah position on a Tree of Life, to offset Gods strong male principles, a balance. But each Israelite tribe has different blessings and traits, blessings from Moses and Abraham? Judah fight their battles on their own etc. Im a Levite, represented by jeans, Levis. Worker bees who protect others and can work with priests and Rabbis. Our Moses blessing is God will thwart our enemies if pleased with the work of our hands….definately in place and a part of many Jewish success stories. I assume the names of the 12 tribes are on the gates so everyone going through receives these blessings as well, Pearls are also the Moon (majic, blessings etc), and to ensure all differences between people are retained.

            Yip, theres a medicinal cure for animal intolerance and sadism toward animals. Raphael has the proper recipe, one of our smoothie potions. From memory its one raw potato, a clove of garlic, 3 asprin to thin your blood, half an avocado, a sprig of mint and rosemary, your own fresh toenail clippings, one tissue, a big dog biscuit and one eggshell. Blend well, scull the lot, then puke for the rest of the day which will purge all evil from your body. I think it only works at 3:21am, the day after a full moon with your feet in a bowl of cold porridge to ground you and make you stay on the spot while you puke.
            Let me know how you get on, its guaranteed to work, puking is always good consequences!

          • Jethro

            All I did was read about it and I have no desire to abuse anything!! Course you probably need to have the desire to abuse for it to work to begin with…

          • Kristen

            I think you could be right there, thats how majic works! Psychology, faith healing and placebos all in one!
            The rosemary is a bit much, right?

          • Jethro

            Double the rosemary maybe and add star anise.

          • Kristen

            Ohhh, good idea, star anise has good symbolism.
            Now you can try it.

          • Jethro

            Helping to write a song does not mean I’m willing to sing it.

          • Kristen

            Damn, why didnt someone tell me that years ago, could have saved myself a lot of puking!
            I have weight problems, seriously. I cant get past 53kg, so have to drink potions. Not that one though, Raphael can test it!

          • Jethro

            Should we really wish that on him? He’s a likable person and I think it’s meant for unlikable people… pick someone else….

          • Kristen

            Haha, I’ll let you choose that one.

          • Jethro

            Oh no no no… the pleasure belongs to you, I would never be so rude. Ladies first, of course!

          • Kristen

            Tough decision….read my pineal gland!
            I have made another improvement, it was just missing a little something. Vanilla bean paste.

          • Jethro

            I come up with two names… I’m sensing an m. But a pee comes to mind… hmm I gotta take care of something real quick.

          • Kristen

            Crap, just remembered I have urgent things to do as well.
            If only I could remember what they were. Race ya outta here!

          • Jethro

            You had have won! I ran into the wall and got lost in thought, which was tough being a zombie without a brain but things happen.

          • Kristen

            Pink Floyds Wall? Me too! Or talking to people akin to talking to a brick wall?
            Well I remembered my urgent things….washing and cleaned the car! Riveting stuff, Mondays are my Sundays to do chores.

          • Jethro

            It was Pink Floyd’s wall I’m sure because I was welcomed to the machine. As I stared I grabbed a pot and sliced some cabbage, adoule’ and as a special touch fried some pork butt with my own special blend of spices and tossed it in too. Anise was involved. Boiling it all down for a bedtime snack. The machine is uploading.

          • Kristen

            Hey You…..my favourite….
            But it was only fantasy
            The wall was too high
            As you can see
            No matter how he tried
            He could not break free
            And the worms ate into his brain
            Mmmmmmm, that sure was an unfortunate brain accident you had!
            Is the uploading machine Mateias missing time machine?
            That sure is one bedtime snack, cabbage sounds so romantic! So much for milk and cookies.

          • Jethro

            Life IS just a fantasy! The time machine is Saturday, so totally yesterday. Bay seasoning keeps the Oder pleasant and crab boil oil which is mostly cloves I think. Good stuff. Romance? It’s all in the dance, I dance to the music in my head when I cook.

          • Kristen

            Now that is something Im sure only Vickie should see!
            Damn, its 4.45pm Monday here, I knew those Scientology MIBs were here on Sat for a reason, so Friday your time. Grrrr. Must be like Santa, they work in time order so we’re first and NY is last (14hr time difference I think).
            9/11 wasnt even on 9/11 here, hows that for a conspiracy?
            Oh well, Mateaia tells me the time machine doesnt stop aging so Ill wait for a better one so I can be 40 forever. Keep me posted on when that one is. And not the Mars one, I think my BFF Patricks going there so I’ll stay on Earth. Maybe 1977 or 1920 in the Wild West.

          • Craig

            That recipe is a winner for sure. Any specific toenail or all the clippings of the day.

          • Kristen

            All the clippings, you need a set of 10 or it doesnt work, but old ones that flew behind a cabinet or fell between couch cushions is fine.
            Mewabe just corrected me, read above…I forgot the test.

          • Raphael

            Glad you liked my recipe so much you decided to share it with the world…but it looks like you forget the crucial part, the test.

            To test if the person was cured, he must put his head inside the mouth of a crocodile. It’s an old African thing…if the crocodile bites, that means the cure did not work…if it doesn’t bite, it was successful.

            Works every time. Needless to say, either way cruelty towards animals is eliminated, so it’s always a win.

          • Kristen

            Damn…I think Craigs South African, but not sure if he qualifies as an ‘old African’? If hes under 60 is it something different…maybe a lion?
            I forgot, I just put my head in the spin dryer, it didnt turn on so it must have worked for me…I havnt tortured a Catholic for years.

          • Raphael

            My neither, I miss it though…especially the “black robes” (priests).

            I put my head in the spin dryer and turn it on every morning after a freezing cold shower, to wake up, it works much better than coffee, although it can be addictive.

          • Kristen

            I only turn the spin dryer on when Im due a Californian spin class, my laundry doubles as my home gym. Although Ive been thinking about giving it a whirl (dad joke for ya, its Sunday), after my wash in the hottub, otherwise known as the washing machine.

          • Craig

            On Jews inheriting earth I think the ancient scripts say this.
            I think the kabbalah approach is very close to my gnostic understanding. I trust the message is not the verbal but the implied. Not everyone will know but what everyone should know they will somehow find out by reading the ancient scripts… Even if they are distorted and documented wrong… That is the guarantee of enscribing self and being in midst.

        • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

          “Youve deleted your other reply”
          It was a duplicate.
          “You bought up a child who races a stroller ”
          I had in mind a stroller that can close it’s hatch but yes the cat would run away when you would open it.
          “being an intelligent species”
          Have you looked at people? No intelligent race would pollute it’s river, soil and air. o intelligent race would eat toxins or allow workers to work in toxic environments.
          George Carlin was right we are just semi civilized people who think themselves as better than apes when we really aren’t. Also you fail to justify the undistributed intelligence that arises when people are born. If there is a perfect God how come some children are born with mental blocks and other children become mathematical geniuses at age 6. You may say that these are outliners but given a intelligent designers only peak performance should be given and the world clearly demonstrates that this isn’t the case.
          There is no anger here only the truth that there is probably no God and even if a God exists he/she/it deserves no praise or worship whatsoever and to do so is foolish.

      • Raphael

        The internet hates Jews? Really? If that is so, they shouldn’t feel special, as part of the internet is now a sewer that serves as a platform for haters (who hate everyone) and mentally ill individuals.
        Are you a hater? Do you hate yourself above all else? Did a Jewish werewolf or a Jewish pumpkin man bite you when you were a child? Did you have a bad day? Or were you trying to hurt Kristen’s feelings, thinking she was Jewish? Beside being mean spirited, it was a tad childish.

        • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

          “”Are you a hater?
          Hate is a strong emotion. I prefer the term disliker.
          “Do you hate yourself above all else?”
          Quite the opposite I love myself.
          “Did a Jewish werewolf or a Jewish pumpkin man bite you when you were a child?”
          I dont’know what you want to achieve with sarcasm but I’m not impressed.
          “Or were you trying to hurt Kristen’s feelings, thinking she was Jewish?”
          Her genes might not be Jewish but her beliefs sure are derived from Abrhamic traditions which are jewish in nature.
          “Beside being mean spirited, it was a tad childish, and that’s an understatement. But I hope you feel better soon…”
          That’s who I choose to be forgive me for having free will.

          • Kristen

            My genes are Jewish, an Israelite, and its in my blood, but Im not Jewish personally, my family hasnt been for over 100 years. You inspire me to convert though, as does Patrick.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            You seem to misunderstand! Jewish are just responsible for indoctrinating the sheeps with false prophets.

          • Kristen

            No they aren’t, if anything, Christians are.

          • Raphael

            You mean to say that Jehovah witnesses or all those American missionaries in Africa are not Jewish? Damn, I am so confused!

          • Kristen

            I know, me too. And all the Kabbalists.
            But I have it sussed I think…if theyre bald with those hair dags, theyre probably a missionary, a female in a Christian length mid calf skirt with sandals and a blouse is a Rabbi, and if they own the Vatican and unfortunate looking its a Jehovah Witness.
            Im more interested in what all the MIBs want to convert me to, and the Jewish Pumpkin Man…or is Halloween a church thing? Damn, I was getting ready for Hannukah.

          • Raphael

            Thanks for clarifying, now I can navigate the religious world with confidence, at last. I am still confused about the Muslims though, are they the pumpkin men after all, as many suspect?
            The MIB’s have a very nefarious agenda…I can’t talk about it here, the ears have walls. I will leave an envelope with information for you at Walmart behind the tutu display at 0004 military time the day after tomorrow.

          • Kristen

            Cool, is that 0004 your time or mine?
            I like the code, very Kabbalic, movies. I love The Day After Tomorrow, seriously, one of my fav movies. So thats the Walmart closest to the main NY library when the world freezes over, right?

          • Raphael

            Yes, don’t forget to carry a blow torch to unfreeze your fingers to open the envelope…After you can have a snack, finger food is a good energy source (another dad joke). Seriously? There is no such thing…but I enjoyed that movie as well.
            I see that you are carrying a very serious conversation with Mateia at the same time…multi-talented or bi-brained? Scientists are investigating the phenomenon.

          • Kristen

            Im not quite sure how to define a conversation with Mateia, I just know the last line, so I threw it in myself…his time machine.
            Im actually watching the movie Bridesmaids, eating cheese and red onion on crackers for dinner while talking to my son about his afternoon at the pub watching Bathurst car racing, while trying to work out what the big booms are, either a Military Tattoo thing at the big park down the road or we’re being bombed, watching my idiot sons debate who is the biggest loser since theyve bought the same hoodie so are dressed identical today which probably isnt cool at 19 and 23 while my thoughts are debating whether I go buy a coffee cos I feel like a really good one, while in a state of wonder that my neighbour friend and I managed to buy Sister Act show tickets today…one tablet, one ipad, one laptop, one phonecall, one hour, and we managed to do it! Thats one heck of an acheivement in my world, these things are a mission in itself.
            All while spying at the MIBs outside through my binoculars!

          • Raphael

            Wow and I thought I was a super achiever for walking and chewing gum at the same time…is fresh coffee the secret of it all, or are you using the time machine stolen from Mateia?
            Your sons don’t like been twins? Can’t imagine why…
            A musical, huh? I stay away from them…but bombs, yeah I love them, especially the big holes they make everywhere. That’s my kind of entertainment.

          • Kristen

            I stole the time machine!
            Yip musicals are cringe worthy BUT I love the Sister Act movies, its the closest I get to church, and the show is meant to be amazing. One prob tho, I cant stand Whoopi Goldberg but my friend won a $1000 ticket place voucher, so we’re going! Took so long to find a night with the right seats…drama queens at its best, but we were going anyway, free is a bonus!
            You must love sinkholes then?

          • Raphael

            You can’t trust anyone with such a name as Whoopi…that’s just not proper. I refuse to have tea and crumpets with a person named Whoopi.
            Anyway have fun at the show.
            Sinkholes…yes, there is a street full of them in the neighborhood, others call them potholes but although I looked I did not see anything worth harvesting in them. Why is the world bent on confusing me so much? It’s a conspiracy.

          • Kristen

            Thats the prefix con, dont trust one word that starts with con, thats the big conspiracy, its all a con. Con fuse….to fuse misinformation into your brain, con vince…who would trust anyone called Vince, con spire…churches have a spire, con trails….yeah right! See the pattern?
            Potholes in Colorado take on a whole new meaning!
            Whoopi….I assume it just means we’re allowed to take in Whoopie farting cushions, sort of like bagpipes for people with no bagpipes. Shows not til December, but yip, Ill have fun, front row upstairs so I can throw food down! My cat steals English crumpets, she ate the side of a whole pack today, odd Tortiseshell, wont eat cat bickies or hard food, only raw meat or cooked chicken but eats crumpets, pumpkin, licks icing off muffins and eats that foam like beach toys..shes the size of a dog, I wonder why?

          • Raphael

            I know…I get so tired of all these rabbi knocking on my door asking me to come to the Temple and convert to Judaism…day and night, it gets to be too much!

          • Kristen

            Btw the plural of sheep is sheep. Trust me on that one, I live in a country with more sheep than people.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            Also you have skipped my question about intelligence distribution entirely. Guess people aren’t confortable answering questions they don’t have a answer to.

          • Kristen

            Hi, sorry, I did answer it, but in a different context.
            Reincarnation is the cause of most of it, I dont support reincarnation at all but everything Ive ever read on any religions or teachings, even CwG insists that its true, so I have to roll this that. Reincarnation does seem to explain everything like child geniuses, victimisation etc. I spend years trying to find a ‘nicer’ answer than adults possessing kids bodies, but sorry, I cant, there dont seem any other explanations OTHER than some radical brain alterations at birth, but there are no studies to be found. Dammit.
            BUT you are also dealing with genetics, biology, brains, diet, education, psychology and thousands of things that can affect intelligence. Not many people are the same, even traits like greed or narcissism with lead people to push themselves and learn more, theyre driven to appear ‘better than everyone else’.
            Intelligence actually refers to thinking capacity, problem solving, memory and other factors, more so than brains though. I was raised with freedom, outside a lot, a tall skinny kid with a healthy diet, that read a lot, mainly mysteries. Obviously kids who are abused, unhealthy, suppressed and controlled develop less of a self thinking and processing capacity. My family has always been average, never wealthy or poor, that effects people. Some people you may think are highly intelligent often dont have much thinking capacity for themselves, they just read the learnings of others, copy or memorise it, then quote them all the timem often with a photographic memory. Thats not intelligence at all. Take the internet and books away, throw them into situations where they have to think and converse freely on general topics, nothing academic, and theyll often be the ones to come across as ‘thick’ or less intelligent. Its all illusionary, the average iq is 100 I think.
            Many studies on children and intelligence find that social interactions, articulating their wants, showing interest in new things, expressing sympathy and caring, creativity with mixing colours, memorising songs, building with blocks etc are actually more ‘intelligent’ expressions than literacy, maths, obedience, memory and other intellectual expressions.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            You say that things such as genetics counts but how does that factor in with the fact that God is all powerful. Strictly speaking if God didn’t wanted people with iq below let’s say 150 then we would all be having 150 iqs. You can’t remove God from equation and justify mental blocks.

          • Kristen

            Youre thinking like a Christian, I dont. I personally think the iq of humans is too high, we’re too big for our boots, lesser intelligent people are better people in general, they care about whats important…..life. I think we should be a lot shorter as well.
            I dont remove God from the equation, Im adding in thousands of years of alterations that have evolved, probably by design, including the use of the right brain as we became more creative. Im sure thousands of years ago everyone was left handed, right brain users, and not funny or creative at all.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            I’m understating that you are making the assumption that humans start to have errors in their bodies after several generations that lead to what we have today but in you assumption you are also implying that God couldn’t have made human correction programs build right in our bodies.
            Again you view God as lesser being where I see no God at all. So I’m understanding from you that you see God as a not all powerful being and that he can’t design perfect systems? Is my understating correct?

          • Kristen

            I wont form opinions about God and His ways. What He wants known is known, Im not his secretary.
            But our bodies are self healing, youre underestimating the wonders of life. I mean one minute egg and sperm meet then make a baby, I cant even get my head around that very concept. Even when we get a graze, our body sends blood then seperates the red and white blood cells so the white heal and kill bacteria while the reds form a hard scab, our bodies bandaid! Or how eyesight, pleasure, love and everything works, its astounding. Look at how gifted and talented we are with sooooo much potential still, who says we arent perfect by design, and WE are the ones screwing up OR that we’re still a work in progress.
            I cant see how you cant see God at all.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            “WE are the ones screwing up ”
            Unfortunately for you genetic disease have been documented way before our Chemical industrial complex. So us screwing up is just a part of the whole equation and even God should have figured that out and made us more intelligent so that we don’t screw up.
            “I cant see how you cant see God at all.”
            Religion makes the assumption that God always existed I just remove intelligence from the equation and say that the laws that give birth to the universe always existed (and make a unscientific founded assumption that other universes exist out there, this is a idea for another time).
            The fact that the laws of universe give raise to beings made out of it that have self reflection and the ability to understand how the laws work as amazing event.
            You see the world as a byproduct of intelligence while I see intelligence as byproduct of the world.

          • Kristen

            I see God as that intelligence you speak of, and the maker of all those Laws.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            That is exactly what I said. I just see those laws as a unintelligent God that gives birth to the world.
            Even if there was a God who created God? And who created the God that created God? and so on and so forth!

          • Kristen

            Kabbalah answers that, google The Source Kabbalah.
            God unintelligent? Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            You have the assumption that intelligence needs to be created by intelligence but for you even the tough that something unintelligent could create intelligence is unimaginable. Kaballah doesn’t explain anything. If you put a computer to calculate things endlessly and the computer would be undying it would eventually create our world just because of mathematics.

          • Kristen

            Good…so when you set your computer to do that, eventually it will make you a time machine.
            Cool.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            You are thinking as a computer as a machine not a eternal undying computing layer of reality.
            God is defined as a layer of reality that has intelligence and not a machine that computes everything with brute force.
            Of course even within theology some argue if God encompasses all creation (Pantheism) or if God is separate from it’s creation (Monotheism).

            Just because you started to talk about time I have to say that moments in time are states of that moments current data encompassing the interaction between all elements within the universe like photons, electrons, waves and so on and so forth.

          • Kristen

            Thats good, when Patrick finds all the research you’ ll be able to make your time machine.
            My time is a little man trapped in the back of my clock that moves the hands for me. Similar to the people in my TV.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            Actually scientist know that the universe is losing data at a specific rate and in order to restore the universe into a previous state you would need the previous state saved somewhere else and 2 other universes in order to compute the restoration.

          • Kristen

            Gosh, does that mean I’ll stop aging?
            You and Patrick really need to get working on that time machine then, or his trips to colonise Mars.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            “Gosh, does that mean I’ll stop aging?”
            Computational properties of the universe have no relationship with your aging process. You are aging because your body cannot repair it’s biological data faster then the rate of damage
            ” trips to colonise Mars.”
            Space colonization will most likely happen (if we don’t kill ourselves until it can be feasible achieved)
            Which leads me to wonder what will all the religion do when we have 2 planets with humans? Will they all become Scientologists ? Oh, dear God please no!!

          • Craig

            Thank you for confirming that even the universe is aging as a blueprint design would.
            That is intelligence light years ahead of matter.
            Then there is the theeeiry that we are actually living out a predestined puppet show. We cannot change the end result, we can only change how it affects us by the choices we make. This theory is Hebraic faith long before you or our modern scientist considered the possibilities, they are just confirming the blue print using terminology that sounds very learnt. Do not respond but follow along on the next blog. It may get interesting.

          • Kristen

            ThatS what Kabbalah sort of believes.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            Aging is cause by entropy but o make matters short intelligence doesn’t equal aging.
            I don’t know where you got that idea.

          • Craig

            Thank you, a fair comment, if the universe has no storage place then it is full… Of what data or is it full of substance. I think the simplifying of the universe as a data processor could be the paradigm that needs to shift to the universe growing through the data processing. It has no need to store, data means nothing if not applied…
            Thank you for taking time to respond.
            I think we are talking the same fruit language you look at it from a logical perspective I opt for illogical as logic results in collision and eruptions while illogical results in any of countless possibilities.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            There was a time after the big bang where the information was growing but it had no loss of information because it had enough storage.

          • Craig

            Thank you for a short direct response, it has reached its optimal growth capacity to make it easy for me to understand…

          • Kristen

            Ok, Ill just keep popping collagen pills and coconut oil then.
            Why dont we just leave Mars for the Scientologists and those they recruit, and make Earth a better place in doing so. Hollywood will fall apart, oh no!
            Scarcasm btw.

          • Patrick Gannon

            The IQ of humans is too high! Anybody else agree with that? Are you aware of the statistics that indicate that those with lower IQs commit far more crimes, particularly violent crimes such as rape, than more educated humans?

            A little research will also tell that the right brain/left brain thing is a myth.

          • Craig

            Darn I thought I was unique brain hemisphere tests indicates 4951 relationrelation left right and 4852 back front… Now I am back to not even knowing myself. Just joking.

            But yes your stats and interpritastion thereof on criminal behaviour is partially correct. Our society norms or social acceptable tolerance norms contribute to these crimes my IQ does not really determine criminal inclination but rather a more natural response to social stimulus.

          • Jethro

            There are many factors involved and yours is the most correct, social stimulus. The IQ factor is assumed because violence tends to be at higher rates where lower income occur, lower than the desired or needed. Low IQ, low income. Low income, angry at life. Angry at life by whatever stimuli has a higher rate of violence.

          • Kristen

            Exactly. The education system and most jobs now are based on intelligence, many simply cannot keep up, but intelligence has also taken away their means to own a home or land where they can provide for their family in other ways.
            As a country with a free trade agreement with China, we’ve seen it all turn to crap since there are now very few factories or jobs that can accommodate those groups, especially Pacific Islanders.

          • Kristen

            Heck, you did well. My brain tests showed Im brain dead with just an active pineal gland.

          • Jethro

            ME TOO!! Great minds are alike!! right? something like that… WOOHOO!!!

          • Kristen

            WOOHOO is one heck of an understatement.
            How cool is that? Makes you realise how brains are soooo over rated, spare parts really.
            Who needs a zombie apocalypse when we are already just ghost, mind, soul people lugging around a brain dead body?

          • Jethro

            Brains… So over rated! I didn’t even realize it was lugging around this body until you mentioned it. Now I’m tired. Back to the apocalypse in the morning.

          • Kristen

            Ad break in the horror movie!
            Maybe Neales secret agenda is getting us all to write a script in here, that would explain all the MIBs lurking around. Assume you have them too?

          • Jethro

            Of course. I thought everyone did, black in black like Will Smith. Or is it back in black AC/DC. Now I’m confused! Secret agendas. I’m not good with secrets, unless it’s not a secret, then I’m pretty secretive. I write my own scripts. You write a pretty fair script. Keep up the awesome scriptering!

          • Kristen

            It was the introduction of the Jewish Pumpkin Man by Raphael, the pineal gland ghost of the artist formerly known as Mewabe that made this one, new characters are always good!
            Im good with secrets…if people dont tell me the secret I swear, I wont tell anyone, pinky promise.
            I think its an entire set for us old people. Thunderstruck to set the theme, Back In Black, Black Dog, Black Betty (love the drums with the riff) then Paint It Black.
            The MIBs and Will Smith just got confused, nosy parkers. Damn people with brains.

          • Craig

            Relationship of hemisphere usage does not imply the brain is working, it just says it is connecting like telephone wires… So no gland at all found in mine just a mushy substance bound by activity sparks… No sparking going on no living…

          • Kristen

            Oh crap..you really need to talk to Dr Patrick…sorry!
            But I have heard you can drill a hole where a baby fontenelle would be, put in a lamp size mercury lightbulb, halogen wont work then use car jumper leads to give to a kickstart. Then each afternoon just charge with a Samsung phone charger. After a month you remove the lightbulb and replace it with peas, which should mush down with good bacteria to form a new pineal gland.
            Let me know how you get on.

          • Craig

            Sowing the seeds for the next frontier, thanks I’ve got it. Edison light bulb… I accept 6 volt as the 240 will not even light up…

          • Kristen

            I’m eliminating anything comparitive when I think we would be better off with lower IQ’s, and crimes are generally related to unemployment, poverty, poor upbringings, despondancy and so much more…in a world where IQ and education rule. Even Joe average is being left behind now.

            A little research has told me that the right and left brain thing isnt a myth. Medical professionals and scientists have a much higher proportion of left handedness, literal thinkers. I have one left handed child, he is definately ‘different’ in many minor ways, and research also tells me there is a higher rate of lefthandedness in children where mothers had multiple ultrasounds in previous pregnancies, as I had to in the ones before him, so there is a clear link there as well. Ancient writings were written from right to left, what does that tell you?
            Are you left handed?

          • Raphael

            Hey…don’t forget Native Americans, they will remain as well when everyone else is gone. I once watched a Canadian movie about a Native American who was raised by a Jewish family in a small racist town on the prairie. True to life…talk about 2 fighting spirits joining forces!

          • Kristen

            Yip..the fighting spirit..says a lot for what flows through peoples blood, the fighters to the bitter end.

        • Kristen

          Theres a Jewish pumpkin man? Damn, I missed that one!
          Who wrote it? Stephen King? Grimm Brothers? Dean Kootz? ISIS?

          • Raphael

            The Jewish pumpkin man has been seen roaming the woods in the Pacific Northwest, sometimes in the company of bigfoot. He has been seen holding bigfoot hand…presumably it was a female. I am not drawing any conclusions until further investigation…will keep you posted, if I can get away from the men in black for a moment.

          • Kristen

            Those damn MIBs, my neighbours sure do get sick of black SUVs on the road.
            I think that woman was me, I just thought the Pumpkin Man was my hot husband with a touch of jaundice and a big ego. Did he have a tutu?
            Could be wrong, keep me posted.

          • Raphael

            Come to think of it, yes he had a tutu and tights…hard yo see in the dense underbrush, thank God. He was carrying a rather large ego on his back.I think it was his…never seen one quite like this, and I lived in LA.

            So that was you and your hubby? I should’ve known with all the hair. But you need to do something about that smell…unless it was his jaundice?

          • Kristen

            Nope, the smell was me, out and proud as a smelly. Its my 70s California theme, the hubby finds my armpit dreadlocks rather attractive.
            It is still 1978 isnt it?

          • Raphael

            Last I heard yes it is…I lost my hearing a few years ago, time flies.

            I love armpit dreadlocks! You hubby is so lucky…I personally braid my nose hair…very stylish, if I may say so myself.

          • Kristen

            Ooohhh nose hair….hot! Ear hair too? Could be why you’re deaf!
            The dad joke was pretty bad, which I think means good on that unique scale.

          • Raphael

            Wait…it’s not just hair coming out of the nose like any ordinary dude…I grow hair on my nose. I just like the look of a furry nose, it work very well with furry glasses (gasses with fur on the rims, never heard of it?) and furry eyebrows.

            The ear hair is great to have a well…for a combover, from both sides. I think that’s what Trump does, that explains his cool looks and popularity with women.

          • Kristen

            How cool, you should do a comb up with your nose hair so it meets that monobrow. My dad has brows Bigfoot would kill for, seriously. Oh wait, Im Bigfoot, crap.
            Nope about Trump, he’s just naturally hot, beyond hot. The hair is just his dead cat isnt it? But the crazy Korean could do with a bit of side hair, an ear hair combover could work well for him. Ill email him later. Or is he in here, just a thought?

          • Raphael

            The crazy Korean is here, there and everywhere…omnipresent and omnipotent, don’t you know he is a god? Show some respect, will you?

            Yes, Trump’s cat is still cuddling his cranium…this truly shows how animal affection never dies, for all the naysayers out there who think pets have no feelings.

            I will try the nose comb up tonight, I can’t wait. When I have it nailed I will upload the picture, I know everyone will be blown away, especially when I sneeze (another dad joke).

          • Kristen

            Oops, hail Korean Leader or whatever they say, I got kicked out of Nth Korea when I was a teen, I think I spoke.
            Please, no more dad jokes, Annie reads these, she might FOMCWIPMPISHADJ Fell Off My Chair When I Peed My Pants In Sheer Horror At Dad Jokes….cant be a good thing.
            Put the pic up, your grey head does look a bit odd in your current profile photo. Im a lamp at the moment to show Jethro my fine Australian speciman.

          • Raphael

            Female bigfeet are not supposed to speak in North Korea or in Trump’s White House unless first spoken to. That’s just the way it is…you should have known better, there is no excuse. Anyway I think a true bigfoot uses telepathy to communicate…are you an imposter? I knew it, you are a Walmart customer after all.

            Dad jokes have been proven to occasionally be lethal (to dads), I will therefore restrain myself.

            I was feeling a bit blue when I took the grey picture, that explains the bland look on my face. Either that or I am a grey. I will let you wonder…

          • Kristen

            Ooops, my bad!
            A grey makes perfect sense to me…under the control of reptilians, under the control of mantises, right?
            No wonder the MIBs disguised as Jehovahs Witnesses are knocking on your door.

          • Raphael

            The MIB’s and Jehovah witnesses are tiny in those parts, they slither under the door.
            Or are these ants? I haven’t been able to tell the difference since the government cut off my meds, I don’t know why.

          • Kristen

            No idea either. One minute they promote sanity, then insanity the next. The big question is…..what is the in, in sanity? I mean, how can two letters, one tiny word, make such a difference to the minds and brains of so many?
            But I have heard that moldy fried bread can replace all meds, works for me.

          • Raphael

            Words are everything…especially in…we are either in or out. Outsanity is the opposite of insanity, from what I understand. I am in a state of outsanity at the present moment..soon I will out of a state of insanity…What’s that look on your face, do you want to learn something or am I boring you?

            Moldy fried bread can replace anything…a missing leg or a leaky roof, even. It’s a wonder…

          • Kristen

            Educate me….surely when sanity goes out the door you are outsanity, then lucid sane moments are back insanity..perhaps they should change the terms to upsanity and downsanity then I might vaguely understand it! Or perhaps we’just all so freaken confused over the elusive concept of sanity we’ve missed the typo…it was always about being sanitary? Cleanliness is akin to sanitary, shortened to sanity to save a syllable? Or did the time machine monster take that one vital syllable to Mars?

            That bread is a wonder alright, I even used it instead of nails to build a house.

    • Spiritual_Annie

      Umm… I mentioned your balls in a post. Hope I’m not on the hot seat.

      • Kristen

        Haha, no, Im proud to have big balls! Bit awkward sometimes when I get dressed, but hey, at least Im always ready for Christmas with a couple of baubles!
        Patrick is openly here as a troll, I said I would stoop to his level and be a biarch to him last month when he’s offensive about our experiences, and use proper defined words like ‘pedant’. Good to see I got under his skin, probably the first female to ever show him whats its like when people are just plain rude, and how annoying people can be!
        But putting a comment as he did, especially to Raphael, randomly down in a post is just plain cowardly.
        At least put things where everyone can see and show your true colours publically I say, so I did. The thread is yet again his!
        Xx

  • Patrick Gannon

    Too many posts to go through. Don’t any of you people have chores to do on the weekend! If I failed to address something, you want my response to, please ping me here.

    • Jethro

      You did fine my friend, most of it is just chatter anyway, passing the time in boredom.

    • Craig

      No chores its raining and am in doors keeping my mind occupied TV is boring.

    • Kristen

      Well I married the Jewish Pumpkin Man at Walmart, thats about it.