Demands for evidence continue on Duncan O'Finioan thread

[Shade]

Posted by Belle (here)
I've just got to ask...what do you consider legitimate science?

There are many 'proven', 'legitimate', 'scientific' conclusions (many found in highly regarded 'scientific' journals) that I don't believe for a second...information has a way of getting skewed and twisted to serve a purpose...and imo we are not among the privileged few who get the truth.

Why do you value it so highly?

I agree with the importance of good science on here especially with the headline stating "where science and spirituality meet".
Manistream science is heavily peer reviewed which means that bullsh*t of nearly every single variety is weeded out. It is some of the best efforts that we have in understanding just how things work. No, we don't get the insider research and hence can't come to as good a conclusions as we might if we had all the information but so much of it is good. And there should be more science on here for sure I agree, and more referencing and such. it is important to know where info comes from. I see a lot of prejudice against science on here to the detriment of health at its worst.

[gigha]

One thing I found out in the playground

That is if a bully comes and demands answers

The best response is no answer...

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Shade (here)
I agree with the importance of good science on here especially with the headline stating "where science and spirituality meet".
Manistream science is heavily peer reviewed which means that bullsh*t of nearly every single variety is weeded out.

Some of us have concluded that the peer reviews in main stream science weed out non-mainstream results, which has a weak correlation with what's bs results, especially when the results significantly support or undermine the interests of the bastards in power on this planet.

[SKAWF]

there would be no scientific evidence for this sort of thing.

mainly because its well out of the jurisdiction of scientific thinking.

if anything you will only ever get anecdotal evidence
and even then you may only find it in the realm of the occult.

science has yet to prove the existence of the soul,
and until it does.... as far as science is concerned... the soul does not exist.
does that mean i should also not accept the existence of the human soul?

does that mean that history is wrong?

i dont think it does.

i think science is so limited becuse it will only recognise that which can be proven

it is the authority on a tiny sliver of infinity.

and thats the box they try to keep us in. imo.

cheers

[Arpheus]

This may end up turning to be an interesting thread,as long as weep keep a healthy and intelligent discussion going,gonna keep an eye on this one to see how it develops...

[Bill Ryan]

-------

I've just woken up to read this new thread. Not yet read all of the new post about this on the forum, in various places.

A friend also wrote to me overnight to ask my opinion. Here's my reply:

I agree that Duncan is exasperated with the New Age community and its disempowering, often wishful-thinking belief systems (e.g. about ascension, or that all the insiders were just about to be arrested) -- etc. As I think you know, I always fully agreed with him about all his observations.

The main difference between Duncan and myself is his presentational style: on occasions he seems to operate more like the enraged Incredible Hulk than the leader and teacher which he is. But the Hulk was a good guy... and did save the day for the Avengers team.



And there's no doubt, for me, that Duncan's awareness serves him well. In my opinion, if Duncan calls it, we should listen carefully.

On the Avalon forum, there are quite a few requests for evidence of his claims. Here it is:

1) From Dave Hodges of The Common Sense Show (a very measured and well-written article):

Part One:
http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2012/1...nto-hiding-why

Part Two:
http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2012/1...ng-into-hiding

2) This information (as the Dave Hodges states) dovetails closely with the new Doug Hagmann ('Rosebud') information which emerged a few days earlier. Links to that are here. Must read also.

Part One:
http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/7305

Part Two:
http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/7310

It all fits with known scenarios and situations. This is what I was expecting earlier this year (2012), but which may now have been deferred till 2013. So far so good... but all this may still be on the cards.

Note that Alex Jones also interviewed Doug Hagmann two days ago:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vvWBD7nG7qM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vvWBD7nG7qM

[robinr1]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Shade (here)
I agree with the importance of good science on here especially with the headline stating "where science and spirituality meet".
Manistream science is heavily peer reviewed which means that bullsh*t of nearly every single variety is weeded out.

Some of us have concluded that the peer reviews in main stream science weed out non-mainstream results, which has a weak correlation with what's bs results, especially when the results significantly support or undermine the interests of the bastards in power on this planet.

this times 10000000000..science is no different than any other topic.......the public is told what "they" want us to know and nothing more

[WhiteFeather]

A great thread that Bill Ryan posted upon joining Avalon.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ome-to-Avalon-


Dear New Avalonian,

Welcome to the Project Avalon Forum. We sincerely hope you enjoy your stay.

The principal purpose of the Avalon Forum:

To encourage and support positive, constructive, and high quality dialog and networking with the goal of creating the future on Planet Earth for ourselves and our children that we want to experience.

This forum is a little different in a number of ways:

•First of all, you had to be invited to be here.
•A lot of the forum is hidden to non-members (including this message). There are some readable areas, but most require you to be a member to not only see them, but to post as well.
•Membership is tiered. This means that the more you post and the longer you've been a member, the more you can do.
•Community Groups can now be found on the top menu under Community > Groups.
What happened to the original Avalon Forum?

As happens with many forums, what we now call 'Avalon 1' descended into an uncomfortable degree of chaos. When this happens in a public place (whether physical or virtual), it's always the actions of individuals that perpetrate that.

Much of the time - but not always - this is deliberate. What we can say is that a number of members there were not at the same spiritual and intellectual level and understanding as we hope and believe you are - hence your invitation.

A way forward needed to be found that allowed the message and vision that this forum represents to be preserved and supported by members who are fully in support of all the principles we espouse.

What is that Message and Vision?

In creating this new forum, we're encouraging all members who've been invited here to:

•Start or participate in community projects that will radiate out to the members' communities - or
•Post information and participate in regards to awakening; spirituality; healing humanity; galactic and earth changes; '2012' (whatever that may mean!); geopolitics; new science; hidden history; ETs and disclosure; what we are not being told by those who might wish to control us - and much else.
Please be proactive in real time in the true spirit of Avalon. Many of you already do, of course. However, we'd like you all to share more about these activities as it will lead to others becoming awakened.

So...

Please do us and this forum proud - and show us the spiritual beings we know you all to be.

Please always remember that this is in essence a private party. We value quality, not quantity. We don't aspire to be like Above Top Secret or Godlike Productions (and there are good reasons for that). This private party is a place of learning, awareness, respect, intelligence, community and fun.

We're delighted to have accepted your membership application on the basis of what we believe we understand about you.

Please understand that if we come to understand other aspects which were not apparent when we first started to get to know you, then we may politely ask you to leave.

Please see this clarifying post for a little more about this. As of 19 January 2011, we're regarding all new Avalonians as PROVISIONAL MEMBERS, who we look forward to upgrading after your first few posts once we have a good idea who you are, what your values are, and how you communicate and relate to others.

If we do ask you to leave, we intend no disrespect - and do not intend conflict. It would just be that the moderator team, working closely together, would have reached the decision that the invitation may have been a mistake and that you may be more satisfied communicating and contributing elsewhere.

A note about the one aspect of the forum which is more controversial than any other: that of channeled messages. The moderator team, fully supported by myself, have made the decision to post a disclaimer on threads on that particular subforum.

My personal opinion, which is fairly well-informed, is that many channeled messages offer many nice words and plenty of saccharine hope - but little of substance and in all probability (I'm afraid) little that is real.

There are deep, dark games played here, and there is much deliberate deception both on the physical (electromagnetic) and astral levels. We encourage intelligent inquiry - and discourage proselytizing and anything that smacks of promoting belief systems of any kind.

And in all that, we're all committed to discovering the truth. My personal purpose is to support that in happening - wherever that leads.

*******

To see the rest of the forum and enable you to post, simply reply to this thread as acknowledgement.

The system will detect the reply. Within 10 minutes, your title will automatically change to Avalon Junior Member and you will be activated.

And for those of you who were long-time senior members of the original Avalon, you'll probably find that you will be manually upgraded to Senior Member by one of the team in due course. I would also encourage you to re-post here your best threads from Avalon 1 so that the new forum may enjoy them. We welcome that.

Once again, welcome aboard. Post your reply, and we'll see you on the other side.

Bill Ryan and the Project Avalon Forum Team

[Shade]

The prejudice that I face in the alternative community because I am a scientist is exactly the same as the prejudice I face in academia because I am esoteric. In each field there is intense and ugly prejudice against the other side. For a moment, consider that there is a place, in the middle where they do not cancel each other out in an exclusive fashion but they complement each other, fitting together like the two hemispheres of your brain. The rational and the art, the male and the female, the hard and the soft, the mind and the heart all working together. That's what this is about really - left-right brain hemisphere unity and harmony. It is not science that is the problem not is it the 'alternative things' which are the problem - it is people. Some say it's not the person it's the things they do that are bad or whatevah.. I don't subscribe to that. in my philosophy, it's not what, it's how and who. Science is just a tool, a thing; rationality. Spirituality is art, and is the heart or irrationality. Each without the other, as in if it denies the other is unwhole and in the polarity wars.




And in truth... Science is not a conspiracy.... it is in the mainstream in academia - where the papers come from - just regular people investigating the universe with their whole passion and being.. they aren't paid or bribed to say things which exclusively support the people in power.. because there is enough regulative power from across the board to call people out on claims that are not backed up by proper evidence. Experiments must be repeatable by anyone who reads a paper so that anyone can do the experiment and see for themselves. A main principle of it is that it is accessible by the person who wants to see for themselves.

And another thing, academics are not stupid. Not much gets past them really, in their fields and by that I mean malpractice or misrepresentation of things or intentional hiding of the facts. I'm not saying that there isn't problems in it all, of course there is, just as there are in the alternative fields. What I like to do is read the papers in science that are encroaching on that axis between the spiritual and the scientific.. what science does in one of its brightest aspects is get there the hard way, step by grueling step. What Spirituality does is fly there, in the heart. They need to make friends, ok? Please try to be more accepting of science as it comes to you, in peace. it is not your enemy.

[sdv]

Historical Evidence for Buddha
(Siddhartha Gautama)


Posted: August 17, 2005

Relevance of the Historical Evidence for Buddha to Christianity:

The historical evidence for the life of Buddha will be briefly discussed in order to provide the reader with another example of documentation for a religious figure in the ancient world in addition to Jesus. As the reader will probably conclude, the historical documentation for the life and teachings of Jesus is far greater than the historical documentation for the life of Buddha, provided that the reader possesses a general understanding of the historical documentation available for the life and teachings of Jesus.

Historical Evidence for the Life and Teachings of Buddha:

Buddha, or Siddhartha Gautama, was born in North India sometime around 563 B.C.E. and presumably lived a long life, perhaps being about eighty years old when he died (AIHET:192).
“So far as we are aware, he didn’t commit anything to writing. Thus, all we know of Buddha’s teaching has come down to us from others. From the very beginning, though, both an oral tradition and a written tradition developed” (AIHET:212).
“Although the oldest available written Buddhist texts are relatively late, tradition assures us that the texts known as Nikayas contain an early and reliable record of the Buddha’s actual teachings, for immediately after the Buddha’s death a council of monks was summoned to recall and collect these teachings” (ASAP:193).
“Unfortunately, very little is known about Shakyamuni Buddha that we could call historical fact. Historical record keeping was not much practiced in those days, and his followers were far more concerned about preserving his teaching than with the details of his life-and, of course, that’s what really matters” (AIHET:192).
“I want to emphasize this point: Commonly repeated stories about the life of Buddha are the stuff of legend, not history” (AIHET:192).
“Various ancient sources give us information about the life of Buddha. The oldest and most important document is the Pali Canon. Committed to writing in the first century B.C.E., the Pali Canon is a carefully assembled collection of the then-existing scriptural works and traditions regarding Buddha. The accounts in the Pali Canon, however, are really nothing more than two commentaries that deal with two different parts of Buddha’s life. They give us only some basic facts” (AIHET:193).
“ The first complete biography of the Buddha was written in the first century C.E. by the poet Ashvaghosha. This work, known as the Buddha-Charita, is unreservedly mythical; the author was not interested in historical veracity. Many of the legends about Shakyamuni Buddha’s life are derived from the Buddha-Charita” (AIHET:193).
“Approximately four centuries after Buddha’s death, the first great effort was made to gather together the existing sources and determine, insofar as was possible, the true record of Buddha’s life and teaching. This scholarly and thoroughgoing work came to be known as the Pali Canon" (AIHET:212).
“Again, the story of Buddha’s life is much more the stuff of legends than of history. But it’s well worth surveying, however briefly. As you might expect, there are numerous variations to the legends” (AIHET:193).
SUMMARY:

1. The best attestation to Buddha’s life is based on oral tradition.

2. Actual written texts relating details about Buddha’s life and teachings are considerably late.
http://www.preventingtruthdecay.org/...ofbuddha.shtml

The Pāli Canon (Pali: Tipitaka) is the standard collection of scriptures in the Theravada Buddhist tradition, as preserved in the Pāli language.[1] It is the most complete extant early Buddhist canon.[2] It was composed in North India, and preserved orally until it was committed to writing during the Fourth Buddhist Council in Sri Lanka in 29 BCE, approximately four hundred and fifty four years after the death of Shākyamuni.[3][4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81li_Canon

So, the first recorded documents about Buddhism supposedly date back to 29BCE, but I think the earliest preserved MS of the Pali Canon dates back to 15th century.

Academics do not all agree on dates. They study the use of language, epigraphical evidence and archaelogical evidence to try to pin down dates, and they disagree with each other!

Does it matter if Buddhism has been practised for 2500 years or for less than 2000 years?

Christianity? There are writings from about 200 CE about the religion that give us approximate datings, and there is also epigraphical and archaelogical evidence. Once again, academics do disagree about precise datings and all have their different methods of dating things precisely.

But, disagreements about precise dates does not mean that these religions do not exist and have not existed for a very long time.

Methinks we get drilled about dates when we learn history and do not get taught about how academics gather evidence and then come to conclusions based on that evidence, so we end up with very confused ideas about history.

PS Maybe humanity will move into a new paradigm where we change our perception of and relationship to time as something absolute and true, universally (no, what we experience on Earth is not universal time, but Earth time as we Earthlings have constructed it!

[Carmody]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Shade (here)
I agree with the importance of good science on here especially with the headline stating "where science and spirituality meet".
Manistream science is heavily peer reviewed which means that bullsh*t of nearly every single variety is weeded out.

Some of us have concluded that the peer reviews in main stream science weed out non-mainstream results, which has a weak correlation with what's bs results, especially when the results significantly support or undermine the interests of the bastards in power on this planet.

I have direct experience with this.

To say that science rules out BS, is an INCOMPLETE analysis. limited analysis thus limited view thus limited answer.

The result is that the global flavor of the presented statement does not inherently have enough depth to apply to the reality that is indicative in it's existence.

That this statement:

I agree with the importance of good science on here especially with the headline stating "where science and spirituality meet".
Manistream science is heavily peer reviewed which means that bullsh*t of nearly every single variety is weeded out.

Does not hold the water of the bucket that it pretends to be.

It is wholly incomplete and it will, by it's very nature, fool people who don't look at the world with any depth. Again... via that statement that has been quoted... much of the world's more simplistic thinkers can be led astray from truth.

Science was designed, right from the get go..to compartmentalize. To separate and to explore reality through engineering principles, which are immutable. As in DOGMA. Note the use of the word 'law' in modern science. Law, as a meaning, as an intent, as a subtlety of direction in a word and what it conveys, has no place in actual science. Law concerns social, cultural and societal norms on human behavior. It directly means the enforcement of societal ideas and emotions in behavior and actually has penalties, like banishment and/or death.

The word law is invoked in engineering, and engineering is a literal case of dogma.

Engineering is the opposite of invention.

Engineering is application of theoretical results that have been normalized for consumption.

There are no Newtonian laws. No law of thermodynamics, no law of anything in science. What there is, is theory that has been given to engineers as dogma that they are to build with ---and not violate.

All these theoreticians of the past, would be horrified to think and know that their works have been dogmatized into immutable laws, which they where never meant to be. Never. They have to be theories and evermore mentioned only as theories, if not, they'll slip into being dogma, due to the human mind and how it works. see what is going on, here?

(if one ever finds the name of the person who first began to turn theories into laws, you'll probably find a secret society member, who, by the way..are most certainly stalking and clouding the highest halls of academia. I know one theoretical physicist, who upon having his final thesis being reviewed and thus his degree hinged on this..his three physicists on the panel....all three signed to him that they were ALSO Freemasons.)

Science has been conflated with engineering, due to the modern version of science being borne out of a teaching and high level scholastic endeavor called 'the German school of thought'.

What this was, is a high level physics school or mind set of teaching that was all about 'rote learning', and not to teach how to open minds into exploration. That the physics and all that was being learned, was done at high speed, intensely,and does not deal with the point that it is ALL THEORY and NOTHING is immutable. That engineering safeguards for the build of things (to build, not question and take chances in building things), was purposely conflated with theoretical exploration.

This is interesting, in that this core aspect of alchemy and all the old sciences and methods of teaching began to go away at the introduction of this new teaching methodology. And that this new methodology and such a modern(ish) 'university type atmosphere' was borne into existence not a few years and not a few miles from the origins of the Bavarian Illuminati.

So, it took the modern revolution of open scientific exploration......and turned it into DOGMA.

And thus, over the past 3 centuries, scientific methods in exploration where turned into dogmatic myopic blinkered exercises in Dung Beetle 'ball of ****' pushing.

Real science concerns itself with evidence. First comes observation, then comes hypothesis, then comes test, then comes theory.

But First and foremost, inescapably so, comes observation. And observation, as an origin point -- cannot be dismissed. The canard of 'observation bias' (aka -'expectation bias') is used negatively to dismiss those who see things that are there, things that does not fit modern ideas on 'scientific LAW'. The whole thing is circular and headed for the ditch. But it fools most people.

Back to the dung beetle of modern science. If one starts from a mental orientation premise that is built on the idea and logic of 'laws', then it is going to be difficult in such an environment to get anything that is truly new, to move forward, or exist, at all. Such a thing is in open opposition the self evident fact (ipso facto) that the new will overrun the old, in concept and reality. This is a known premise on the fundamentals of scientific exploration in Theories and observation.

For example, one example of near hundreds.... the 'laws of thermodynamics' are based on carnot's works and carnot's works are Newtonian in analysis, and fail completely in the face of quantum function.

What you will get, is people who have shoehorned observation and data INTO Carnot's works in order to try and get 'laws' of thermodynamics to fit the data. Yet it does not work. What they engaged in was a thing called 'negative proofing' in their mental outlook and mindset. Bias, plain and simple. Editorialization. The same thing that happened to Maxwell's original works on electromagnetism, which are inclusive of FTL and other effects. Heaviside edited that out and then Lorentz finished the job. Educate yourself on such subjects. just a subtle push and a word here and there..and truth in science and reality is blocked. Just. Like. That. (In the same way that other crimes have been pushed away and lost over time. like the people occupying Palestine hope to have happen, that their real and still current crime will be lost, in the mists of time. I mean, to the western world, Libya has already been forgotten.) (also, see how JP Morgan hired a scientist, Lorenz, to go around and be promoted -publicity tour- and then to replace all school and physics texts, in all libraries and halls of academia, anywhere in the world..for free..with Maxwell's theories..scrubbed of any capacity for FTL, anti-gravity, and over unity. Thus temporal and dimensional effects, as well. That all of this was scrubbed from the math. By JP Morgan, as an origin point, the Guy who took down Tesla, so people would remain in a controlled matrix.)

This is due to the entire enterprise of science having been invoked and thrust into the world based on a prevalence of linear type thinkers and dogmatic thinkers, and negative proofing thinkers being the core component of modern science.

All due to that interesting point of modern science being from the 'German school of thought', which erupted around the same locale and time as the Bavarian Illuminati, which was of ..Jesuit origins.

Thus, modern science was designed fro the ground up to be inclusive of and centered around people who don't really imagine ANYTHING. Linear thinking ground pounder types. Most dangerously, the type of mental outlook which is dogmatic in origins and view of externalization.

Back to the 'negative proofing' and what it means. What that means is that..if a proposed thing or situation does not fit the extant science, in any way, then it is dismissed. It is usually dismissed with a certain unrealized virulence.

Also, that linear minded negative proofing mindsets, are generally... ok, highly incapable in the area of mental self analysis.

But they can't see this, they can't understand it, so they are blocked from the knowing of how their own mindset--prevents the new.

To top it off, they've been compartmentalized, which is the other core aspect of the German school of thought. The modern version of the tower of babel where the people where divided in their languages in order to compartmentalize them into submission through the creation of ignorance between them. It nicely foments war, as an aside.

This compartmentalization further entrenches the core mind set of dogma and negative proofing and a limited mental reach. thus this kind of thinker came to dominate modern science, which, once again, is engineering of dogmatic 'scientific bulls', issued as laws.

And at that point, humanity's opening was effectively blocked.

Theoretical scientists understand that there is NO law, anywhere in science and in reality, and that every single theory that has been very wrongly called a law is open to questioning at every step and at every moment and that NONE of them is to be adhered to in the face of observation and data. NONE. Not a single one.

But it is difficult to realize such thing when one has been compartmentalized, like every single story of how modern politics and businesses is... and how every single story on black ops projects and work areas exist. 110% compartmentalization, in order to block anyone from having any sort of overview or complete picture.

This is why new science comes from outside of science and modern science is driving us into terminated ditches and dead ends, as it has laws.... and by definition......cannot change.

This is why new science comes from 'mavericks' and 'outside the box' thinkers, and even high school drop outs. crass people who don't realize there are rules and laws in that dogmatic and linear world of poorly realized un-emotionally developed people called 'scientists'. Scientists who are trained in an environment of engineering and dogma, as this is where their mindsets flourish best, which is why they where attracted to it in the first place. And they found a herd to be in, to travel in, to identify with.

And this limited view of modern science is incapable of seeing the trap that was erected, way back when, and took shape over the past centuries.

Another point, is that the black ops projects threw that dogmatic crap rightfully into the toilet... and went all the way on full exploration and exploitation of the clues found in the data and in the fringes...that modern science threw out in it's normalization of data, it's tossing out of things that did not fit theory. Theory which they had mislabeled and misinterpreted as laws.

And this is how the black ops projects and large corporations, military, and governments managed to secretly get 1000's of years ahead of the rest of the world in technology and theory.

I could go on for months, here. And I have.

[Strat]

Posted by Shade (here)
I am a scientist

Nice! What's your field of study?

[CdnSirian]

There are seemingly conflicting voices on this thread, yet I see them as the many sides of the same coin.

All the viewpoints are important. All present truth.

Absolutes can be elusive...

[Rocky_Shorz]

Posted by we-R-one (here)
PS I will gladly remove part of my comments from post #120, if a proper source can be provided........

stats on IMOs are tough...

we each learn and share what we know, if you would have asked me I would have said my head, and left it at that...

around here getting quoted by a News Source isn't the top of our priority lists...

this has been a rough Full Moon cycle, add the Holidays and most are ready for a vacation...

We're all good...

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Theoretical scientists understand that there is NO law, anywhere in science and in reality, and that every single theory that has been very wrongly called a law is open to questioning at every step and at every moment and that NONE of them is to be adhered to in the face of observation and data. NONE. Not a single one.

A fine rant, Carmody (all of it, not just my randomly chosen quote.) Thanks.

I am reminded of why I had so much fun as a Unix guru and Linux kernel hacker working on leading (bleeding) edge hardware for 30 years.

The reality of what that hardware could do, and we intended it to do, kept changing so rapidly that any "law" more specific than Moore's Law (constant exponential increase in transistor density) could not survive more than a few years. One had to keep devising new theories, concepts, and rules of thumb. To do this successfully, one needed hands on experience and solid understanding from solder to connectors and packaging to instruction set architectures to compilers and language design to kernel system call API's to system library architecture to GUI human interface conventions, so that one knew, in one's gut, how arbitrary and malleable were the details in each of these layers, because one had, oneself, changed several of these layers, in ways that affected many other practitioners work and the resulting products.

Such times are transient. Soon the surviving details are solidified and canonized, within the framework of the power structure on this planet.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
Such times are transient. Soon the surviving details are solidified and canonized, within the framework of the power structure on this planet.

Therein lies one of the two fundamental reasons that I am here, now, on this forum, instead of on the Linux Kernel Mailing List.

1. The power structure was closing in on what I could accomplish of substantial interest, shaping what I was working on into the sort of computer that the NSA might use to track us human cattle on this planet (a specialized, narrowly focused and highly compartmentalized endeavor with narrow focus and dubious intentions.)
2. I was being poisoned in mind, body and soul in all the other ways that I had been ignoring. The ongoing project to poison humanity was getting to me as well. Unlike the few really brilliant geniuses who seem to advance their craft while tending to other aspects of their being, I had needed to and/or chosen to focus my more modest talents in one area, neglecting the rest.

It was time to put aside that focus and tend to the rest of me, if I wished to regain my health and lay a foundation for additional fruitful and beneficial endeavors in this life.

[Flash]

Posted by Rocky_Shorz (here)

Posted by we-R-one (here)
PS I will gladly remove part of my comments from post #120, if a proper source can be provided........

stats on IMOs are tough...

we each learn and share what we know, if you would have asked me I would have said my head, and left it at that...

around here getting quoted by a News Source isn't the top of our priority lists...

this has been a rough Full Moon cycle, add the Holidays and most are ready for a vacation...

We're all good...

In fact, that the source material and references, when ask, would be a "it is me" answer means potentially two things:

Me is a pure idiot with such an inflated ego that it is laughable

or

Me is a true expert in his field, or a true thinker, in which case it becomes exceedingly interesting to converse with.

In Avalon, we have the second case much more often than the first.

[Warlock]

I encountered this same issue while part of another forum, which I still belong to. I do not spend much time there, simply because the level of open-mindedness and intelligence is on a higher level here.

The problem is that I can quote a source and then you can look for a source that says the opposite. So then, who is to be believed? Then I say "well my source has a Masters in such and such and has been in that field for such and such a time".
You retort that your source has a PHD and while they haven't been in that field for quite that long, they do have the education, and it goes on and on and on.

As regards personal experience, observation and just simply knowing someone who tells you what they know, how can that be discounted?
For example, if I knew William Cooper while he was alive, and he told me that this happened to him and he knew this and that, how can you say to me "Well show me"? I'm telling you what he told me. I'm telling you that he showed me a certain copy of a document and he kept it. Now, was my source in this example legit? Yes.
What if I gave you the information he gave to me, but refused to name him as the source? If I was trustworthy, you would probably believe, but what if you didn't know me? Then what?
And so it goes.............

Concerning personal experience and observation, I will tell you I have had an encounter with a demon. I won't go into details, but if you were not there, you cannot tell me that what happened was this or that. It was not 'this or that'. It was not my imagination. It was not someone playing a trick on me.
I have no evidence to show you concerning this experience. No audio, no video, no nothing. This event could not be re-created by a scientist in a lab, but no matter, because it happened in the real world, not a fantasy world of controlled conditions.

I think I'm done with my thoughts for now.

Warlock

[Rocky_Shorz]

I'm curious, how did you know it was a demon, have your ever heard of the red skinned dude Onyx met?

horns and everything fits the description...

if you looked up the word Demon in a dictionary, it would be this guy's picture...

but his reason for being here wasn't evil...


Pretty brilliant way to hide in plain site, tell everyone you're a demon, and no one will chase you... most won't even tell friends or family...

how would a local priest respond if you said you are being visited by a demon?

pure Genius...

[jackovesk]

Firstly, I'd like to state on the record, I am a fan of Duncan O'Finioan's...

However, just having painstakingly listened to 2 Duncan O'Finioan - Round table discussions on Wolf Spirit Radio...

12/1/2012 & 12/28/2012

I must say, what absolute 'Jibberish'...

It certainly is a worry, when people take all this stuff so seriously..!

It begs the question: Why..?

I can only talk on behalf of myself and my observations and have come to the conclusion...

Too many people, simply have (Too-Much) time on their hands...

Take a leaf out of Duncan's message i.e. What are 'You' actually doing to effect change..???

What the hell is all the fuss about...????

Think about it...