quote:

---

Barnabas62:What interests me is the staying power of the extra-terrestrial myth in its various forms. What is its enduring power?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
oH, so we begin with the PRESUMPTION that History is merely subjective in the first place--

that nobody can speak to History from the first person; that was recorded in the past is all there is;

that it's all just a matter of opinion anyway.

...It's the perfect Occult argument ... there is only One Truth, and it is ALL One ...

As above, so below ...

This is not what Jesus taught us ... ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall set us free.

My personal recollections count for zero;

Teachings of the Christ count for zero;

Two thousand years of wars to propagate ideology count for zero; and attempts to establish common Laws based on behavior count for zero.

I'm still not feeling "heard" here.


EEWC

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

History is not subjective; it is objective, physical and factual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Annunaki have been coming here periodically for nearly half a million years, and every single hierarchy on this planet is based on the Annunaki model.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

History is not subjective; it is objective, physical and factual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

History is not subjective; it is objective, physical and factual.

---

Possibly so. But you have yet to give us a reason to think that what YOU say is history REALLY IS HISTORY. Just because you assert something is HISTORY doesn't make it so. You have to do better than that. You need to give us evidence that we can smell, eat, taste, feel, touch, or see, and link it with sound reasoning to your conclusions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

History is not subjective; it is objective, physical and factual.

---

Possibly so. But you have yet to give us a reason to think that what YOU say is history REALLY IS HISTORY. Just because you assert something is HISTORY doesn't make it so. You have to do better than that. You need to give us evidence that we can smell, eat, taste, feel, touch, or see, and link it with sound reasoning to your conclusions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

History is not subjective; it is objective, physical and factual.

---

Possibly so. But you have yet to give us a reason to think that what YOU say is history REALLY IS HISTORY. Just because you assert something is HISTORY doesn't make it so. You have to do better than that. You need to give us evidence that we can smell, eat, taste, feel, touch, or see, and link it with sound reasoning to your conclusions.

---

That requirement, if applied consistently, must inevitably lead to atheism must it not?

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: That requirement, if applied consistently, must inevitably lead to atheism must it not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
On what do I base my choice whether to believe something or not, when I'm confronted with something without scientific evidence? My free will.

---

quote:

---

Emily Windsor-Cragg:
you also believe--

the earth is flat and you'll drop off the edge;
No

the sun is 93 million miles away;
Yes

the moon is 2100 miles in diameter;
Yes

the earth has a molten iron core;
Yes

civilization began just 6000 years ago;
Give or take a thousand years. It depends a bit on how you define 'civilization'

before that people lived in caves;
Yes. Some of them continued to do so for some time afterwards.

there's a Law that mandates the IRS income tax;
I'm not from the US, I don't know.

Edward Duke of Windsor abdicated for the love of Wallis Simpson;
I'm not from the UK, I don't know.

Lee Harvey Oswald shot President Kennedy;
Yes, until confronted with compelling other evidence.

Building Seven came down of its own accord;
Yes, it came down because of the 9/11 attacks (until confronted with compelling other evidence).

the Supreme Court rules on Common Law in the nation called the United States of America.
I'm not from the US, I don't know.

---

quote:

---

mousethief: Personal experience. Making choices based only on your free will isn't Christianity, it's Sartrian existentialism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

mousethief: Personal experience. Making choices based only on your free will isn't Christianity, it's Sartrian existentialism.

---

I don't know much about Sartrian existentialism. I'll make it a mix between free will and personal experience, would that be ok?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
And to get on with conventional belief structures,

you also believe--

the earth is flat and you'll drop off the edge;
the sun is 93 million miles away;
the moon is 2100 miles in diameter;
the earth has a molten iron core;
civilization began just 6000 years ago;
before that people lived in caves;
there's a Law that mandates the IRS income tax;
Edward Duke of Windsor abdicated for the love of Wallis Simpson;
Lee Harvey Oswald shot President Kennedy;
Building Seven came down of its own accord;
and
the Supreme Court rules on Common Law in the nation called the United States of America.

Right? You believe all that too, right?

These beliefs are common mythological currency in this country, where Annunaki culture is considered a myth and secret societies remain secret.

This is the stuff we are expected to swallow.

I don't swallow it; but you guess that already.

To me, what is actually true is up for study.

EEWC

---

Since when was a flat Earth a common view? It hasn't been a common view....ever. The Ancient Greeks, Persians and Arabians all believed in a spherical Earth. As for things to do with the sun, moon and Earth, those are worked out mathematically. Do you doubt mathematics?
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Do you doubt mathematics?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Do you doubt mathematics?

---

Mathematics is one of the most insidious inventions of the Annunaki. With it they lull millions of people every year, people who otherwise might have learned the truth about those insidious space bastards.

---

I thought there was something strange about my maths teachers
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Here's one of my public Facebook pages.

https://www.facebook.com/AnnunakiFromOrion#

Maybe you can get to it. I'm working in there today, to resort images into albums.


 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Do you doubt mathematics?

---

Mathematics is one of the most insidious inventions of the Annunaki. With it they lull millions of people every year, people who otherwise might have learned the truth about those insidious space bastards.

---

I thought there was something strange about my maths teachers

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
This type of "understanding" (perhaps it is better to call it "gnosis") is not uncommon in my experience, but it is pesky difficult to set up any framework of dialogue with anyone who thinks that way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Here's one of my public Facebook pages.

https://www.facebook.com/AnnunakiFromOrion#

Maybe you can get to it. I'm working in there today, to resort images into albums.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
And to get on with conventional belief structures,

you also believe--
...
the earth is flat and you'll drop off the edge;
...
civilization began just 6000 years ago;
before that people lived in caves;
...

---

Since when was a flat Earth a common view? It hasn't been a common view....ever. The Ancient Greeks, Persians and Arabians all believed in a spherical Earth. As for things to do with the sun, moon and Earth, those are worked out mathematically. Do you doubt mathematics?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
And to get on with conventional belief structures,

you also believe--

the earth is flat and you'll drop off the edge;
the sun is 93 million miles away;
the moon is 2100 miles in diameter;
the earth has a molten iron core;
civilization began just 6000 years ago;
before that people lived in caves;
there's a Law that mandates the IRS income tax;
Edward Duke of Windsor abdicated for the love of Wallis Simpson;
Lee Harvey Oswald shot President Kennedy;
Building Seven came down of its own accord;
and
the Supreme Court rules on Common Law in the nation called the United States of America.

Right? You believe all that too, right?

These beliefs are common mythological currency in this country, where Annunaki culture is considered a myth and secret societies remain secret.

This is the stuff we are expected to swallow.

I don't swallow it; but you guess that already.

To me, what is actually true is up for study.

EEWC

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:


Google Rossyln Chapel, the Templars.
http://tinyurl.com/b6h2zfq


EEWC

---

Rosslyn Chapel is a Scottish medieval collegiate church - a sort of church built by the well-off to have a fancy place for a group of priests to say mass for the repose of their soul and those of their families. It's extremely ornate - because it's meant to impress the other noble and gentry families who were also building them. It's a fashion that post-dates the dissolution of the small and not-very-influential Lothian preceptory of the Knights Templar in Scotland by over a hundred years. It has nothing to do with them.

I know this in part because I actually worked in a manuscript repository which had Sinclair papers and charters and had to deal with the various types who came in who didn't know one end of a medieval charter from another, but weren't going to let that stop them making stuff up about Templars.

Hello Emily, if you can't actually read the relevant original documents to put them in their proper historical context or know enough to make sure you're getting your ideas from someone who can - what you're doing may be thrilling for you, but it isn't history. It would be rather like me offering to produce code for software by communing with astral spirits after chicken sacrifices. It might make me feel jolly important and I might manage to impress a few people with my astral chicken computer wisdom but it hasn't the first thing to do with how to write code.

If I signed up for a forum of software coders and put forth my chicken-sacrifice theory and credentials - I 'd get the same sort of reception that you get. Now I might get off on that and how I was being persecuted for the truth, and how coders were all part of conspiracy to stop people understanding how their computers were really governed by spirits, but if I actually wanted to know anything about computers and thought understanding them was important, it would be tragic and sad.

I would just be blindly insulting the people who could actually tell me about what I was interested in, and wasting their time because I was so far adrift from reality and somehow unable to perceive that. And I'd end up feeling isolated because I was unable to communicate enjoyably with other people and getting a hostile response from them - even if I could give myself an utterly false sense of superiority and 'being right' as some sort of compensation.

I think you should try posting about anything you can think of except your fascination with this sad pseudo-history, because if you could make contact with people and enjoy talking to them about subjects where you can have an ordinary conversation, you might enjoy it and might start to get some perspective.

Best wishes,
Louise

[ 20. May 2013, 02:17: Message edited by: Louise ]
 

---

Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on :
 
I think I would like to start an elite society.....
Anyone else care to join?
Elite about wot?
I dunno!

[ 20. May 2013, 02:25: Message edited by: Rowen ]
 

---

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rowen:
I think I would like to start an elite society.....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rowen:
I think I would like to start an elite society.....
Anyone else care to join?
Elite about wot?
I dunno!

---

Any society that'd accept me wouldn't be elite enough
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
I'm really amazed at your comments.

I don't have any reasonable way to answer you, except to say, I'm doing the best I can with the information I can find.

I know my links only work off and on ... always. That's a problem I always have.

God is very real and Personable to me, and He leads me on, in the pilgrimage that my life is.

At least we here have GOD in common, even if we don't agree about the time of day.

Whether our thoughts align or not, at least our Lord gave us behavioral guidelines so that we can get along anyway despite our divergent and unharmonious thoughts.

Howzzat for an answer? Hope it's sufficient.

I'll try not to stir things up so much next time.

With kindest regards,
Emily

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
And to get on with conventional belief structures,

you also believe--

the earth is flat and you'll drop off the edge;
the sun is 93 million miles away;
the moon is 2100 miles in diameter;
the earth has a molten iron core;
civilization began just 6000 years ago;
before that people lived in caves;
there's a Law that mandates the IRS income tax;
Edward Duke of Windsor abdicated for the love of Wallis Simpson;
Lee Harvey Oswald shot President Kennedy;
Building Seven came down of its own accord;
and
the Supreme Court rules on Common Law in the nation called the United States of America.

Right? You believe all that too, right?

These beliefs are common mythological currency in this country, where Annunaki culture is considered a myth and secret societies remain secret.

This is the stuff we are expected to swallow.

I don't swallow it; but you guess that already.

To me, what is actually true is up for study.

EEWC

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

Emily Windsor-Cragg:
before that people lived in caves;

---

Yes. Some of them continued to do so for some time afterwards.

---

Is that actually true? What about areas with no caves to live in?
 

---

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Well, I don't trust our leaders either, the higher up the tree you get the more heads you stood on to get there. But I do trust jobbing archaeologists and scientists - there is no way they could all be silenced, especially in this 'information age'. Look at Jimmy Saville, it all came out in the end - it always does imo.
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I had an initial peek at your photo albums. I would have found it helpful if the captions gave a few more details. Such as:

Where the feature shown is from.
What it is. (As in monument, pot, seal...)
What Earth culture produced it. (As in Sumerian, Akkadian, not Annunaki)
What, exactly, it is supposed to demonstrate.

Some you have annotated. Others you have not.

If you refer to a life on, or in, Lyra, you explain where or what Lyra is. If it is the constellation, the same objections apply as to Orion. Constellations are human artifacts, images projected onto the screen of the starry sky, linking together stars which may be very, very far removed from each other in reality. We as a species are very good at image projection.

We are especially good with regard to faces. (Research with babies has shown that they react to a pattern of dots on a disc something like a smiley as if it is a face.) Seeing faces in landscapes is so easy that is isn't proof of much.

Coming back to your list of myths which are believed with no challenge, the sizes and distances of the major heavenly bodies in the Solar System can be determined experimentally by anyone, using techniques devised by the Ancient Greeks - I've done it as part of the Open University Science Foundation course.
 

---

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Emily--

Serious question: have you been reading David Icke?

I skimmed much of his site, years ago. He, too, seems determined to make sense of and connect a wide variety of things, so that they make sense.

I take a "don't know" attitude toward most things. I like to play with ideas. If someone says that something isn't true, I mull over whether I can think of any way that it *could* be true. That doesn't mean that it *is* true--just that looking from different perspectives can be interesting, and fun.

But, sometimes, you just have to hold the puzzle pieces. *Forcing* them together can just muddle your search for truth. Living with "don't know" can be very scary. For me, it's the best way to go. And it takes a lot of pressure off of me. Whew!


If what you say about the Annunaki is true, what difference does it make in our everyday lives? What is the good truth that they've kept us from.

I've noticed, both on the Ship and on your sites, that you emphasize right behavior over doctrine.

So how then shall we live?

Not poking at you. Honestly asking.
 

---

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :
 
Strange that the people who go on about extraterrestrial influences on ancient culture never seem to publish in academically peer-reviewed journals on Near-eastern societies.

 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:

Serious question: have you been reading David Icke?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

I have archived about 50,000 photo images that prove--to myself--that what I have just stated is true. I don't know of any way or means for me to convince anybody else of anything who wasn't willing to spend the next ten years studying images and manuscripts as I have done.

---

quote:

---

So, I just state what I know, which is, we are lied to by TPTB about nearly everything. That's a game the Elites play against the rest of us.

---

quote:

---

But the killer aspect is when we don't know WHAT WE DON'T KNOW. And that's the Game human leadership has been playing against the people -- Not telling us what we don't know so we have to go digging for it ourselves.

---

Are you Donald Rumsfeld's long-lost sister?

Seriously, this doesn't make any sense. How can "human leadership" tell me what I don't know. It - governments or whoever - doesn't know what I don't know.
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief
You need to give us evidence that we can smell, eat, taste, feel, touch, or see, and link it with sound reasoning to your conclusions.

---

That requirement, if applied consistently, must inevitably lead to atheism must it not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I think I get it, though. Emily Windsor-Cragg does not trust any of the well publicised sources because they show the effects of successful suppression of the truth by those who wish to suppress the truth.

<snip>

(Pity she wasn't around for our special "Da Vinci Code" discussion board. That was a fun time with Dan Brown, the Knights Templar, the Priory of Sion, the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail etc. Louise went to town IIRC. Much fun was had by all.)

---

I missed that one! I have read as far as this post and hope I have picked up correctly the trend of the thread. I wonder whether EEWC has thought of joining the Graham Hancock message boards, where she will find sympathetic views onZechariah Sitchin et al ... although I'll be there as a challenger.
 

---

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Interesting thing I noticed when reading Icke's site:

When I skimmed his site, years ago, he seemed obsessive about making a coherent whole of all his questions--kind of a General Theory of everything. The one section that seemed less so was about childhood sexual abuse. (Against it.) Which got me to thinking about the long-term effects of trauma, and being caught in someone else's lies, and how a survivor makes sense of all that.

I might have been totally off-base, but it seemed like a possibility.
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
A couple of years ago, I was posting on a Dutch forum that in the end was overrun by people who argued like Emily. What I always found interesting was their double-edged fascination with Science.

On the one hand, Science is dismissed by them as 'foregone objective conclusions'. On the other hand, they almost crave to be recognised as scientific ('objective, physical, actual data').

---

Picking up on Leaf's point re gnosis, cultish beliefs can be quite empowering for people who otherwise lack recognition. In the cult, the "outsider" becomes "in with the in-crowd", which seems to breed a certain kind of superiority. new personal significance is found. If this is coupled with a self-enclosing ideology (e.g. mainstream sources are not to be trusted, conspiracy to deceive is everywhere, "we" have a special revelation) the mental prison has two locks; I'm better "inside", I'm safer "inside". Well, if it makes them happy, it can't be that bad. But if it makes them happy, why the hell do they look so sad?

The massive attraction of "The Matrix" seems to have something to say about modern (perhaps I should say postmodern) western culture. Take the red pill. Find out how deep the rabbit hole goes. Welcome to the "real world".

All you have to do is swallow that red pill, folks. But, let's face it. Pills may be hard to swallow, but not nearly as hard to swallow as the suspension of disbelief required to find anything plausible in Emily Windsor-Cragg's linked website. Nothing of significance to be found down that rabbit-hole. Well, at least not about the "real world". What it has to say about Emily Windsor-Cragg is a matter for experts in a rather different field of enquiry. I couldn't possibly comment. Well, not in Purgatory, anyway.
 

---

Posted by Thyme (# 12360) on :
 
It's all reminding me of the stories that surface occassionally about how the Christian Churches have suppressed the real truth about Jesus, citing various Gnostic Gospels as evidence.

Rowan Williams (Former ABC) nailed it when he said something like: 'The reason these documents disappeared from mainstream Christian sources is not because they were suppressed (they are readily accessible now to anyone with internet access or even access to a bookshop), but because they are a collection of badly written nonsense.'

Anyway, I'm getting a bit confused about whether the Annunaki are the evil overlords screwing with our perceptions or hugely advanced beings that the PTB are trying to prevent us from knowing about. Or both.

But I am a bear of very little brain which is why I don't post much in Purgatory. Mainstream thought isn't always the correct or final answer but this Annunaki stuff (which I've never heard of before) just seems too barking to be worth much mental effort.

I think I'll wait till Emily and her friends have convinced the PTB.

Barnabus 62's question about the enduring power of the extra terrestial myth is interesting, there does seem to be something hardwired in us that finds this idea compelling. I wonder if it is just a way in which our brains interpret that sense that their is something inexplicable about the universe and its workings which religious explain as God.
 

---

Posted by Nicodemia (# 4756) on :
 
These Annuki would be homo erectus then, not homo sapiens?
 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 
barnabas62: If this post is too off topic, please delete. thank you.
I turned on Radio 4 yesterday and caught the end of Desert Island discs, where the castaway chose as her book something by David Icke!! I think I'll listen to the repeat on Friday to find out why.

Some years ago I read 'Lost Secrets of the Sacred Ark' by Laurence Gardiner in order to challenge some GH ideas. It stated that gold can be super-heated and turned into a magical white powder which was fed to the AE pharaohs. I followed this up, had an interesting conversation with someone in the Gold Institute (or whatever it was) who was pleased to have a change from the usual enquiry of how much their gold was worth.; also I checked out all web sites claiming to supply this powder! Quite a few led back to David I cke's site. My efforts were in vain, however, because thpostter(s) concerned on GH still believed.
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
The Annunaki are REAL! I was a skeptic, but then the kind chap who lives in the local underpass offered to show me the TRUTH and when I woke up and dried off from the ice bath he'd left me in (apparently extreme cold shorts out the Illuminati tracking chip they implant in everyone at birth) I could hear the beautiful song of the wonderful travellers from Orion! To think it was being blocked by my fillings - DENTISTRY IS PART OF THE CONSPIRACY, PEOPLE!!!

The One World Government conceals the truth about the Annunaki, but not well enough. Someone found out at the start of the last century - King Edward VIII and his brother Adolf. When it became clear that the Cabal would never allow the Truth to be disseminated the latter even hid a clue to it in the name of his political party - AnnuNAKI/NAZI - coincidence? HA! You have been deceived my FRIEND! The whole of WW2 was fought to make sure that THAT clue would never AGAIN be seen!

Ia, Ia - they come AT last! Earth Government hides ALL truth! The pyramids are PROOF! NASA is lying to you! The Earth is NOT FLAT! The Annunaki will return! The Labyrinth has you! I am the Minotaur! Take the RED pill! THE cake is A lie! WE aLl live in A YELLOW subMARine! THE CAKE IS A LIE!!!
 

---

Posted by Alaric the Goth (# 511) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 


(Wipes coffee splutters off keyboard)

Thanks Marvin. I needed that.
 

---

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Marvin's post reminds me of Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum.

Basically, people purposely make up a fake conspiracy theory. They think it's funny. Then things start happening. Things get so confusing that they don't know whether things are really happening, or they've gone crazy, or a mixture of both.

It was, frankly, the bleakest book I've ever read. Some people take it as pure satire. ISTM there was some humor in it, but not much.

When I finished it, I didn't want to read anything else ever again. The only thing that *might* get me to read it is if I read up on Kabbalah, because I got a feeling it was subtly worked into the story. (I've read another novel--Dante's Equation--that worked its way openly through...is it the Tree of Life? And Katherine Neville's The Eight has some interesting things worked into that very haunting book.)
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 

quote:

---

Anglican_Brat: Strange that the people who go on about extraterrestrial influences on ancient culture never seem to publish in academically peer-reviewed journals on Near-eastern societies.

---

quote:

---

Doc Tor: Emily, you do realise that when you say 'from Orion', that's pretty much meaningless?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The Real Truth

---

Thank you Marvin for enduring such physical torment to lead us to the truth.

As you represent the PTB here I am now a believer.

 

---

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
He is clearly in error, because that should read SHEEPLE not PEOPLE.
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
As you represent the PTB here I am now a believer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
...SusanDoris, what is GH?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Picking up on Leaf's point re gnosis, cultish beliefs can be quite empowering for people who otherwise lack recognition. In the cult, the "outsider" becomes "in with the in-crowd", which seems to breed a certain kind of superiority. new personal significance is found. If this is coupled with a self-enclosing ideology (e.g. mainstream sources are not to be trusted, conspiracy to deceive is everywhere, "we" have a special revelation) the mental prison has two locks; I'm better "inside", I'm safer "inside". Well, if it makes them happy, it can't be that bad. But if it makes them happy, why the hell do they look so sad?...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
Marvin, I am in total admiration of your ability to do that!

SusanDoris, what is GH?

---

Agree with you about Marvin! GH is the Graham Hancock Message Boards.
In case anyone wants to know, the Ark of the Covenant is, apparently, suspended above the labyrinth in the centre of Chartres Cathedral in another time dimension. Unfortunately, it cannot be retrieved because the correct conjunction of the original stained glass window, roof peak and something else I forget is impossible because of the ravages of time.
 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Clingford:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
...SusanDoris, what is GH?

---

I think she is referring to Graham Hancock who is a writer of pseudo-history.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
I have come across a fair few miserable Christians over the years...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Clingford:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
...SusanDoris, what is GH?

---

I think she is referring to Graham Hancock who is a writer of pseudo-history.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patdys:
In hell I joked that one person's bat shit crazy is another's theology. This was a very generalist joking comment based on that thread development. But like a lot of my humour, it expressed an element of my underlying belief or fear. Now I accept the presentation is a little unusual but the content Emily presents is probably no less unusual than all religious beliefs. I don't share Emily 's beliefs. But then I don't share many of the beliefs of my own faith tradition.

But I do like what Emily wanted as her screen name. The feminine form of Pinocchio. And I guess, I too, want to be a real boy, (a real girl), a real human. And I shudder to think how I, with my one trick relational theology, present to an outsider.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patdys:
In hell I joked that one person's bat shit crazy is another's theology. This was a very generalist joking comment based on that thread development. But like a lot of my humour, it expressed an element of my underlying belief or fear.

---

quote:

---

I AM THE walrus.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
HE IS A MARTIAN! And probably a Lizard as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:

quote:

---

I AM THE walrus.

---

Sir Paul, is that you???

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Pity she wasn't around for our special "Da Vinci Code" discussion board. That was a fun time with Dan Brown, the Knights Templar, the Priory of Sion, the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail etc. Louise went to town IIRC. Much fun was had by all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
…
I now have, running through my head, a parody of a parody composed by a friend of mine about the theories of Bauval and Hancock and sphinx measuring.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
. . . Each of us knows what we know, what we believe. We have a foggy notion of what we don't know that we'd like to know. But the killer aspect is when we don't know WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.
. . . Emily

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
I have read that thing about the Ark - someone with all of the author's books donated them to Oxfam, so I bought them, scanned them, and returned them.

---

Eminently sensible!! In fact, I checked the biblical references too. It made for quite an interesting hobby for a while actually.

quote:

---

I thought it quite amusing to see Marcus Du Sautoy on TV risking standing beneath the invisible Ark when discussing maths. It was quite clear that one essential pole of the suspension mechanism was missing.

---

quote:

---

I'm impressed that SusanDoris went to the trouble of investigating the gold hypothesis. I just wrote it off without bothering. (

---

quote:

---

Did you know that Waitrose sells edible gold for cake decorating?)

---

Obviously, waitrose know something we don't.
 

---

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patdys:
In hell I joked that one person's bat shit crazy is another's theology. This was a very generalist joking comment based on that thread development. But like a lot of my humour, it expressed an element of my underlying belief or fear. Now I accept the presentation is a little unusual but the content Emily presents is probably no less unusual than all religious beliefs. I don't share Emily 's beliefs. But then I don't share many of the beliefs of my own faith tradition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
kind of a General Theory of everything. The one section that seemed less so was about childhood sexual abuse. (Against it.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:
Is there any way to claim 'your visitor from another world is ridiculous, but mine is totally plausible' without appealing to special pleading?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Oh gawd! It seems if you believe in one conspiracy theory you believe them all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
. . . So if your religious worldview also contains a whole bunch of unlikely conspiracy theories, or scientifically invalid nonsense, then that worldview can be critiqued more heavily than a worldview whose beliefs are generally consistent with reality as we observe it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
It's like, "Secrets of the Elites" are never to be revealed, eh?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Basically, people purposely make up a fake conspiracy theory. They think it's funny. Then things start happening.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
My aunt was married to a gentleman who believed that there was life after death for all, but that for non-Christians, this life would be, not in heaven, but on other planets. He mentioned Venus and Mars as options.

I think he was a Methodist

---

Actually that sounds like Mormon teaching to me. Everyone, whoever htey are, gets retrospectively baptised and gets to live on new planets, with their social status depending on how near their beliefs are to Mormonism and how many kids they have and how white they are (they have kept quiet about that last bit for a few decades). These new planets are managed by the best Mormons (i.e. white, male, and with lots of kids) who get to be a sort of local god. Once upon a time (*they might have officially repudiated the idea now, I'm not sure) they would go on to say that the God of this world was just such a holy man promoted to godhood out of some repvious world - and of course there could be other such gods in other worlds inaccessible to us. So strictly speaking Mormonism is, or was not so long ago, not theist at all. Much more like ancient pagan beliefs. Maybe even Sumerian ones. (Except that they didn't think the rest of us had a chance, you had to be a god to live on)
 

---

Posted by Cara (# 16966) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
. . . So if your religious worldview also contains a whole bunch of unlikely conspiracy theories, or scientifically invalid nonsense, then that worldview can be critiqued more heavily than a worldview whose beliefs are generally consistent with reality as we observe it.

---

A few Christian beliefs not generally consistent with any reality I personally have observed (YMMV):

The capacity of Jesus to:
turn water into wine
walk across storm-driven waters
revivify people who've been dead several days
re-attach sword-severed ears with touch alone
be the progeny of a supernatural being

The capacity of the BVM to:
give birth without the agency of human sperm
remain virgin (if that means an intact hymen) after giving birth

Other, more general, beliefs:
An eternal life-after-death in two distinct phases, the second of which returns individuals to perfected versions of their original physical bodies

I grant you, the addition of highly-unlikely conspiracy theories would make any the above look even dodgier. But you've got to admit Croesos has a point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
kind of a General Theory of everything. The one section that seemed less so was about childhood sexual abuse. (Against it.)

---

People of this sort seem to generate General Theories - a case of pattern recognition gone mad perhaps.

On a more mundane level, there is Andrew Kadir-Buxton who believes everything, bar everything, from the female orgasm to mental illness can be solved by punching people in the head:

http://www.kadir-buxton.com/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:
Is there any way to claim 'your visitor from another world is ridiculous, but mine is totally plausible' without appealing to special pleading?

---

Yes and no. In terms of the high-level beliefs themselves, there's not much difference. But the worldview that contains that belief also contains a whole bunch of other beliefs (and perhaps relies upon them) that might be demonstrably false.

So if your religious worldview also contains a whole bunch of unlikely conspiracy theories, or scientifically invalid nonsense, then that worldview can be critiqued more heavily than a worldview whose beliefs are generally consistent with reality as we observe it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
kind of a General Theory of everything. The one section that seemed less so was about childhood sexual abuse. (Against it.)

---

People of this sort seem to generate General Theories - a case of pattern recognition gone mad perhaps.

---

Speaking of pattern recognition -- reading through this thread and its relative in Styx, and glancing through Emily Windsor-Cragg's website, I'm reminded of the film A Beautiful Mind--especially the state of his office, plastered with pages from magazines with an intricate web of string connecting random words that spelled out Soviet spy messages.
 

---

Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on :
 
Does all of this mean Gozer the Gozerian will be coming back??!
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Serious question: have you been reading David Icke?

... Some years ago I did, but he comes to a lot of conclusions that my data does not support. [I'm using elipses ... to differentiate between your text and mine.)

I skimmed much of his site, years ago. He, too, seems determined to make sense of and connect a wide variety of things, so that they make sense.

... Yes. We need to make sense of our lives, and particularly of our public and civil lives, where leaders are taking us.

I take a "don't know" attitude toward most things. I like to play with ideas. If someone says that something isn't true, I mull over whether I can think of any way that it *could* be true. That doesn't mean that it *is* true--just that looking from different perspectives can be interesting, and fun.

... Sure! And that's what game designers do, because they don't have to be bothered with too much data, too little data, or data that doesn't fit.

But, sometimes, you just have to hold the puzzle pieces. *Forcing* them together can just muddle your search for truth. Living with "don't know" can be very scary. For me, it's the best way to go. And it takes a lot of pressure off of me. Whew!

... Yes, I began this poking into things twelve years ago when I was forcibly retired (by illness), and had time on my hands to do it.

If what you say about the Annunaki is true, what difference does it make in our everyday lives?

... Huge. They signed Treaties with Eisenhower from 1954 onward that have affected our use of technologies in a very extremely negative way ... as in serial wars just to test armaments and guns;
bacteriological warfare, electronic warfare, etec.

What is the good truth that they've kept us from.

... Very little "good" truth; just a lot of predatory military operations that we never should have taken on.

I've noticed, both on the Ship and on your sites, that you emphasize right behavior over doctrine.

... Everybody has their thoughts. When I was a kid I believed all sorts of silly things; and then when I had children, I went through my Fundie period; and then when the kids were growing up and teaching me about limits and boundaries; I lightened up. After all the kids left home, I had to deal with my own inner self. And each time my life changed, my beliefs changed (or maybe the other way around). But my behavior had to remain consistently civil, thrift, simple and decent in order for me to live with myself and with other people. So I adopted the tactic of just letting people have their own thoughts (and beliefs) because I figure, they're going through their own shit.

So how then shall we live?

...Jesus' teachings are still the best, and hardest in the short-term to abide by. But i think His approach is the best, along with Common Laws (against Harm, Deceit, Waste and Undue Cost) which His Father YHVH gave to Israel first, and then to the British.

Not poking at you. Honestly asking.

... I can tell that. Thank you so much for poking questions at me. I love that challenge, to answer and be civil.

EEWC
 

---

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
For ten years, since Nancy Lieder had her dog put to sleep in anticipation of Armageddon, I have been re-rendering and analyzing NASA/ ESA/ JAXA and Astronomy photos to see what they conceal.

In the process what I discovered is that there is nothing in Astronomy or Space Science that is taught from Truth; everything you read everywhere is confabulated mythology.

I have archived about 50,000 photo images that prove--to myself--that what I have just stated is true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
As you represent the PTB here I am now a believer.

---

NOOOOOO - don't start believing until you've shorted out your tracking chip! THEY will find you and BRAINwash you again, over and over, always with the goddamn brainwashing guys, really it's getting old now so just stop ok? Nothing can prevent the TRUTH except for the FORCES of DARK. DARK is the absence of LIGHT, which means there isn't anything brightening up the place where you are did your candle blow out OMG YOUR CANDLE BLEW OUT. Prepare for the dugongs, for they come at night in the DARK. My new fillings said so. These ones AREn't a conspiracy. They're made of iron. Good, dependable iron from OrION - coincidence? HA! You have been deceived my FRIEND!. I am he who knows the truth because of iron in my tooth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Porridge:
I grant you, the addition of highly-unlikely conspiracy theories would make any the above look even dodgier. But you've got to admit Croesos has a point.

---

quote:

---

ET visitors from the Orion Constellation have been coming to Earth in 3616 cycles for nearly half a million years. Kept secret by elite societies, their top-down hierarchy form of governance has been replicated here all over the world, despite Secrecy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Surfing Madness:
My first thought on reading this was, does than mean that half of Scotland have the truth from drinking so much Irn-bru?

---

The Pictish Folk never knew the Annunaki Giant Humanoids From Beyond The Moon so they SWALLOW their iron when it should be in the tooth! The TRUTH is in the TOOTH! The TOOTH, Duke Leto! Testify! Beware the dugongs! SoyLENT Green is PEOPLE! The clue to this Truth was left in the Christian Festival of Lent - SoyLENT/LENT coincidence? HA! You have been deceived my FRIEND! The TICKETS are now DIAMONDS!!!
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Anglican't, I didn't come up with a theory until I was 40,000 photos into the project. I work phenomenologically ... without a hypothesis until it all fits together in a single Aha!

Also, Nibiru used to orbit OleSol in a 3616-year long orbit; and it would only show up here, come through, and the rest of the time Nibiru & Company were traveling back to Orion (1800 years) and then back here again (another 1800 years). They're long-lived people, so their culture took advantage of resources on this planet, from visit to visit.

Elites. Bloodlines beginning with Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Joseph, Jacob, etc., through the twelve tribes of that racial group ... who utilized crusades to enrich themselves with Babylonian banking practices, namely the Templars ... who then became the founding 300 families of Europe and who today own most of the world (they think). Elites today are industrialists, bankers and coupon-clipping globalists.

Why do humans obey the wishes of the ETs? Humans taught the ET cosmology (Occultists, New Age, Rosecrucians, Masons, Theosophists, etc) because it's COOL TO BE COOL. They have a set of teachings that promote individual self-love and outright complacency. (All One, Like Attracts Like, As Above, So Below, Reality is Illusion, Live by Astrology etc.)

Elites are commanded to maintain secrecy of the Annunaki teachings by their hierarchy MASTERS. Ask any Mason. ... But the A-liens are not overlords in any direct sense. They have their own lives, their own Monarchy, hierarchical systems, technologies and problems ... albeit similar to our own. They're divided into factions, as we are.

British Royalty, although claiming to be the head of the Anglican Church but being members of secret and civalric orders, were responsible for the founding of Tavistock (the psycho-puzzle palace), for the splitting off of Jews into Palestine (the Balfour Declaration), for the dumbing-down of the working classes (in opposition to Church schools' efforts at increasing literacy), so they're playing both ends against the middle, calling themselves Christian but playing the Occult card in the back room.

Kyzyi, the Mayans have pictographs of saucer craft, and their number system is similar to the Sumerians who learned from the Annunaki. Likewise, the Egyptians. There are pyramids all over the planet having similar architectural specifications, is another clue.

I hope I have covered everybody. If not, holler.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Anglican't, did the photo albums come up alright?

Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't; and I didn't want to add more photos until I knew if the system's working today.

Facebook fails a lot, in their linking, show and tell.

:/
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
SusanDoris, I'm sorry, I can't recall the details of Du Sautoy's programme - it was about a year back, and I can't remember what the maths was, either. It seemed very interesting at the time! He was on TV quite a bit then. (There's a piccy on this page Labyrinth )
Also, when I said I scanned the books, I meant scan read, not digitally copy them! Just in case anyone with a copyright interest is hanging about.

[ 20. May 2013, 16:25: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 

---

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
Everybody, this is neither the circus nor heaven - no trolling, no games. Parodies that make no debating point come very close to personal attack / trolling.

You are not obliged to participate in this thread if you don't want to, other boards (including hell) are thataway -->

Doublethink
Purgatory Host
 

---

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
Emily, thank you for improving the readability of your posts. Much appreciated.

Doublethink
Purgatory Host
 

---

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :
 
So if I've understood this correctly, our alien 'overlords' only visit when they happen to be passing through our part of the solar system. They also don't appear to hold any sanction over their appointees on Earth so it's not clear why these appointees would so clearly conform to their masters' wishes if they are subject to such lax, infrequent control.

And if the aliens are so technologically advanced, is there no merit in following their practices and way of life?

___________________________________

Separately, I note that you say the ROYAL FAMILY are part of our oppressive culture but that you call yourself Emily WINDSOR-Cragg. How are we to interpret what you say as the truth rather than a FALSE FLAG OPERATION?
 

---

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :
 
(In light of Doublethink's post at 5.22pm (cross-posted with mine) the second part of my post should perhaps be disregarded.)
 

---

Posted by TomOfTarsus (# 3053) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
I hope I have covered everybody. If not, holler.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
[QB]Also, Nibiru used to orbit OleSol in a 3616-year long orbit; and it would only show up here, come through, and the rest of the time Nibiru & Company were traveling back to Orion (1800 years) and then back here again (another 1800 years). They're long-lived people, so their culture took advantage of resources on this planet, from visit to visit.

---

quote:

---

Elites. Bloodlines beginning with Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Joseph, Jacob, etc., through the twelve tribes of that racial group ... who utilized crusades to enrich themselves with Babylonian banking practices, namely the Templars ...

---

quote:

---

who then became the founding 300 families of Europe and who today own most of the world (they think). Elites today are industrialists, bankers and coupon-clipping globalists.

---

quote:

---

Why do humans obey the wishes of the ETs? Humans taught the ET cosmology (Occultists, New Age, Rosecrucians, Masons, Theosophists, etc) because it's COOL TO BE COOL.

---

quote:

---

Elites are commanded to maintain secrecy of the Annunaki teachings by their hierarchy MASTERS. Ask any Mason. ... But the A-liens are not overlords in any direct sense. They have their own lives, their own Monarchy, hierarchical systems, technologies and problems ... albeit similar to our own. They're divided into factions, as we are.

---

quote:

---

Kyzyi, the Mayans have pictographs of saucer craft, and their number system is similar to the Sumerians who learned from the Annunaki.

---

quote:

---

Likewise, the Egyptians. There are pyramids all over the planet having similar architectural specifications, is another clue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
"Coupon-clipping globalists"? What do you mean?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
While trying to find details for SusanDoris, I came across this site, which does not entirely seem off topic. Exposing du Sautoy

---

quote:

---

If I’ve read your article correctly, you are hostile to du Sautoy because his programme is somehow anti-Christian.

---

I think he would like the strength of his arguments to help towards a realisation that atheism is the best choice!
 

---

Posted by St. Gwladys (# 14504) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
British Royalty, although claiming to be the head of the Anglican Church but being members of secret and civalric orders, were responsible for the founding of Tavistock (the psycho-puzzle palace

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by St. Gwladys:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
British Royalty, although claiming to be the head of the Anglican Church but being members of secret and civalric orders, were responsible for the founding of Tavistock (the psycho-puzzle palace

---

And I always thought that Tavistock was the pleasant little town we passed through on our way to Cornwall...

---

quote:

---

This thread is in poor taste. We should not make fun of the mentally ill.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
I think a better point to make would be that the traditional view of the incarnation of Jesus, while in one sense supernaturally fantastic, doesn't require serious breaches of the laws of planetary motion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
I think a better point to make would be that the traditional view of the incarnation of Jesus, while in one sense supernaturally fantastic, doesn't require serious breaches of the laws of planetary motion.

---

Oh, you mean like the star over Bethlehem which led the Wise Men to the manger?

---

quote:

---

But to accept Mormonism, I'd have to accept a bunch of things that I know aren't true, like horses (and a bunch of other animals, and crops) being around in America before the Europeans introduced them...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
So if I've understood this correctly, our alien 'overlords' only visit when they happen to be passing through our part of the solar system. They also don't appear to hold any sanction over their appointees on Earth so it's not clear why these appointees would so clearly conform to their masters' wishes if they are subject to such lax, infrequent control.

Before I dive in here, have you read "The Holographic Paradigm"? .... just so I can gauge what to place in the background.

And if the aliens are so technologically advanced, is there no merit in following their practices and way of life?

We're 3rd Dimension Physical, but they're 5th-thru-9th Dimensional Subjective.

We don't live by the same operational rules.

We in 3D live by causes and effects.

They in 7th D live by manifesting their thoughts as on a Startrek Holodeck.

Our rules do not work for them; and their rules do not work for us.

And this is part and parcel of the problem we have with Occult and New Age Teachings: they're appropriate for a place where results, effects and outcomes OPERATE DIFFERENT than here.

There's really no MIXING the two.



___________________________________

Separately, I note that you say the ROYAL FAMILY are part of our oppressive culture but that you call yourself Emily WINDSOR-Cragg. How are we to interpret what you say as the truth rather than a FALSE FLAG OPERATION?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
(In light of Doublethink's post at 5.22pm (cross-posted with mine) the second part of my post should perhaps be disregarded.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomOfTarsus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
I hope I have covered everybody. If not, holler.

---

You missed me! But no wonder, considering the speed that this thread is moving at.

What do you think of Jesus?
Tom

---

In my adoptive situation when I was five or six, the family was in chaos.

We were spending the summer of 1950 at Venice Park in California near Muscle Beach and on the way down to the beach I met a lady standing with some books in her hands. And she pulled me aside, and told me about Jesus. And I remember thinking at the time, "Gosh! He sounds as if He knew how to handle things better." So I said, "Okay, I'll give my life to Jesus ..." and I hoped Jesus would sort things out for me.

I love His methods, if not His outcome. I work at doing things His way.


 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
[/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by St. Gwladys:
And I always thought that Tavistock was the pleasant little town we passed through on our way to Cornwall... [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Justinian--So the Jews are the Templars? That's a new one on me
... Jews have joined the Templars and Jesuits.

---

quote:

---

"Second, you're equating the belief system of the patriarchal ritual-centered followers of the Supreme Architect of the Universe with the no true way fluffy New Agers. Wait, what?"
... Their dogma, cosmology and operating ethics are identical: All is One, Like Attracts Like, As Above so Below, Reality is Illusion, etc.

---

quote:

---

"Or is it the Golden Ratio showing up everywhere?"
... Annunaki are masters of the golden ratio in all their architecture and art work.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
"Dogs flew spaceships! The Aztecs invented the vacation! Men and women are the same sex! Our forefathers took drugs! Your brain is not the boss! Yes! That's right! Everything you know is wrong!"

--The Firesign Theatre

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by St. Gwladys:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
[qb] British Royalty, although claiming to be the head of the Anglican Church but being members of secret and civalric orders, were responsible for the founding of Tavistock (the psycho-puzzle palace

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
"Or is it the Golden Ratio showing up everywhere?"
... Annunaki are masters of the golden ratio in all their architecture and art work.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amos:
Emily, what is your view of Lyndon LaRouche? Some of your thinking reminds me of his.

Also, do you know the work of Dr Margaret Barker? If not, I think you might enjoy it and find that you and she have a lot in common.

---

Okay, now, this is fun ... following thoughtstreams.

LaRouche is a brilliant tactitician (sp?) He's mostly over my head because I'm focused on the Beatitudes and on imagery in Astronomy and NASA.

His explanations sound sensible, but I don't know ANYTHING! about Economics except what I had to learn in College Econ101 & 102.

I Googled Dr Margaret Barker, and--I don't think so. She's not an astronomy nut like I am. She's into all the folds and twirls of epistemology, and after reading Ray Dubuque, I gave that up.

I trust Jesus' methods and His Father YHVH to get me to where I need to go next. I go to Communion, and I let that be enough.

Is that enough around here?


 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
[QB] [QUOTE] This thread is in poor taste. We should not make fun of the mentally ill.

---

Not even on a bad day when everybody looks like they've got the problem you've been waiting for?

Em
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Strange that the people who go on about extraterrestrial influences on ancient culture never seem to publish in academically peer-reviewed journals on Near-eastern societies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
[qb] Justinian--So the Jews are the Templars? That's a new one on me
... Jews have joined the Templars and Jesuits.

---

quote:

---

"Second, you're equating the belief system of the patriarchal ritual-centered followers of the Supreme Architect of the Universe with the no true way fluffy New Agers. Wait, what?"

... Their dogma, cosmology and operating ethics are identical: All is One, Like Attracts Like, As Above so Below, Reality is Illusion, etc.

---

I'm going to need that unpacked for me....What on earth are you or he talking about??

OH! Paydirt!

Check this out! It's a MSWord .doc file, two sides of one sheet of paper.

Remember, I'm a Christian, and I do not buy into the Annunaki cosmology, because "manifesting one's reality" here in 3rd Density Physical Reality doesn't work for me.

http://www.holyconservancy.org/OCCULT2.pdf

Stored in a linux environment, this document is virus free.

You wanted proof I'm not just blowing smoke?


 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
On the topic of proof:

Somebody asked me for this in the Hell thread, but it didn't seem appropriate there, to talk about THIS. So, here it is.


I put up the Annunaki page I have on Facebook, yesterday; but here it is again.

https://www.facebook.com/AnnunakiFromOrion#

And the Album

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.309061465893604.1073741827.175354842597601&type=1#

The planet Nibiru has been visible to some since 2003 (when Nancy Lieder began her odyssey). I've been archiving photos since about 2009 that I didn't know how to interpret.

The the images I finally re-rendered into ultra-violet (because Nibiru is a black-light planet with a black-light sun Nemesis) are here:

http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

Sumerian writings that discuss the Annunaki culture are here:

http://www.enkispeaks.com

This is like trying to take a drink from a firehose.

Does this Forum have the capability to put up just one photo image at a time, so I can bring exceptionally clear images here?

So, if these links do not constitute PROOF to you that the Annunaki and Planet Nibiru are REAL, what would constitute such proof?

Please advise.

Emily
 

---

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

I can find them. Not instantly, but within a day.


 

---

Posted by Jahlove (# 10290) on :
 
Why is emily ignoring my crochet-related questions? Is it because the crochet-hook is a symbol of alien ZOG-Lizard repression?
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

I can find them. Not instantly, but within a day.


 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jahlove:
Why is emily ignoring my crochet-related questions? Is it because the crochet-hook is a symbol of alien ZOG-Lizard repression?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:


>>>Stalin was a Jesuit; Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

It's not ours to know, why turncoats turn their coats.

---

quote:

---

Remember, I'm a Christian, and I do not buy into the Annunaki cosmology, because "manifesting one's reality" here in 3rd Density Physical Reality doesn't work for me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
And neither was Stalin a Jesuit. Stalin was not even Catholic; at least you got that part right about Hitler's upbringing.

I don't suppose you have cites for either of these propositions?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Stalin is not mentioned once on that page, by the way. Why is it even in this list?

---

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school

---

quote:

---

mousethief: YOU'RE STALIN? WHO KNEW!

---

To be honest, it comes as a surprise to me too
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Emily:

I'm astonished that you actually use stuff found out by googling to support your theories.

Despite their 'Do No Evil' clap-trap monicker Google could be described as a secretive, hegemonous global network which has spent the past n years amassing shedloads of data on men, women and children who only wish to use their computers to produce homework or keep in touch with relatives.
 

---

Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Emily:

I'm astonished that you actually use stuff found out by googling to support your theories.

Despite their 'Do No Evil' clap-trap monicker Google could be described as a secretive, hegemonous global network which has spent the past n years amassing shedloads of data on men, women and children who only wish to use their computers to produce homework or keep in touch with relatives.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On the topic of proof:
The planet Nibiru has been visible to some since 2003 (when Nancy Lieder began her odyssey). I've been archiving photos since about 2009 that I didn't know how to interpret.

The the images I finally re-rendered into ultra-violet (because Nibiru is a black-light planet with a black-light sun Nemesis) are here:

http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On the topic of proof:

Somebody asked me for this in the Hell thread, but it didn't seem appropriate there, to talk about THIS. So, here it is.

I put up the Annunaki page I have on Facebook, yesterday; but here it is again.

https://www.facebook.com/AnnunakiFromOrion#

And the Album

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.309061465893604.1073741827.175354842597601&type=1#

The planet Nibiru has been visible to some since 2003 (when Nancy Lieder began her odyssey). I've been archiving photos since about 2009 that I didn't know how to interpret.

The the images I finally re-rendered into ultra-violet (because Nibiru is a black-light planet with a black-light sun Nemesis) are here:

http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

Sumerian writings that discuss the Annunaki culture are here:

http://www.enkispeaks.com

This is like trying to take a drink from a firehose.

Does this Forum have the capability to put up just one photo image at a time, so I can bring exceptionally clear images here?

So, if these links do not constitute PROOF to you that the Annunaki and Planet Nibiru are REAL, what would constitute such proof?

Please advise.

Emily

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

mousethief: The Jesuits operate hundreds of schools as shown in this link.

---

I have taught at a Jesuit school

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Is this the same Nibiru where Kirk and Spock save the indigenous people from a volcano but violate the Prime Directive when rescuing Spock, or a different Nibiru?

---

Apparently this one is toroidal, and so has a different number oif axes of rotational symettry than ordinary boring spherical planets, which is supposed to be important. For some reason. According to that Facebook page.

I can prove the n-colour problem on a torus. Well, I can if you give me twenty minutes with the right textbook, or else the notes I made last time I did any graph theory. Isn't that amazing
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:


>>>Stalin was a Jesuit; Hitler was a Catholic honored with a Catholic funeral and six priests officiating.

It's not ours to know, why turncoats turn their coats.

---

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews. And what historical evidence is there that he had a Catholic funeral? He committed suicide (a mortal sin) and was buried by the Russians (who were definitely NOT RC).

quote:

---

Remember, I'm a Christian, and I do not buy into the Annunaki cosmology, because "manifesting one's reality" here in 3rd Density Physical Reality doesn't work for me.

---

Yeah, but what does the New Age crap have to do with Pope Francis, or any other Christian leader of note?

---

This is all so pithy and ripe for a food fight photo.

The "Hitler" they found in the bunker was one of his doppelgangers; the real one got away to South America (or Antarctica or the Moon) is how the conspiracy nuts tell it. I have a photo image of that guy too, deceased, that was claimed to be the deceased Hitler. In Germany, after the war, he was honored at a full Catholic funeral, is another story I found.

So, as a matter of FACT, I do not know nor can I testify to what actually happened to Hitler.

YOU said: Stalin may have been brought up by the Jesuits, but I've seen nothing that says that they kept him in their fold.

Well, he knew exactly what ideas, concepts, doctrines and dogmas he was opposing, didn't he? He was well schooled in the cynicism of the Bolsheviks who said, "There'll be pie in the sky when we die, by and by!" Those Bolsheviks KNEW religious doctrine.

[/qb][/QUOTE]Yeah, but what does the New Age crap have to do with Pope Francis, or any other Christian leader of note? [/QB][/QUOTE]

Everything. New Age and Occult doctrine teach deliberate and insinuated COMPLACENCY, non-activism, non-interventionism.

"It's all good," "All is One," "As Above, so Below," "Like Attracts Like," Reality is an Illusion, "There's no such thing as Trying," and "Astrology" --these doctrines NAIL THE IDEA, There's nothing to do about Injustice in the world. Just think about something else.

Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

Em
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
I've been looking a bit around the links that Emily has provided. Most of it is stuff I'd already seen before of course: the Templars, chemtrails, aliens having built the pyramids...

There is something about a hollow Earth, something I've also seen before.

But there is more: the Earth is growing! Just like a living organism would. Now that's a cool concept. I bet it's possible to write interesting SF based on the concept of planets that grow.
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
It's Hell. Deal.

Stop reading and close the link, already.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

Love, I live in the forest where there are NO Christians, nobody to even talk to.

And near local Hot Springs where New Age Hippies congretgate, all I hear is their dogma: All One; As above, so below; Reality is illusion; No such thing as Trying; Like attracts like; Astrology, etc.

That's why I come here, for christian encouragement. I used to go, from 2005-2011, to BBC's Religion Forums. That was a wonderful place til they shut it down in favor of secular materialistic blah blah blah.

Emily
 

---

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PeteC:
It's Hell. Deal.

Stop reading and close the link, already.

---

Oops, it is so not Hell. Apologies.

---

quote:

---

posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg

Quite banal, eh?

And a masters degree confers upon one the authority to judge social agencies and consequences, does it?

---

quote:

---

L'organist: The Tavistock is a registered charity which is engaged in the field of research in the field of organisational behaviour.

---

That's what they said about the Second Foundation...
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
Okay so Pete thinks this is a Hell thread, now I think it's Circus.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:

---

posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg

Quite banal, eh?

And a masters degree confers upon one the authority to judge social agencies and consequences, does it?

---

May I suggest that Crazy Cat Lady, being resident in the UK, is likely to have a better idea of the bona fides of the Tavistock Institute than a non-resident?

The Tavistock is a registered charity which is engaged in the field of research in the field of organisational behaviour.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
Okay so Pete thinks this is a Hell thread, now I think it's Circus.

---

I agree with you.

Nobody serious intends to sit still here.

Em
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
Hi Emily, I’ve followed your posts with interest and would like to ask you a few questions if I may.

Firstly, you say that you came to your conclusions purely on the basis of many thousands of astronomy photographs which you have worked on and re-rendered.

Yet much of your ideas appear historical/ archaeological rather than pictorially originated. If your conclusions came directly from your experience of these astronomical images where did such matters as Sumarian writings, British Royal Families, and Templars (for instance) come from? You wouldn’t have seen such ideas in your NASA images directly, however well re-rendered. So where did you get your ideas from if not your own direct experience. Have you taken these ideas from another source? Perhaps someone else’s work? If so, how do you know to trust their work if it is not your direct experience?

...MY WORK IS MY OWN PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE. I was digital imaging technician and corporate trainer for Xerox corporation in the 1970s. That's where I learned how digital images work; how they work with pixels and colors.

Secondly, I would question whether your approach to evidence is purely objective. It is always possible, I am sure you would agree, that we can read our own imaginings and presuppositions into the evidence in front of us. We are of course very imaginative creatures, and we have all done this at some point. What is important, for everyone therefore, is to make sure that what we think we see, in our subjective mind, is what is objectively really there. I checked out your facebook album but unfortunately could not see what you claimed the images showed. The first photo was a black and white grainy image of a sky above an observatory. In your caption you claimed to see many figures walking around in the sky in the image. I’m afraid to tell you that I cannot see any figures at all. In all of your images, I had the same issue. I would suggest to you, is it possible that you are seeing what you expect to see, and these things are not objectively present? It is a common phenomenon, which is why it is so important to check one’s own experiences with others.

MY APPROACH--since I presume that I know nothing and have no hypothesis--is PHENOMENOLOGICAL, after the method of Idhe and Hussrl.

Thirdly, I would ask about your approach to other secondary and tertiary sources. I appreciate your interest is astronomy and so, like all of us, you read other people to understand other subjects. But you must be aware of how important it is to check out your sources, to ensure that the person you are reading is an expert in their field. There are many people posting on the internet, some of which are genuinely mistaken, others outright deceiving, others just writing imaginative fiction. How do you discern which is true from which is to be discarded. You have posted above, as an example of irrefutable evidence for your theories, a very long, very rambling webpage written by a man called William Henry. Posted on a website written solely by a lady called Sasha Lessin. Who are these people that you appear to trust without question? Are they experts in historical, archeological, and astronomical analysis? Or are they deluded, or fiction writers? How do you decide? William Henry’s website calls himself a author, and an ‘investigative mythologist’. This is an invented title that he has awarded himself. He makes money from selling his opinions via book and radio. Do you not see that he can, and likely is, extremely biased?

DUE TO THE VERY FACT THAT PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES PREDOMINATE ON THE NET, I view every image as potentially faulty at the outset. Only when an image falls within the limits and boundaries of a large body of OTHER IMAGES do I claim or infer that that image has some salience to what I believe.

And finally, what constitutes proof to you? You say that your links above are proof of the Annunaki and Nabiru. Yet to everyone else on this thread, they are not. They contain suggestions, conjectures, and forced pattern making between unconnected things. They are opinion, not evidence. The images you have posted contain nothing more than what you have made them contain. You have manipulated them yourself into showing odd coloured effects in the sky. The effects appear random, showing bands of colour in one image, and other effects in another. None of the images show anything resembling a planet. The catalogue of images you have posted on Facebook is equally random. Some containing images of relief drawings, but showing no understanding of where they are from, who took the picture, or what the context of the drawings is. You include among them an artistic drawing of a flying saucer. You are aware this is not a real photograph? The captions attached to the images have no relation to the image itself, neither explaining what the image shows, or what has led to the conclusions in your caption. You have an image which you say is an aerial map of Cobb mountain. You say it shows faces all over it. I’m afraid that I cannot see a single face in that photo. Again, this is not evidence, this is your personal opinion.

... I believe in the Holy Spirit of Truth; I believe in the "RING OF TRUTH." By government classification I QUALIFY as a "remote viewer." I am classified ON THE RED LIST BECAUSE I reveal information that the USGovt doesn't want revealed, so I must be doing something right.

So please, explain to us, why do you believe that these random images show irrefutable proof of a specific alien race called Annunaki and their planet-ship 'Nabiru'. What has convinced you of this rather than one of the other many, many possible interpretations of these images?

WHY DO I BELIEVE??? On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

Regarding your question, what would constitute proof? I would say if you showed us any image you hadn’t manipulated, which anyone could see showed another planet in the sky. Perhaps a translation by a Sumarian scholar of an actual Sumarian text, with appropriate source citing, which describes alien visitors, or an alien planet. Not an opinion piece on a random webpage, but the pure historical text, translated into English. These things constitute proof. Everything you have linked to so far shows nothing but your own imagination, and the imaginations of others.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
Hi Emily, I’ve followed your posts with interest and would like to ask you a few questions if I may.

Firstly, you say that you came to your conclusions purely on the basis of many thousands of astronomy photographs which you have worked on and re-rendered.

Yet much of your ideas appear historical/ archaeological rather than pictorially originated. If your conclusions came directly from your experience of these astronomical images where did such matters as Sumarian writings, British Royal Families, and Templars (for instance) come from? You wouldn’t have seen such ideas in your NASA images directly, however well re-rendered. So where did you get your ideas from if not your own direct experience. Have you taken these ideas from another source? Perhaps someone else’s work? If so, how do you know to trust their work if it is not your direct experience?

...MY WORK IS MY OWN PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE. I was digital imaging technician and corporate trainer for Xerox corporation in the 1970s. That's where I learned how digital images work; how they work with pixels and colors.

Secondly, I would question whether your approach to evidence is purely objective. It is always possible, I am sure you would agree, that we can read our own imaginings and presuppositions into the evidence in front of us. We are of course very imaginative creatures, and we have all done this at some point. What is important, for everyone therefore, is to make sure that what we think we see, in our subjective mind, is what is objectively really there. I checked out your facebook album but unfortunately could not see what you claimed the images showed. The first photo was a black and white grainy image of a sky above an observatory. In your caption you claimed to see many figures walking around in the sky in the image. I’m afraid to tell you that I cannot see any figures at all. In all of your images, I had the same issue. I would suggest to you, is it possible that you are seeing what you expect to see, and these things are not objectively present? It is a common phenomenon, which is why it is so important to check one’s own experiences with others.

MY APPROACH--since I presume that I know nothing and have no hypothesis--is PHENOMENOLOGICAL, after the method of Idhe and Hussrl.

Thirdly, I would ask about your approach to other secondary and tertiary sources. I appreciate your interest is astronomy and so, like all of us, you read other people to understand other subjects. But you must be aware of how important it is to check out your sources, to ensure that the person you are reading is an expert in their field. There are many people posting on the internet, some of which are genuinely mistaken, others outright deceiving, others just writing imaginative fiction. How do you discern which is true from which is to be discarded. You have posted above, as an example of irrefutable evidence for your theories, a very long, very rambling webpage written by a man called William Henry. Posted on a website written solely by a lady called Sasha Lessin. Who are these people that you appear to trust without question? Are they experts in historical, archeological, and astronomical analysis? Or are they deluded, or fiction writers? How do you decide? William Henry’s website calls himself a author, and an ‘investigative mythologist’. This is an invented title that he has awarded himself. He makes money from selling his opinions via book and radio. Do you not see that he can, and likely is, extremely biased?

DUE TO THE VERY FACT THAT PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGES PREDOMINATE ON THE NET, I view every image as potentially faulty at the outset. Only when an image falls within the limits and boundaries of a large body of OTHER IMAGES do I claim or infer that that image has some salience to what I believe.

And finally, what constitutes proof to you? You say that your links above are proof of the Annunaki and Nabiru. Yet to everyone else on this thread, they are not. They contain suggestions, conjectures, and forced pattern making between unconnected things. They are opinion, not evidence. The images you have posted contain nothing more than what you have made them contain. You have manipulated them yourself into showing odd coloured effects in the sky. The effects appear random, showing bands of colour in one image, and other effects in another. None of the images show anything resembling a planet. The catalogue of images you have posted on Facebook is equally random. Some containing images of relief drawings, but showing no understanding of where they are from, who took the picture, or what the context of the drawings is. You include among them an artistic drawing of a flying saucer. You are aware this is not a real photograph? The captions attached to the images have no relation to the image itself, neither explaining what the image shows, or what has led to the conclusions in your caption. You have an image which you say is an aerial map of Cobb mountain. You say it shows faces all over it. I’m afraid that I cannot see a single face in that photo. Again, this is not evidence, this is your personal opinion.

... I believe in the Holy Spirit of Truth; I believe in the "RING OF TRUTH." By government classification I QUALIFY as a "remote viewer." I am classified ON THE RED LIST BECAUSE I reveal information that the USGovt doesn't want revealed, so I must be doing something right.

So please, explain to us, why do you believe that these random images show irrefutable proof of a specific alien race called Annunaki and their planet-ship 'Nabiru'. What has convinced you of this rather than one of the other many, many possible interpretations of these images?

WHY DO I BELIEVE??? On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

Regarding your question, what would constitute proof? I would say if you showed us any image you hadn’t manipulated, which anyone could see showed another planet in the sky. Perhaps a translation by a Sumarian scholar of an actual Sumarian text, with appropriate source citing, which describes alien visitors, or an alien planet. Not an opinion piece on a random webpage, but the pure historical text, translated into English. These things constitute proof. Everything you have linked to so far shows nothing but your own imagination, and the imaginations of others.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
On any day of the week, I can take webcam images from several observatories and SHOW YOU what is on the surface of Nibiru. I can SHOW YOU what surfaces and conformations are on the landmass of Nibiru AS IT STRETCHES OUT BEHIND THE ARTIFICIAL SUN Wormwood. This is NOT BELIEF.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Christians don't talk about the negative influence of New Age and Occult beliefs, nearly often enough.

---

You're hanging with the wrong kind of Christians, then. When I were an Evangelical, it was a perennial topic of flagellation.

---

Love, I live in the forest where there are NO Christians, nobody to even talk to.

And near local Hot Springs where New Age Hippies congretgate, all I hear is their dogma: All One; As above, so below; Reality is illusion; No such thing as Trying; Like attracts like; Astrology, etc.

That's why I come here, for christian encouragement. I used to go, from 2005-2011, to BBC's Religion Forums. That was a wonderful place til they shut it down in favor of secular materialistic blah blah blah.

Emily

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews.

---

Tell that to the priests and bishops of Poland
 

---

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews.

---

Tell that to the priests and bishops of Poland

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:

Hitler didn't persecute Catholics as a hard and fast rule, not like the Jews.

---

Tell that to the priests and bishops of Poland

---

I think he persecuted them primarily because they were Poles. Back in those days, everyone persecuted the Poles (well, the Russians and Germans did, which was more than enough).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
And a masters degree confers upon one the authority to judge social agencies and consequences, does it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
... they're not just in the business of organizational behavior. They're here to AFFECT organizational behavior, especially HIERARCHICAL BEHAVIOR.

---

An organisation is trying to AFFECT organisational behaviour! I am shocked, SHOCKED to find that behaviour-affecting behaviour is going on! And right here in Bloomsbury!

I mean we all know that advertisers, charities, courts of law, demonstrators, economists, educators, governments, journalists, legislators, management consultants, managers, marketers, moral reformers, novellists, political lobbyists, political parties, PR drones, rioters, single-issue campaigners, spammers, trade unions, and so on, would NEVER sink as low as trying to AFFECT organisational BEHAVIOUR!

(*) Which is one reason why science done properly is profoundly democratic and egalitarian, because when you include detailed descriptions of your method in an argument, and include your data, and all the boring old-fashioned scholarly apparatus of references and indexes and formal nomenclature, and you separate your assumptions and workings and discussions and conclusions from each other, then you put the maximum about of power in the hands of the reader, whoever they are.

[ 22. May 2013, 14:31: Message edited by: ken ]
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I've been trying to find a sensible source online to verify what I learned years back about one of the issues raised, the recolouring of Mars pictures by NASA, but if there is one which is a historic and properly scientific out there, it is drowned in piffle.

Basically, the processes used on the first pictures were based on the idea that the Martian sky would be blue. Subsequently, it was realised that the sky was coloured by red dust from the planet, rather than blue light scattered by the atmospheric gases, and was actually pink. Recalibrating the images made everything much redder. I probably have evidence for this buried in my collection of old Astronomy, New Scientist or Scientific American magazines, and I have contacts closer to the source who I trust to confirm it.

The reasonable process has now, apparently, been seized upon as evidence of other stuff, which has buried the original online.

I assume that more recent photographs are using more effective photography methods.
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
An apparently sensible site
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
There's a thread about this matter--
Kerygmania biblical unrest 542 17213
Word of God? (Emily Windsor-Cragg) 22 May, 2013 17:54

in Kerygmania, the Books I've read down through the years, which include also some Sumerian records, Book of Enoch, Bible chapter 6, Emanuel Velikowsky's Worlds In Collision (in the 1960s).

So I was EXPECTING astronomical changes to take place. And of course, NASA and Astronomers are averse to that. At about 2003 I ran across Nancy Lieder's stuff, which is channeled ET stuff, and I began studying the sun and Moon. Then in 2007 I took on NASA and the Mars Rovers, and I proved to myself NASA wasn't looking at their own photos.

So, there are lots of points of light coming together. My method from University Philosophy is Phenomenology after the specifics of Hussrl and Don Idhe. ... You begin without any hypothesis and you just collect data. And you collect a huge amoung of data and then you spread it all out in front of you ... on the floor. And then you figure out, what relates to what, like a puzzle.

That's my method. And at this point, solar astronomers can no longer show the Sun in black and empty space because that's not where it's at.

They can't show the Moon in black and empty space either, because it's SITUATED on a colored back-ground. That's as far as can go with data. But I can, and did, thread together finally a hypothesis how it all fits. And that was given to me as an inspiration, which I have yet to be able to refute.

I'm not working with anybody else's data at this point. Either I've figured it out, or I haven't. When somebody shows me data that refute my present hypothesis, I'll go into THAT DATA, and see what I can figure out NEXT.

I have no comments on anybody else's work. I just do my own work, that's all. It stands or falls.

Ah! How does the British Royal Family TIE IN TO THIS? Great question! The Throne of the British Royal Family goes back to the Jacobian Covenant with YHVH. YHVH is God of the Annunaki ["Let US make man in our image."] Thus Annunaki history is also the history of our Judaic-Christian culture; and Nibiru is the Planet from which "God" emanates and does His Will. It's a planet run by a Monarchy bloodline along the doctrines of hierarchy [which work there but don't work here, but that's another story].

It's all tied together, with a nice neat bow. And the future is tied in also. We have a future with Nibiru and its black sun Nemesis, from now on.

I hope I have, if not satisfied you, at least amused you.

Emily


********************
Hi Emily

I’ve followed your posts with interest and would like to ask you a few questions if I may.

Firstly, you say that you came to your conclusions purely on the basis of many thousands of astronomy photographs which you have worked on and re-rendered. Yet much of your ideas appear historical/archaeological rather than pictorially originated. If your conclusions came directly from your experience of these astronomical images where did such matters as Sumarian writings, British Royal Families, and Templars (for instance) come from? You wouldn’t have seen such ideas in your NASA images directly, however well re-rendered. So where did you get your ideas from if not your own direct experience. Have you taken these ideas from another source? Perhaps someone else’s work? If so, how do you know to trust their work if it is not your direct experience?

Secondly, I would question whether your approach to evidence is purely objective. It is always possible, I am sure you would agree, that we can read our own imaginings and presuppositions into the evidence in front of us. We are of course very imaginative creatures, and we have all done this at some point. What is important, for everyone therefore, is to make sure that what we think we see, in our subjective mind, is what is objectively really there. I checked out your facebook album but unfortunately could not see what you claimed the images showed. The first photo was a black and white grainy image of a sky above an observatory. In your caption you claimed to see many figures walking around in the sky in the image. I’m afraid to tell you that I cannot see any figures at all. In all of your images, I had the same issue. I would suggest to you, is it possible that you are seeing what you expect to see, and these things are not objectively present? It is a common phenomenon, which is why it is so important to check one’s own experiences with others.

Thirdly, I would ask about your approach to other secondary and tertiary sources. I appreciate your interest is astronomy and so, like all of us, you read other people to understand other subjects. But you must be aware of how important it is to check out your sources, to ensure that the person you are reading is an expert in their field. There are many people posting on the internet, some of which are genuinely mistaken, others outright deceiving, others just writing imaginative fiction. How do you discern which is true from which is to be discarded. You have posted above, as an example of irrefutable evidence for your theories, a very long, very rambling webpage written by a man called William Henry. Posted on a website written solely by a lady called Sasha Lessin. Who are these people that you appear to trust without question? Are they experts in historical, archeological, and astronomical analysis? Or are they deluded, or fiction writers? How do you decide? William Henry’s website calls himself a author, and an ‘investigative mythologist’. This is an invented title that he has awarded himself. He makes money from selling his opinions via book and radio. Do you not see that he can, and likely is, extremely biased?

And finally, what constitutes proof to you? You say that your links above are proof of the Annunaki and Nabiru. Yet to everyone else on this thread, they are not. They contain suggestions, conjectures, and forced pattern making between unconnected things. They are opinion, not evidence. The images you have posted contain nothing more than what you have made them contain. You have manipulated them yourself into showing odd coloured effects in the sky. The effects appear random, showing bands of colour in one image, and other effects in another. None of the images show anything resembling a planet. The catalogue of images you have posted on Facebook is equally random. Some containing images of relief drawings, but showing no understanding of where they are from, who took the picture, or what the context of the drawings is. You include among them an artistic drawing of a flying saucer. You are aware this is not a real photograph? The captions attached to the images have no relation to the image itself, neither explaining what the image shows, or what has led to the conclusions in your caption. You have an image which you say is an aerial map of Cobb mountain. You say it shows faces all over it. I’m afraid that I cannot see a single face in that photo. Again, this is not evidence, this is your personal opinion.

So please, explain to us, why do you believe that these random images show irrefutable proof of a specific alien race called Annunaki and their planet-ship 'Nabiru'. What has convinced you of this rather than one of the other many, many possible interpretations of these images?

Regarding your question, what would constitute proof? I would say if you showed us any image you hadn’t manipulated, which anyone could see showed another planet in the sky. Perhaps a translation by a Sumarian scholar of an actual Sumarian text, with appropriate source citing, which describes alien visitors, or an alien planet. Not an opinion piece on a random webpage, but the pure historical text, translated into English. These things constitute proof. Everything you have linked to so far shows nothing but your own imagination, and the imaginations of others. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
http://www.scienfree.org/Elenin_Files/

>>>Let's define the DIGITAL IMAGING ASPECTS I deal with, from Xerox Corporation when I was a trainer for them. 1) Rotation 2) Scaling 3) Contrast 4) Hue saturation. "Retouching" doesn't come into it because I don't mess with pixels.

---

... no discussion or captions or explanation or descriptions of where they were taken or what they are supposed to be. Can you explain why you think that the stuff there---

INTERRUPT. I don't GET CAPTIONS. I get non-random and structured data that must be seen in the light of anthropological research around RANDOMNESS versus ORDER. This is preliminary, daily, data.

ought to persuade me that the world has been repeatedly visited and interfered with by human-like creatures from another planet? How exactly do all these nice shiny pictures tell us that there were aliens on earth a hundred thousand years ago?

INTERRUPT. Sumerian records describe what the culture of the Annunaki did ages ago. I don't even have to go there. That's another discipline.

You say that NASA put false colours in their pictures and that you have corrected them. Why do you think your colours are correct and NASAs are false? How do you know what the true colours should be?

GOOD QUESTION! Every intensity of light has a color that it emanates. You NEVER SEE blue soil, purple tire tracks or a high-noon orange sky. It doesn't happen in color refraction. I have posted the photo of NASA's Mars red-filter system--

http://www.scienfree.org/images/MARS/23_NASAcolorfilter.jpeg

NASA uses to color ALL Mars photos taken on the surface. NASA ALSO, confuse the viewer, refuses to ORIENT images N-S-E-W with North at the top, so their images are always katty-corner and sideways and everywhich way, making a certain orientation for the geography of Mars impossible.

I mean we all know that advertisers-- ... Which is one reason why science done properly is profoundly democratic and egalitarian, because when you include detailed descriptions of your method in an argument, and include your data ... then you put the maximum about of power in the hands of the reader, whoever they are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:

Basically, the processes used on the first pictures were based on the idea that the Martian sky would be blue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
What I hope is that you're beginning to see how everything ties in to one package... It all fits.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:

Basically, the processes used on the first pictures were based on the idea that the Martian sky would be blue.

---

The Martian sky IS blue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl Kroenen:
Emily Windsor-Cragg (Someone, it seems must). She wallows not alone in her paranoid delusions.

See the wonderful Mysterious Milton Keynes for example - this neatly summarises some of the more extreme suppositions regarding the so called 'reptilian preconditioning'. Milton Keynes appears to be an Illuminati / Annuniki capital by all accounts....

Annunaki were never Reptilian; they are our direct Progenitors, mammalian. See www.enkispeaks.com for Sumerian writings in some sense of chron order.

Some put blind faith in such interpretations of the world around us, whilst for others it's more of a light hearted fantasy which lends enchantment to the banal existence of our everyday grind - just as schoolboys imagine their bicyles are motorbikes, or that their pencil cases are walkie-talkies....no harm will come.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
If you look at my link, it contains images of colour sample strips both under Earth conditions and on Mars. These were used to calibrate the images and revealed the dusty sky.

---

I found, in practice, some images were falsely hued more than others, with OCCASIONAL BLUE sand, PURPLE tire tracks and ORANGE sky over head despite hundreds of other images in which the soil, the sky and standing water were all hued same as here would be: BROWN MUD and tire tracks, blue sky and water showing as a reflective surface. I remember one ESA image in particular showing snow drifts that was colored a lovely PEACH color. I laughed at that one. ESA images are more imaginatively "assisted" with innovative hues than NASA images. JAXA (Japanese) images are manipulated the least. I have some fabulous Moon footage from JAXA.


Emily
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Assuming it's all true, how does it feed the hungry Emily ? How does my asking come to that ?
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
How does it feed the Hungry? Good question.

I've given it some thought.

Revelation speaks of a time when black is white and white is black, when martyrs cry out, the four horsemen of the apocalypse gallop forth: famine, war, death, pestilence.

That's now, when Justice is turned upside down, the world operates by the Laws of the Jungle, good people attract predators, evil people attract security.

Also in Revelation is the RESOLUTION of its terrible End Times problem. The generals and Elites who seek safety in their underground enclaves won't be coming out again.

Predatory and parasitic society will crash and burn. The meek shall inherit the earth, and they shall find their exquisite delight in the abundance of Peace.

The Annunaki, for their part, live in a holographic dimension Other than Ours. I expect they'll just recede into the background, and maybe just leave us Earthlings alone.

That's my hope anyway. And we're going to have to forge new leadership along the lines of "governance by CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED," since all of that has been overwritten by predatory commercial statutes, Laws of the Sea and Admiralty. There's gong to be a lot of work to do, to bring our Law Codes back to BEHAVIOR: only prosecuting Harm, Deceit, Cost and Waste, not thoughts, not beliefs, not ideologies.

Behavior alone.

Those are my thoughts on our future.
 

---

Posted by Anchorman (# 16469) on :
 
Hi, ad_o
Good here, innit?

I've read some of the pseudo science stuff (Hancock, Rohl etc in particular...you know my 'thing' about serious Egyptology.)
Anyway, the real archaeology is far more exciting than the fantasy stuff (except for Stargate SG-1).
We'll get onto Nabiru next.....or possibly not.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
What is pseudo-science and what is a scientific issue that Governing Leadership stonewalls and refuses to examine publicly--

space science [ETs and space wars], chemtrails, fluoride in the water, use of depleted uranium, genetic modifications, etc.--

these are issues that the public must insist on the public policy, "Advise and Consent," because these issues affect us all.

Practically all these matters are completely out of our hands at this time. And in consensual societies, THAT is inappropriate.

And if nobody asks questions or poses any contradictions to the Usual Official Stories, we won't get anywhere learning what's true about these areas.

Emily
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Revelation was all 'fulfilled', in so far as there was any prophetic element, from Nero to Domitian. It is figuratively true still of course. So again, what are we doing to be instruments of His Kingdom coming, being, happening NOW? To be instruments of justice, peace, equity, sanity, freedom, kindness, co-operation, humility, inclusion, compassion REGARDLESS of what's gone on before and going on around?

I'm happy to assume that everything you say is true, but what difference does it make Em?
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Revelation was all 'fulfilled', in so far as there was any prophetic element, from Nero to Domitian. It is figuratively true still of course. So again, what are we doing to be instruments of His Kingdom coming, being, happening NOW? To be instruments of justice, peace, equity, sanity, freedom, kindness, co-operation, humility, inclusion, compassion REGARDLESS of what's gone on before and going on around?

I'm happy to assume that everything you say is true, but what difference does it make Em?

---

I realize you are correct: we have just completed the so-called Millennium. Satan is loosed for a little while and then he too is gone.

But is that the end of the story? I don't think so. I think we need a new whole chapter.

Em
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Indeed not Em. And it may NEVER be. So how do we 'occupy' till He 'comes' ?
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Jews are also expecting a Messiah, just as Annunaki cycled through their periodic Messiahs.

So, I'm not so sure that anybody's coming. Looks to me as if Messiahs are a dime a dozen in the ancient Annunaki as well as current ideological marketplace.

Would you settle for a government of honest common law? ... And never mind bloated egos ... ?

Emily
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Yes we should all remove the beams from our eyes and love one another.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:

Basically, the processes used on the first pictures were based on the idea that the Martian sky would be blue.

---

The Martian sky IS blue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anchorman:
Hi, ad_o
Good here, innit?

I've read some of the pseudo science stuff (Hancock, Rohl etc in particular...you know my 'thing' about serious Egyptology.)
Anyway, the real archaeology is far more exciting than the fantasy stuff (except for Stargate SG-1).
We'll get onto Nabiru next.....or possibly not.

---

 

---

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
And what is the source of those "blue sky over Mars" pictures?
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
In fact, pictures of Mars with a blue sky are quite common, for example this one. NASA often does this on purpuse, because astronomers are more likely to spot features in the picture when the lighting more or less resembles what they're used to on Earth. The Bad Astronomer explains here.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.:
And what is the source of those "blue sky over Mars" pictures?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Here's another one, but upside down. NASA scientists never orient planetary photos as to north-south.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Here's another one, but upside down. NASA scientists never orient planetary photos as to north-south.

---

[qb]
Firstly, that's because they appear "upside-down" in telescopes, so the pictures are showing what the astronomers actually see.
Secondly, are classifications such as "north" and "south" even relevant when we're referring to a completely different world? Maybe Mars' magnetic field is that way round?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
I'm also not sure, even if NASA would render the pictures upside-down, what would be the relevance of this. How would this help them to deceive us?

Surely, even if there are buildings on Mars, showing the pictures upside-down won't do much to hide them.

---

quote:

---

Emily Windsor-Cragg: People who live on Mars don't appear to want to be visible from above. That's my take on it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

Emily Windsor-Cragg: People who live on Mars don't appear to want to be visible from above. That's my take on it.

---

I don't like my picture taken from above either. But what I don't understand is how photographing a planet upside-down is going to help with this.

This is a picture of Earth, upside-down from how we normally think of it. How will showing it like this make me less visible?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by passer:
There are people on Mars? What - like us, in the image and likeness and so on? What colour are they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by passer:
Well I wasn't equating colour with Race, but I suppose lots of people do. What colour are the Reptoids?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Prove it. Which feels cruel of me Em. Because of course you cannot. Only you can see these things. So again, let's assume as an act of faith that you are right and everyone else is wrong. So ? How does it benefit the poor ? What should we do in the light of your vision for the poor ? The needy ? The lonely ? The afflicted ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.:
And what is the source of those "blue sky over Mars" pictures?

---

NASA

http://www.scienfree.org/images/MARS/2005marsunsetnasa.jpg IN 2005

http://www.scienfree.org/images/MARS/23_040225marsunset.jpeg IN 2004

Em

---

quote:

---

The most conspicuous feature of Martian surface geology is a sharp contrast, known as the Martian dichotomy, between the rugged southern highlands and the relatively smooth northern basins.

---

quote:

---

The other thing is, Mars is behind us. It would be nice if scientists would begin studying the planets that have become our companions at present.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Okay; however, once an astronomer looks closely enough to DETECT UP-AND-DOWN by isolating how lifeforms grow relative to GROUND, then one can establish a "correct" orientation, to keep to, so that subsequent studies can all be related, geographically.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
People who live on Mars don't appear to want to be visible from above.

---

Or from the side, if the fact that no Mars Rover missions have yet identified any signs of life is anything to go by.

The image of those Rovers as Martian versions of the Google Street View van taking pictures to complement our overhead satellite views is an amusing one, though
 

---

Posted by horsethorn (# 17695) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
Another thought:

Jesus taught: "Ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
...
Every one [planet] can be made more or less visible either in white light or in black light.

...Emily [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
No Em. It's not possible. All we need is love. But a lot of it. And we don't have it of ourselves.

---

What Jesus said was: "Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free," right?

Live is fine, it's good; but it's not sufficient.

We must know what is true, to overcome conventional reality.


Emily
 

---

Posted by passer (# 13329) on :
 
I saw this article and thought of this thread, for some reason.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
@ passer

 

---

Posted by Bostonman (# 17108) on :
 
It takes a bold spirit to look at thousands of pictures of Mars, not find any buildings, and decide, "It's because they've hidden them" rather than "It's because they're not there." So I salute you, Emily Windsor-Cragg.

I submit, however, as Martin has above me, that God and your neighbor might be better loved by your redirecting energy away from analyzing tens of thousands of pictures and toward the ideals of Matthew 25: feeding the hungry, taking in the stranger, visiting those in prison, and so on.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Love is the truth.

Truth is just one aspect of love.
 

---

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by passer:
I saw this article and thought of this thread, for some reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
Unaccountably, this sprang to mind.

---

In the spirit of this thread, I think that's quite accountable!

As an aside, I just ran through that test, and was struck by how different my answers were to what they'd have been if I was still working. I was clearly a ball of pent-up angst when I was working, whereas I now come out as laid-back approaching horizontal. That's office politics for you. Sigh. Learning to let go...

I love the last few questions. I can see that for some people the internet might appear as an anthropomorphic hive-being sort of presence - I've known my fair share of conspiracy theorists who are apprehensive of the Deep Web and the Dark Web where the Illuminati can be found, and where such as the Annunaki plough their mysterious furrows. It's as if they see life though a photoshopped lens. They spend their time looking for yet more things to be afraid of, more things on which to lay the blame for their own feelings of inadequacy and helplessness.

I do wonder if it's an age thing. My kids and their peers regard the internet as an extension of their daily lives, just another tool accessible through their iPhones. They are completely at ease with all the technology they've grown up with, and relatively incurious as to how it works beyond the front-end. Older people may be just more suspicious of anything that can be loosely labelled as new-fangled, and less trusting of its infrastructure. If a youngster finds something wrong or illogical on the web, they just shrug it off as they would if a person gave them inaccurate information (it's only Wiki) whereas an older person might be more inclined to wonder why it is wrong, and another faux conspiracy is born.
//streamofconsciousness
 

---

Posted by St. Stephen the Stoned (# 9841) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:

quote:

---

Originally posted by passer:
I saw this article and thought of this thread, for some reason.

---

Unaccountably, this sprang to mind.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
Why does the statement "People deliberately try to irritate me" have as its highest-frequency answer "Once a day"?

---

 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQdvYFMBAU

For what it's worth. I don't believe his analysis, but there you have it.

K.
 

---

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: That requirement, if applied consistently, must inevitably lead to atheism must it not?

---

To be honest, I think the requirement is too strong. Scientific evidence might be sufficient to make people believe something, but it isn't necessary. There are plenty of things I believe in life without scientific evidence ("Don't drink that coffee yet, it's hot!" "Ok, I'll take your word for it.")

Been on holiday so only just seen this.

1. Scientific evidence removes the need for belief.

2. Your thinking reminds me of the “youth evangelist” I heard in the 1960s.
All you need to become saved is to have faith; having faith is easy – you have faith every time you turn on a tap and expect water to come out of it.

Expecting water to flow from a tap when it’s happened successfully several times a day for a dozen+ years is not exercising faith – it’s a reasonable expectation based on overwhelming repeated experimental evidence. Similarly you probably learnt as a child that when people tell you that a drink they made for you is still hot they are probably right. (Because you learnt the hard way).

Sometimes we have to guess without certainty and behave as though we are right – getting married comes to mind – you could argue that getting married implies belief about the future. Often we don’t need to guess but some people choose to do so; I don’t know that there’s a God, I’ve chosen to believe that there is exABC Rowan Williams.

We tend to test things we understand and take on trust things we don’t. It was always said that the bank manager who grilled you severely over your application for a £10K house loan would grant a business a million pounds with little scrutiny – he had a house, he’d never contemplated a use for a million quid. The late George Carlin put it thus; "If you tell people that an invisible man in the sky created the universe and everything in it then they will believe it without question BUT tell them that the paint is wet and they have to touch it...just to make sure!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hugh--

But trusting scientific evidence requires trusting the Scientific Method, the people using it, the quality of their tools and data, that reality can accurately and fully be measured that way, etc., does it not?

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: 1. Scientific evidence removes the need for belief.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: Expecting water to flow from a tap when it’s happened successfully several times a day for a dozen+ years is not exercising faith – it’s a reasonable expectation based on overwhelming repeated experimental evidence.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: 2. Your thinking reminds me of the “youth evangelist” I heard in the 1960s.
All you need to become saved is to have faith; having faith is easy – you have faith every time you turn on a tap and expect water to come out of it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
People who live on Mars don't appear to want to be visible from above.

---

Or from the side, if the fact that no Mars Rover missions have yet identified any signs of life is anything to go by.

The image of those Rovers as Martian versions of the Google Street View van taking pictures to complement our overhead satellite views is an amusing one, though

---

No doubt there's an extra button to show canals as well as streets over the topography view.
 

---

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee
"If you tell people that an invisible man in the sky created the universe and everything in it then they will believe it without question BUT tell them that the paint is wet and they have to touch it...just to make sure!"

---

quote:

---

Moo: People touch it because paint does not remain wet. They want to find out whether it has dried yet.

---

Some people even like sticking their finger in fresh, wet paint


@HughWillRidmee: I'm sorry that my answer from yesterday evening was a bit short (it was quite late). I have been thinking a bit about it, and I'll try to give you my tl;dr answer now.

On the first page of this thread, a couple of weeks ago, the conversation went a bit like this (if I'm allowed to paraphrase a little).

Emily: The Annunaki are real.

Various Shipmates: We want to see scientific evidence of that, otherwise we won't believe it.

You: You don't have scientific evidence that proves Christianity either, so by your own logic you should abandon it.

I hope I got the gist of the conversation right. Let me try to explain my answer that I gave back then a bit better. I guess it is possible to divide the claims we can make into three categories:

CATEGORY 1: There are claims that have been proven scientifically. We should simply believe these claims, faith isn't required here.

Claims of the form 'if I let go of an apple, it will fall to the ground' fall into this category. Of course, strictly speaking science has no way to prove that the next apple will also fall to the ground, but you've made the Popperian argument (in your example about the water taps) that overwhelming evidence says that it will.

I agree with you, no faith is required here.

CATEGORY 2: There are claims that have been disproven scientifically. We should simply disbelief those claims, faith doesn't come into play here. (In fact, we could see this category as a form of category 1 of course, where the scientific proof would be negative instead of positive.)

CATEGORY 3: There are claims that have neither been proven nor been disproven scientifically. This is the interesting category of course, because here we have a choice.

Emily's claim "The Annunaki exist" falls into category 3 (although some of her other claims don't, for example the ones about a 12 mile wide Mars with buildings on it). The Christian claim "God exists" falls into this category too (I know there are some people on the Ship who claim that they can prove God's existence, but I'm not one of them).

If Emily could give scientific proof for the existence of the Annunaki, her claim would obviously fall into Category 1 and the matter would be resolved, but as long as she can't it's in Category 3. The same is true for the Christian claim of God's existence.

Which means that we have a choice: either we believe it, or we don't.

When it comes to claims in Category 3 (especially the Christian claim) you seem to have an attitude on the Ship that I'm paraphrasing as: "For all claims in Category 3, we should adopt a default position of disbelief, to be on the safe side." For example, you seem to have this attitude in this post.

What I tried to show (admittedly clumsily) in this post is: "the bulk of human communication takes place within Category 3, and it's quite common for us to choose to believe things that haven't been scientifically proven".

For example, in this post, you claim that you heard an evangelist speaking about water taps in the sixties. I believe that you did. But I have no scientific evidence to prove that this really happened, and there isn't exactly an overwhelming evidence that anonymous people on the Internet always speak the truth.

Yet, I believe you. Because you strike me as a basically decent person, and I don't see why you would lie about this. These are perfectly valid reasons for me to believe you, but they aren't scientific evidence. I can't just go to the Journal of Mathematical Analysis and say: "π + e is a transcendental number because I'm a decent guy and I wouldn't lie about this"

So, all I want to say in this rambling post is: "I don't have scientific evidence that God exists, but I choose to believe it, and in fact it's perfectly normal to believe in things for which we don't have scientific evidence."

Thank you for your patience.
 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Le Roc:
So, all I want to say in this rambling post is: "I don't have scientific evidence that God exists, but I choose to believe it, and in fact it's perfectly normal to believe in things for which we don't have scientific evidence."

---

quote:

---

SusanDoris: Except that all the other beliefs can be shown to be ideas from the human brain, or have a basis in scientific/natural fact.

---

quote:

---

SusanDoris: And the difference is also that no other beliefs have the same world-wide influence that belief in God/god/s does, nor do they teach children that hugely influential things without evidence are true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
So, all I want to say in this rambling post is: "I don't have scientific evidence that God exists, but I choose to believe it, and in fact it's perfectly normal to believe in things for which we don't have scientific evidence."

Thank you for your patience.

quote:

---

SusanDoris: And the difference is also that no other beliefs have the same world-wide influence that belief in God/god/s does, nor do they teach children that hugely influential things without evidence are true.

---

Yes, there are other beliefs that do exactly that.

There is a belief that has no evidence at all (I would even say there is strong scientific evidence against it), it is spread massively all around the world by all possible means, and it has a huge influence on children.

This belief is: "buying stuff is what will make you happy".

FWIW, within our society I find this belief far more dangerous than most religious beliefs.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: We are probably not that far apart until............

---

Darn, here was me looking for a long fight

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: I think they are mistaken but, provided any harm they do is limited only to themselves, their belief presents little danger to humanity.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: It is only a few steps from I believe to I know to you must know to The lower house also passed a bill imposing up to three years in jail on those who offend

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: Teaching people that the physical world can be changed by superstition is wrong – it provides the hope of false short-cuts (at least someone wins the lottery) and ideas such as heaven encourage social inertia (the rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate) and the acceptance of poverty/abuse/violence/genital mutilation etc. because it will all be alright once you’re dead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

I'm fine thank you, but are you open for the idea that my religion might also inspire me to try to do some good? Yes of course, but if you are the sort of person, as I suspect you are, who is able to be inspired to try to do some good can you accept that you might be the same person without that religion? Obviously we can’t test the hypothesis but I’ve known a lot of good people – some of them were also religious.

I don't deny that some awfully bad things have been (and continue to be) done in the name of religion. Believe me, I hate these as much as you do. Religion is connected to some strong emotions of ours, and therefore it can easily be abused. But isn't this the same with some other things: money, sex, politics, even love? Surely you don't want to abandon all of those as well? No, but I’m not sure that you’re analogies are valid. This is thinking on the hoof. Humans, to varying degrees, are motivated by the same wants as they were seventy thousand years ago –things such as food, warmth, shelter, companionship, security , sex. Money/power is the stepping stone to satisfaction of these needs whilst religion, politics, and sometimes love are means to obtaining money/power.

You say religion is connected to some strong emotions - granted that it’s not total but I suspect that religion is most often and most closely linked to fear. I know some people will say that they want to go to heaven and spend eternity with their god but I reckon most religious want to avoid hell (or get today their daily bread). Not a scrap of evidence for hell but play on the natural fears that enabled us to survive on the African savannah and some will fear. (Ever known anyone listen to the twigs hitting their bedroom window on a dark, stormy winter night only to find that it actually was the bogeyman?). In many societies there's plenty of reason to fear hunger and violence. Then get others to share the fear as a price for companionship/mutual support. It’s interesting that the lack of religion is generally greatest in those countries where the citizens are, or feel, most secure. It’s also interesting that some sections of christianity (and other religion) work very hard to try to keep their congregations dependent upon the church rather than other agencies/"socialism".

I would like for humanity to abandon unnecessary fear.

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: Teaching people that the physical world can be changed by superstition is wrong – it provides the hope of false short-cuts (at least someone wins the lottery) and ideas such as heaven encourage social inertia (the rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate) and the acceptance of poverty/abuse/violence/genital mutilation etc. because it will all be alright once you’re dead. Yes, but not all religion is like this. Mine isn't, for example. (Maybe this sounds like bragging, but there you go.)

---

And that’s great – but, in truth, I suspect most religious people would say theirs wasn’t like that either. Yet they will pray expecting to improve the divine will and teach others to try to do so, they will fund the adornment of buildings and the enrichment of officials when others are in desperate need of the basics, they are sure that they know what their god wants everyone else to do in their bedrooms, and who with, and under what circumstances. And their religion is not harming anyone, where would morality be without their religion – they’d all be murderers and rapists wouldn’t they – not.

So - why are you religious? How is your religion different to most other peoples’? Do you encourage others to share your religious views?What do you get/hope to get from your religion?

You can PM me if you wish

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: Yes of course, but if you are the sort of person, as I suspect you are, who is able to be inspired to try to do some good can you accept that you might be the same person without that religion? Obviously we can’t test the hypothesis but I’ve known a lot of good people – some of them were also religious.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: You say religion is connected to some strong emotions - granted that it’s not total but I suspect that religion is most often and most closely linked to fear.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: I know some people will say that they want to go to heaven and spend eternity with their god but I reckon most religious want to avoid hell

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: It’s interesting that the lack of religion is generally greatest in those countries where the citizens are, or feel, most secure.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: I would like for humanity to abandon unnecessary fear.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: And that’s great – but, in truth, I suspect most religious people would say theirs wasn’t like that either. Yet they will pray expecting to improve the divine will and teach others to try to do so, they will fund the adornment of buildings and the enrichment of officials when others are in desperate need of the basics, they are sure that they know what their god wants everyone else to do in their bedrooms, and who with, and under what circumstances.

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: So - why are you religious?

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: How is your religion different to most other peoples’?

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: Do you encourage others to share your religious views?

---

quote:

---

HughWillRidmee: What do you get/hope to get from your religion?

---

I don't see my faith in purely utilitarian terms of "what can I get out of it?" But I guess I coud say that my faith gives an extra dimension to things, through which I see the world, and which inspires me to try to do something good for other people. I wouldn't want to miss it.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
Well, isn't this judgment interesting?

This guy thinks he ought to be my Guide and Mentor, telling me what I ought to be doing.

Never mind, that I have found buildings, military bases and operations (in NASA photos) and all the Races of mankind there; plus snakes. Oh the snakes.

Look. You do what you are called to do, and I'll do what God has called me to do, okay Friend?

Emily

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bostonman:
It takes a bold spirit to look at thousands of pictures of Mars, not find any buildings, and decide, "It's because they've hidden them" rather than "It's because they're not there." So I salute you, Emily Windsor-Cragg.

I submit, however, as Martin has above me, that God and your neighbor might be better loved by your redirecting energy away from analyzing tens of thousands of pictures and toward the ideals of Matthew 25: feeding the hungry, taking in the stranger, visiting those in prison, and so on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hugh--

But trusting scientific evidence requires trusting the Scientific Method, the people using it, the quality of their tools and data, that reality can accurately and fully be measured that way, etc., does it not?

---

A scientistic method that leaves out the rest of this dimensional universe is not scientific.

without Intuition and [telepathic] remote-viewing, scientists are completely cutting themselves off from higher knowledge, which is a form of deliberated ignorance.

And that's where secular materialism stands to this day: knowing absolutely nothing about higher intelligences [like who "God" is and what "God" functions are].

Today, astronomers have been taught a cosmology that is completely obsolete, out of date and wrong. They believe in it, the way they believe in Jesus ... by faith.

That is no way to run a planet.

Emily
 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
without Intuition and [telepathic] remote-viewing, scientists are completely cutting themselves off from higher knowledge,...

---

quote:

---

SusanDoris: It's alwaysa rather preciously woolly response which seems to mean that they are on some imagined 'level' unattainable by non-believers!

I do not recall seeing Sof posters implying that idea though!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
But trusting scientific evidence requires trusting the Scientific Method, the people using it, the quality of their tools and data, that reality can accurately and fully be measured that way, etc., does it not?

---

A scientistic method that leaves out the rest of this dimensional universe is not scientific.

without Intuition and [telepathic] remote-viewing, scientists are completely cutting themselves off from higher knowledge, which is a form of deliberated ignorance.

And that's where secular materialism stands to this day: knowing absolutely nothing about higher intelligences [like who "God" is and what "God" functions are].

---

quote:

---

Without diesel engines and power steering, poets are totally cutting themselves off from bus driving

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
without Intuition and [telepathic] remote-viewing, scientists are completely cutting themselves off from higher knowledge,...

---

Why do you call it 'higher' knowledge? Wouldn't it be more accurate to call it 'different'?

---

No, not different at all. MULTI-dimensional knowledge is all part of the same diverse universal reality.

The Universe is as diverse as the forest, the ocean, the meadow and the mind.

Turning off the rest of the Creation so you can only see what your IDEAS HOLD AS "sacred" is like
only believing BBC and letting the rest of the world go to Hell.

That's not an intelligent strategy.

45 87 99
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by malik3000:
Somewhere in St. Paul's epistles, he says that if something can be proved, there is no need for faith. In other words, God cannot be proved scientifically. So "Creation Science" is attempting the impossible. By the same token, neither can God be disproved scientifically. Thus atheists of the Dawkins variety -- as opposed to agnostics -- are likewise attempting the impossible. ... And I don't believe that, as yet, "Remote viewing" or other methods purporting to rely on telepathy can be said to be part of the Scientific Method.

---

Ah! So that's where the heresy lies--again--in Saul of Tarsus' false testimony!

if something can be proved, there is no need for faith is false!

What can be proved in 3rd Dimensional Physicality is absurd and requires FAITH in 7thD or 13thD subjectivity.

The rules of manifestation in subjective existence absolutely refute the laws of cause and effect in 3rd dimensional physicality.

So, if the Angels didn't have faith that God knows how to run 3rd D Causes and Effects, they would not be able to attend to the outcomes of Physical failure uncaused by bad intentions.

Every time Paul opens his mouth, he contradicts the teaching of Jesus, Son of YHVH.

45 87 99
 

---

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hugh--

Acupuncture and homeopathy aren't about the supernatural. I know homeopathy is pretty controversial, at least in the US. But acupuncture is well documented in medical settings.

Acupuncture worked well for me, over a long period of time. I've had good experiences with Oscillococcinum homeopathic cold/flu medicine. And I don't seem prone to placebo effects.

FWIW.

Cochrane reports homeopathy aggregated results over many properly constituted trials – indistinguishable from placebo.
Acupuncture works just as well with sham needles (they have retractable points) and normal needles placed randomly (but not in the recommended places). – conclusion – placebo.

Much info. readily available if you want it.

They both rely on concepts not found in the natural world (succussion and chi) and, by definition, would prove the existence of the supernatural if they worked better than placebo.

As to colds/flu – your immune system, in time, deals with viruses – just don’t, please, risk relying on homeopathy for prevention against dangerous conditions such as malaria. My doctor had a patient who did - the patient survived, but only after six weeks at death's door in a specialist London hospital.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
Placebo is difficult, isn't it? It does work better than nothing, there is something going on, but it isn't going to work if the patient knows that's what it is. So why not use homeopathy or acupuncture if they are as good as placebo?

Though not for the killers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

quote:

---

Originally posted by malik3000:
Somewhere in St. Paul's epistles, he says that if something can be proved, there is no need for faith. In other words, God cannot be proved scientifically. So "Creation Science" is attempting the impossible. By the same token, neither can God be disproved scientifically. Thus atheists of the Dawkins variety -- as opposed to agnostics -- are likewise attempting the impossible. ... And I don't believe that, as yet, "Remote viewing" or other methods purporting to rely on telepathy can be said to be part of the Scientific Method.

---

Ah! So that's where the heresy lies--again--in Saul of Tarsus' false testimony!

if something can be proved, there is no need for faith is false!

What can be proved in 3rd Dimensional Physicality is absurd and requires FAITH in 7thD or 13thD subjectivity.

The rules of manifestation in subjective existence absolutely refute the laws of cause and effect in 3rd dimensional physicality.

So, if the Angels didn't have faith that God knows how to run 3rd D Causes and Effects, they would not be able to attend to the outcomes of Physical failure uncaused by bad intentions.

Every time Paul opens his mouth, he contradicts the teaching of Jesus, Son of YHVH.

45 87 99

---

Oy vey! Well i guess i'll just have to live in my own little 4D world (counting time as the the 4th dimension) and not trouble my poor brain about the 13th dimension. You are free to accept on faith that the Annunaki told you that Paul was a heretic. Moi, i'll just have to get along without my tinfoil hat.

and
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
Please note thati really didnt intend my previous post to be an ad hominem comment on the poster but on the content of the post, my opinions of which i stand by. Actually Sister Emily is a sincere person and probably a very nice person, and i loved her post in Eccles where she related her enthusiastic Texas-style response in church to a Bach piece that had been playrd. I thought "You go girl!"
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:

Possibly the most disconcerting aspect of placebo is that it does work when people know that's what it is. But it usually only works for some people and is a waste of time/effort/money in the majority of cases.

And, if its done without disclosure, it's deceitful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
without Intuition and [telepathic] remote-viewing, scientists are completely cutting themselves off from higher knowledge, which is a form of deliberated ignorance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
I've had good experiences with Oscillococcinum homeopathic cold/flu medicine. And I don't seem prone to placebo effects.

---

Two mutually contradictory statements I'm afraid.
 

---

Posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg (# 17687) on :
 
If earthbound, physical scientists cut themselves OFF from "other-dimensional" [The Holographic Paradigm] knowledge, they can't understand the relationship because "what they know" and the cosmic perspective in which "what they know" operates and has its effects.

Staying COMPLETELY and SOLELY within the confines of physical "causes and effects" is ...

LIKE the physician who refuses to acknowledge effects of nutrition and stress;

LIKE the architect who refuses to acknowledge effects of climate;

LIKE the engineer who refuses to acknowledge effects of wear and tear;

LIKE the computer geek who refuses to recognize or acknowledge effects of neglected UPDATES;

LIKE the media who refuse to recognize or acknowledge effects of dysinfo and misinfo on the public mind.

Partial knowledge creates a situation in which chaos can operate TRANSPARENTLY.

eewc

[ 21. June 2013, 00:47: Message edited by: Emily Windsor-Cragg ]
 

---

Posted by Plique-à-jour (# 17717) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:

Partial knowledge creates a situation in which chaos can operate TRANSPARENTLY.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
...someone can see "dark matter" simply by photographing in NIGHTSHOT, black-light digital images that leave out R-G-B hues

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
I've had good experiences with Oscillococcinum homeopathic cold/flu medicine. And I don't seem prone to placebo effects.

---

Two mutually contradictory statements I'm afraid.

---

Seriously, I'm known for all sorts of rare reactions to prescription meds. If I were placebo-effect prone, I'd think I wouldn't have such bad reactions. FWIW.
 

---

Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Seriously, I'm known for all sorts of rare reactions to prescription meds. If I were placebo-effect prone, I'd think I wouldn't have such bad reactions. FWIW.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
There is the nocebo effect, which causes negative results.

Mistakenly pressed reply instead of URL

Report on nocebo effect

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emily Windsor-Cragg:
If earthbound, physical scientists cut themselves OFF from "other-dimensional" [The Holographic Paradigm] knowledge, they can't understand the relationship because "what they know" and the cosmic perspective in which "what they know" operates and has its effects./[QB]

---

quote:

---

Staying COMPLETELY and SOLELY within the confines of physical "causes and effects" is ...

LIKE the physician who refuses to acknowledge effects of nutrition and stress;

LIKE the architect who refuses to acknowledge effects of climate;

LIKE the engineer who refuses to acknowledge effects of wear and tear;

LIKE the computer geek who refuses to recognize or acknowledge effects of neglected UPDATES;

LIKE the media who refuse to recognize or acknowledge effects of dysinfo and misinfo on the public mind.

Partial knowledge creates a situation in which chaos can operate TRANSPARENTLY.

eewc

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0