The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Technology, Science & Alt Science => Topic started by: New Earth on January 10, 2012, 05:18:02 PM
-
I recently read a book called "Worlds Beyond the Poles" by Amadeo Giannini. He writes that the universe is physically connected and that there is no space as we know it. He states that if one travels south of south pole or north of the north pole, he will move away from the earth "globe" and into a celestial landmasses of the universe. The reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because the telescope lens causes an illusion of isolated sphere. Anyways the book is very interesting and it matches with my new model of a new heaven and new earth. I believe that the new universe will not contain empty space as it does now, rather space will be replaced by an infinite physical land. (Paradise) Planets will still exist and will still be spherical within a structure of the universe. To travel to celestial lands will be done via north and south poles. This will apply to every planet of the new universe.
-
You should read extensively on Quantum Entanglement. I think you'll like it.
-
You're still here? Seriously?
-
The reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because the telescope lens causes an illusion of isolated sphere.
Words fail.
Translation: "the reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because of something I made up after downing 3 pints of vodka, 5 tabs of acid and a bag of charlie."
-
The reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because the telescope lens causes an illusion of isolated sphere.
Words fail.
Translation: "the reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because of something I made up after downing 3 pints of vodka, 5 tabs of acid and a bag of charlie."
I didn't write that. Amadeo Giannini wrote it in his book "Worlds beyond the Poles"
-
The reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because the telescope lens causes an illusion of isolated sphere.
Words fail.
Translation: "the reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because of something I made up after downing 3 pints of vodka, 5 tabs of acid and a bag of charlie."
I didn't write that. Amadeo Giannini wrote it in his book "Worlds beyond the Poles"
As in, the founder of Bank of America?
-
Amadeo Giannini wrote it in his book "Worlds beyond the Poles"
I'm not familiar with the name but from that one quote alone I think we can safely say he's a complete loon. ;D
-
oh man, NE ya juz ain't goin awai.
-
I recently read a book called "Worlds Beyond the Poles" by Amadeo Giannini. He writes that the universe is physically connected and that there is no space as we know it. He states that if one travels south of south pole or north of the north pole, he will move away from the earth "globe" and into a celestial landmasses of the universe. The reason the astronomers classify earth and other planets as isolated spherical objects is because the telescope lens causes an illusion of isolated sphere. Anyways the book is very interesting and it matches with my new model of a new heaven and new earth. I believe that the new universe will not contain empty space as it does now, rather space will be replaced by an infinite physical land. (Paradise) Planets will still exist and will still be spherical within a structure of the universe. To travel to celestial lands will be done via north and south poles. This will apply to every planet of the new universe.
And what evidence does he cite to make this any more convincing than Harry Potter's floo network?
-
Hey NE I think this guy has a pretty good understanding of it form what you shared. I feel that the poles are an opening (or not) to whatever one believes tho I'm certain the flat earth celestial realm is the highest realm which integrates the positive polarity facet of all planets throughout infinity. Tho its not strictly flat either (the body of it is) but I have glimpsed that it can be abstract as well with various concavity pockets and or exact concave earths integrated. Gravity is defined by an automatic desire to have feet on the ground, unless otherwise stated.
so the poles are like a portal to many different channels of reality. If one disbelieves they simply wont go anywhere. The hollow earth is ussualy discredited but I have defined it somewhat more.
-
Hey NE I think this guy has a pretty good understanding of it form what you shared. I feel that the poles are an opening (or not) to whatever one believes
Does that mean my little magnet is also an opening to whatever I believe?
tho I'm certain the flat earth celestial realm is the highest realm
Highest realm in infinity? So infinity + 1?
which integrates the positive polarity facet of all planets throughout infinity.
You don't know what a positive polarity is do you? Or what a facet is.
Tho its not strictly flat either (the body of it is) but I have glimpsed that it can be abstract as well with various concavity pockets and or exact concave earths integrated.
Glimpsed? I see....
I think your third eye needs glasses.
Gravity is defined by an automatic desire to have feet on the ground, unless otherwise stated.
Rocks don't have feet. How does gravity exist for them?
so the poles are like a portal to many different channels of reality. If one disbelieves they simply wont go anywhere.
You should prove this by going to one of the poles and never coming back.
The hollow earth is ussualy discredited but I have defined it somewhat more.
This statement has nothing to do with anything in this thread.
-
The bromance between Ryan and NE endures. <3
-
The bromance between Ryan and NE endures. <3
Indeed. I'm waiting for them to combine their imaginations to the point where they believe they can do anything...
Then promptly get a painful smackdown by physics.
-
hjahah you guys are hilarious :D
-
This statement has nothing to do with anything in this thread.
a facet is a face/side of an object : here it is used allegorically
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51781.msg1269296#msg1269296
see section 2.3
-
You should prove this by going to one of the poles and never coming back.
The poles are not the only way, when one ascends they tune into the planetary toroid field and its higher frequency bands wherever they are. I think to some extent it has happened to anyone who has embraced flat earth/concave earth perception
-
I feel that the poles are not the only way, when one ascends they tune into the planetary toroid field and its higher frequency bands regardless of where one happens to be. I feel it has happened to anyone who has embraced flat earth/concave earth perception in totality.
The poles are more so a saturated area of the field whereby one who has not learnt to align with oneness may get to momentarily have that experience... a bit like taking a drug where their finite aura can only reach a certain capacity of saturation
-
Yes Ryan you are correct and I agree with you on most points that you made. Space is really is an illusion. Its almost like a mask that is hiding celestial paradises from earthly men. This infinite landmass (space) dimensionally separated from our reality. When the right time comes, this barrier will be bridged and people will no longer see space and dark airless empty void. Everything will be land, everywhere there will be life, no more dark voids or empty airless wastes. The poles of course will serve as an opening to this infinite land, the planets will still exist and will appear as spheres. However everything will be connected via "celestial" lands.
I don't like this term "celestial lands" but I use it for the lack of better description of the "new space" Again space for the lack of better term. And like you said poles are not the only portals to this infinite land. So basically this is the model; Space is replaced by Infinite landmass. Planets appear spherical. Actually given the proper 5D conditions you can even materialize your own planets simply by imagining them.
The reason people attack us on this board is because deep down they know that their reality can't be the only one out there. They all seek higher existence, they all want it, but they just don't know how to find it. They are deeply anchored in the conventional notions and accepted physics, which disallows them to see higher truth and ultimate reality. It is not my or your duty to help them. Like Christ said "Even if you will see you won't believe" Likewise even if these people experience what you and I already know, they will still cling to Newton and Darwin, so its ultimately their problem. And eventually they will all parish away together with current reality that unfortunately binds us all on this plane of existence, but which soon shall dissolve and be no more.
-
If you don't need the poles to go into the higher dimensions, why are you still here? Shouldn't you have ascended by now?
NE: we attack you because everything you and Ryan say is gibberish. I've proven this by saying some complete nonsense and be said I had the concept "in a nutshell". So if I know that I made up words and ideas in a string that didn't make sense and be said it did then its clear that he has no real understanding of what he says.
And neither do you.
-
If you don't need the poles to go into the higher dimensions, why are you still here? Shouldn't you have ascended by now?
NE: we attack you because everything you and Ryan say is gibberish. I've proven this by saying some complete nonsense and be said I had the concept "in a nutshell". So if I know that I made up words and ideas in a string that didn't make sense and be said it did then its clear that he has no real understanding of what he says.
And neither do you.
you can only speak for yourself dave you don't now what others experience and think, accept it.
regarding ascention ...waht maekes you think I haven't been there and come back for the sake of placing it in words so others may know. You don't know! do you... deep down it frightens you
-
If you don't need the poles to go into the higher dimensions, why are you still here? Shouldn't you have ascended by now?
NE: we attack you because everything you and Ryan say is gibberish. I've proven this by saying some complete nonsense and be said I had the concept "in a nutshell". So if I know that I made up words and ideas in a string that didn't make sense and be said it did then its clear that he has no real understanding of what he says.
And neither do you.
you can only speak for yourself dave you don't now what others experience and think, accept it.
regarding ascention ... how do you know I haven't been there and come back for the sake of placing it in words so others may know the concept. You don't know! do you... deep down it frightens you that maybe just maybe what we put forth is true
And this sir is why I don't respond to over half of your attempts to get my attention I don't need to prove it for myself (the words have been compiled long since that occurred, if it hadn't I wouldn't have a reason to write what I write) and I certainly don't need to prove anything to you (remember you came to my thread not the other way round) I offer the links here and there so others who happen upon the threads (who are neither here nor there on the subject) can make an informed decision of what to think about the actual subject rather than dismissing it out of hand on account of second hand opinions...
-
If you don't need the poles to go into the higher dimensions, why are you still here? Shouldn't you have ascended by now?
NE: we attack you because everything you and Ryan say is gibberish. I've proven this by saying some complete nonsense and be said I had the concept "in a nutshell". So if I know that I made up words and ideas in a string that didn't make sense and be said it did then its clear that he has no real understanding of what he says.
And neither do you.
you can only speak for yourself dave you don't now what others experience and think, accept it.
Oh but I do.
If I were to ask anyone what the background of this text box is (the reply text box) they would all tell me "white". How do I know? Because it is white. One can not deny that it is white because the entire universe relies on rules. And the rules state that this text box must be white.
regarding ascention ... how do you know I haven't been there and come back for the sake of placing it in words so others may know the concept. You don't know! do you... deep down it frightens you that maybe just maybe what we put forth is true
Because I have and you have not. If you had, I'd have known about it. I am Lord Dave, after all. Prove me wrong.
And this sir is why I don't respond to over half of your attempts to get my attention I don't need to prove it for myself (the words have been compiled long since that occurred, if it hadn't I wouldn't have a reason to write what I write) and I certainly don't need to prove anything to you (remember you came to my thread not the other way round) I offer the links here and there so others who happen upon the threads (who are neither here nor there on the subject) can make an informed decision of what to think about the actual subject rather than dismissing it out of hand on account of second hand opinions...
I think, deep down, it frightens you that maybe, just maybe, you are insane. You post here to seek someone's agreement so that your fears can be subdued and your ideas verified. It's nothing to be ashamed of though. Everyone does. We all fear that we're wrong. That our lives mean nothing. That everything we know is wrong. Many religions are based on this fear.
However, I know you are wrong for one very simple reason:
You use words that do not fit what you mean to say. You claim to use them in ways that are yours and yours alone yet also claim to wish to convey such knowledge to others. You contradict yourself and that is why I know that you are wrong.
-
However, I know you are wrong for one very simple reason:
You use words that do not fit what you mean to say. You claim to use them in ways that are yours and yours alone yet also claim to wish to convey such knowledge to others. You contradict yourself and that is why I know that you are wrong.
Show me an example a real example whereby I have failed to link another thraed which delves into the extrapolation of defineing the term.
YOU lord dave know nothing of the sort
Im going to lay it out plain and simple....NDE = knowledge of these facts ...your fears are not the same as mine...I fear not that people think im insane as I have known that thats what most beilve anyway, I dealt with that and accepted it along time ago its not something that bothers me...
You may need others to agree with your claims that I'm crazy and that life can only be possibly on a round earth. I on the other hand need no one to believe what I say. If an individual reads what I have written with a sincere and open heart they will know just as well as I do the truth behind these words.
all I say comes from compassion so that others may step out of the delusion of exclusively materialist ways of thinking thereby evading a potentially unpleasant lesson in either this life or lives to come. Whether one believes the earth can be flat is irrelevant much of what i write may be enough to cause an individual to really consider that they have a soul
................
-
However, I know you are wrong for one very simple reason:
You use words that do not fit what you mean to say. You claim to use them in ways that are yours and yours alone yet also claim to wish to convey such knowledge to others. You contradict yourself and that is why I know that you are wrong.
Show me an example a real example whereby I have failed to link another thraed which delves into the extrapolation of defineing the term.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51781.0
You were very reluctant to define "imploversial physics".
And let's not forget Pseudo-frequency:
Cosmic defined-space has a pseudo-frequency. It implodes inward but never cycles either because the singularity exponentially recedes into spaceless space, thus never giving semi-formless 3D space the chance to complete a cycle (in oscillatory terms; polarising back and forth; it continues on endlessly inward) hence why space has no evident density.
None of these words actually make sense in this context. A frequency is something that occurs repeatedly at a specific rate. If it never cycles, it's not a frequency.
And semi-formless is also another term that makes no sense. It either has form or it doesn't. To say something is semi-formless is to say it has a form.
And how you come to that conclusion and say space has no evident density makes no sense either. Space as you define it has no density because there's nothing in it except energy.
And that's just one small section.
YOU lord dave know nothing of the sort
Oh but I do. I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. Everything you know is wrong.
Im going to lay it out plain and simple....NDE = knowledge of these facts ...
And there you go again. What do you want to define NDE as? Near Death Experience?
your fears are not the same as mine...I fear not that people think im insane as I have known that thats what most beilve anyway, I dealt with that and accepted it along time ago its not something that bothers me...
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I don't think you're afraid other people think you're insane, I think you're afraid that you really ARE insane. Very different fears.
You may need others to agree with your claims that I'm crazy
Yep. Otherwise the universe wouldn't make any sense and we might as well throw all known physics out the window. Cause, ya know, I'm afraid everything I know is wrong.
Fortunately, they do agree.
and that life can only be possibly on a round earth.
Where did that come from? No one is debating that. I know, for a fact, that life is possible in a variety of environments. Maybe even deep space itself or on an asteroid, but definitely on a space station. None of these are a round earth.
I on the other hand need no one to believe what I say. If an individual reads what I have written with a sincere and open heart they will know just as well as I do the truth behind these words.
Yes you do. I'll tell you why:
1. You're posting it on a Flat Earth forum. If you wanted to get the attention of others, you should post this on more populated forums with more critical people, like http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=68
2. You said that those who read it with a sincere and open heart will know that it's true. You're telling me that anyone who says it's not true is blocked by his insincere and closed heart. You are telling me that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong because they are. That is the sign of someone who desperately needs to validate themselves against overwhelming evidence. But that's easy. Why prove it when you can dismiss everyone who doesn't agree with you by saying they have a closed heart?
all I say comes from compassion so that others may step out of the delusion of exclusively materialist ways of thinking thereby evading a potentially unpleasant lesson in either this life or lives to come.
Tell ya what: go out into the middle of a large city near you and demonstrate whatever transcending stuff you do. I'm sure watching you suddenly vanish from our plane of reality then reappear will be on the news.
Oh wait... it doesn't work like that does it? Your body will be standing there and nothing apparent will happen. Well I guess it's impossible for you to prove any of this to anyone eh?
Whether one believes the earth can be flat is irrelevant much of what i write may be enough to cause an individual to really consider that they have a soul
Hold on there. You JUST said that I need to know that life can only exist on the Round Earth and then go on to say that it's irrelevant if I think that? WTF?
And nothing you say talks about a soul. You're trying to redefine astrophysics with metaphysics.
Look, if you want anyone to take you seriously, do a trick.
-
ITT: alts and their gibberish
-
ITT: alts and their gibberish
Oh cheesus, you should know I don't do alts. I'm a good member. :P
-
ITT: alts and their gibberish
Oh cheesus, you should know I don't do alts. I'm a good member. :P
lorddave four precedent
-
ITT: alts and their gibberish
Oh cheesus, you should know I don't do alts. I'm a good member. :P
I meant the bromance in this thread is actually performed by a single member.
-
ITT: alts and their gibberish
Oh cheesus, you should know I don't do alts. I'm a good member. :P
I meant the bromance in this thread is actually performed by a single member.
Oh. Yes, sorry.
-
However, I know you are wrong for one very simple reason:
You use words that do not fit what you mean to say. You claim to use them in ways that are yours and yours alone yet also claim to wish to convey such knowledge to others. You contradict yourself and that is why I know that you are wrong.
Show me an example a real example whereby I have failed to link another thraed which delves into the extrapolation of defineing the term.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51781.0
You were very reluctant to define "imploversial physics".
And let's not forget Pseudo-frequency:
Cosmic defined-space has a pseudo-frequency. It implodes inward but never cycles either because the singularity exponentially recedes into spaceless space, thus never giving semi-formless 3D space the chance to complete a cycle (in oscillatory terms; polarising back and forth; it continues on endlessly inward) hence why space has no evident density.
None of these words actually make sense in this context. A frequency is something that occurs repeatedly at a specific rate. If it never cycles, it's not a frequency.
And semi-formless is also another term that makes no sense. It either has form or it doesn't. To say something is semi-formless is to say it has a form.
And how you come to that conclusion and say space has no evident density makes no sense either. Space as you define it has no density because there's nothing in it except energy.
And that's just one small section.
YOU lord dave know nothing of the sort
Oh but I do. I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. Everything you know is wrong.
Im going to lay it out plain and simple....NDE = knowledge of these facts ...
And there you go again. What do you want to define NDE as? Near Death Experience?
your fears are not the same as mine...I fear not that people think im insane as I have known that thats what most beilve anyway, I dealt with that and accepted it along time ago its not something that bothers me...
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I don't think you're afraid other people think you're insane, I think you're afraid that you really ARE insane. Very different fears.
You may need others to agree with your claims that I'm crazy
and that life can only be possibly on a round earth.
Where did that come from? No one is debating that. I know, for a fact, that life is possible in a variety of environments. Maybe even deep space itself or on an asteroid, but definitely on a space station. None of these are a round earth.
I on the other hand need no one to believe what I say. If an individual reads what I have written with a sincere and open heart they will know just as well as I do the truth behind these words.
Yes you do. I'll tell you why:
1. You're posting it on a Flat Earth forum. If you wanted to get the attention of others, you should post this on more populated forums with more critical people, like http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=68
2. You said that those who read it with a sincere and open heart will know that it's true. You're telling me that anyone who says it's not true is blocked by his insincere and closed heart. You are telling me that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong because they are. That is the sign of someone who desperately needs to validate themselves against overwhelming evidence. But that's easy. Why prove it when you can dismiss everyone who doesn't agree with you by saying they have a closed heart?
all I say comes from compassion so that others may step out of the delusion of exclusively materialist ways of thinking thereby evading a potentially unpleasant lesson in either this life or lives to come.
Tell ya what: go out into the middle of a large city near you and demonstrate whatever transcending stuff you do. I'm sure watching you suddenly vanish from our plane of reality then reappear will be on the news.
Oh wait... it doesn't work like that does it? Your body will be standing there and nothing apparent will happen. Well I guess it's impossible for you to prove any of this to anyone eh?
Whether one believes the earth can be flat is irrelevant much of what i write may be enough to cause an individual to really consider that they have a soul
Hold on there. You JUST said that I need to know that life can only exist on the Round Earth and then go on to say that it's irrelevant if I think that? WTF?
And nothing you say talks about a soul. You're trying to redefine astrophysics with metaphysics.
Look, if you want anyone to take you seriously, do a trick.
1 An open heart and sincerity does not judge as such if an individual reads these words without judgement (i.e. a preconception of "this guy has to have it wrong he believes a flat earth is possible") then they will set themself in a receptive position to recive the frequency of holographic intent that accompanies all I do....metaphysical imprints of eveyones actions and levels of truth/untruth are left as a trail wherever thy go.
2 I've done a trick but most people deny themselves that it occurred.. the mind is very stubourn when exposed to things that it doesn't believe is possible. It simply filters that stuff and fact is every moment I am in the presence of another I am doing this "trick" - involuntarily might I add
3 you either did not fully read The Ancient Greek Concept of Nous (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51614.0) as advocated at the beginning of Imploversial Physics...or you did and were reluctant to admitted that you had in the first place for you would have had no guise as a basis to attempt to belittle the terminology that I use. and don't deny it that was exactly what your intent was...To simply be a Nasty little Brat irrespective of whether it made any sense or not. Which doesn't bother me, because Ultimately you render a service to others at your own expense by proxy of your folly
I was reluctant to define Imploversial Physics because I sensed insincerity in your manner of posting elsewhere before hand... you are after all lorddave. Plus for those who read the Nous thread first the term and entire concept of imploding space is defined (all who I have shared it with who have followed this advised approach have concurred to the metaphysical logistics) so it is obvious enough what the term Imploversial means once the first paragraph of the IP thread is read.
You entirely misunderstand every thing I have written Vanishing from this plane does not occur when one shifts their perception, for 1 that would violate your free will....2 the same continuum of events exist in all three models....so the resonance of where ones conciousness is anchored shifts to the reality codes one perceives whilst the body remains in all three simultaneously...holographic principle.. The celestial realm is an exception when one goes there they're removed from the 3 base physical realms (of the omnified cosmologies) consciouslym and placed in the infinite paradise timeline which is entirely positive...so time in the 3rd Aetheric Density of awareness is non-relative to the Infinite timeline 5th Density awareness. one can go there experience a slice of the eternity and come back without any time passing (in this plain you read these words). Thus one gets a glimpse at where they will be at the end of their life or if they ascend physically during life... the circumstances for physical ascension are tedious to attain and some will only ascend after a certain amount of individuals in this bass physical realm either wake up spiritualy to responsible lives or are wiped out.
Lastly at least you were honest here.
Yep. Otherwise the universe wouldn't make any sense and we might as well throw all known physics out the window. Cause, ya know, I'm afraid everything I know is wrong.
Fortunately, they do agree.
and I guess you didn't realise that by posting this you inevitably inadvertently confirmed that the inverse of every thing you say is also valid
P.S. this also equates to a repliey to every one else other than dave with the same views
-
Lord Dave is a real Lord. He was knighted by Cheesus Crust, a blasphemous queen of the flat earth lol
-
1 An open heart and sincerity does not judge as such if an individual reads these words without judgement (i.e. a preconception of "this guy has to have it wrong he believes a flat earth is possible")
That's an open mind. An open heart accepts a person as they are without judgement, not an idea. Please use correct terms in the future.
then they will set themself in a receptive position to recive the frequency of holographic intent that accompanies all I do....metaphysical imprints of eveyones actions and levels of truth/untruth are left as a trail wherever thy go.
Holography:
Broken down means whole drawing.
So are you talking about the frequency of an illusion or drawing? Cause that's what holographic means: An illusion of a drawing.
And it's curious to think that such frequencies can go through the internet. How powerful you must think you are eh?
2 I've done a trick but most people deny themselves that it occurred.. the mind is very stubourn when exposed to things that it doesn't believe is possible. It simply filters that stuff and fact is every moment I am in the presence of another I am doing this "trick" - involuntarily might I add
I see. Then without accepting what you say is true, how does one verify that you are performing this "trick"? What are the characteristics? What are the visible or measurable reactions to doing this action?
3 you either did not fully read The Ancient Greek Concept of Nous (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51614.0) as advocated at the beginning of Imploversial Physics...or you did and were reluctant to admitted that you had in the first place for you would have had no guise as a basis to attempt to belittle the terminology that I use. and don't deny it that was exactly what your intent was...To simply be a Nasty little Brat irrespective of whether it made any sense or not. Which doesn't bother me, because Ultimately you render a service to others at your own expense by proxy of your folly
Nope, didn't read it but after going through the first few lines I still say you're wrong.
he only way of understanding how this could be is if Nous is formless, non-cyclic i.e. a pseudo-frequency
Formless, non-cyclic is not a frequency or even a pseudo-frequency. For something to be a pseudo it must look like it but not really be it. For something to be a pseudo-frequency, it must look like it repeats but doesn't.
And if you recall, after you (painfully) described it to me, I told you that such a word was worthless and you should have chosen a better one to describe it, like asymptote. You didn't because you didn't know such a word existed.
I was reluctant to define Imploversial Physics because I sensed insincerity in your manner of posting elsewhere before hand... you are after all lorddave. Plus for those who read the Nous thread first the term and entire concept of imploding space is defined
How do you figure? The word Imploversial doesn't exist in that thread and imploding is mentioned only once. If you want to define something, you should actually define it, not make vague hints about it and expect everyone to say "Oh, that means imploding controversial physics if you look at the word just right and add some letters ".
(all who I have shared it with who have followed this advised approach have concurred to the metaphysical logistics) so it is obvious enough what the term Imploversial means once the first paragraph of the IP thread is read.
Please show me ONE person(aside from New Earth) who agrees with you and is able to come to that conclusion from the first paragraph of the IP thread and I'll concede my point.
You entirely misunderstand every thing I have written. Vanishing from this plane does not occur when one shifts their perception, for 1 that would violate your free willFree Will isn't violated by a willful shift of location....2 the same continuum of events exist in all three modelsRealities, not models.....so the resonance of where ones conciousness is anchored shifts to the reality codesFrequency, not codes. one perceives whilst the body remains in all three simultaneouslyA physical object existing in three separate realms of reality simultaneously means that each realm is the same as the previous ...holographic principleIncorrect usage of the word. Holographic principal is when you create an illusion to show a more complete image of something... The celestial realm is an exception when one goes there they're removed from the 3 base physical realmsSo your body should vanish yet it has never occurred. (of the omnified cosmologiesRedundant terms. ) consciouslymThis term does not exist and placed in the infinite paradise timelineParadise is a term that is individualized and can not be universally defined which is entirely positivePolarity or emotionally?...so time in the 3rd AethericAether is the fictional "stuff" that early scientists and naturalists believed separated the planets and stars from each other. Density of awarenessawareness is an idea and ideas have no density is non-relative to the Infinite timelineAll timelines are infinite 5th DensityMultiple Densities for one thing is incorrect. awarenessideas don't have densities. one can go there experience a slice of the eternity and come back without any time passingYou are describing Astroprojection (in this plain you read these words). Thus one gets a glimpse at where they will be at the end of their lifeThat would be astro-projection and time travel or if they ascend physically during lifeNo such event has occurred in the history of humanity.... the circumstances for physical ascension are tedious to attain and some will only ascend after a certain amount of individuals in this bassThis is a fish. physical realm either wake up spiritualy to responsible lives or are wiped out. Requiring individuals to either stop existing or follow your beliefs in order to achieve your goal is a form of holy war.
Please See Me!
Lastly at least you were honest here.
Yep. Otherwise the universe wouldn't make any sense and we might as well throw all known physics out the window. Cause, ya know, I'm afraid everything I know is wrong.
Fortunately, they do agree.
and I guess you didn't realise that by posting this you inevitably inadvertently confirmed that the inverse of every thing you say is also valid
So by admitting that I'm afraid everything I know is wrong, I admit that the opposite of everything I said is right?
Hold on, let me work that one out....
Normal:
I'm afraid everything I know is wrong.
Inverse:
I'm NOT afraid everything I know is wrong.
Hmmm... these appear to be contradictory. How can both be true?
Lord Dave is a real Lord. He was knighted by Cheesus Crust, a blasphemous queen of the flat earth lol
Hardly. I am Lord of myself. I have given myself that title, to apply to my mind and my mind alone.
-
1 Selective interpretation does not make you look clever.....
2 Ignorance by choosing not to read that which is advocated as a prerequisite to comprehend the holographic approach isn't a good enough excuse to claim I have failed in defining terms and phrases...
3 you stop reading because you were out of your depth hence why you probably would been wiser to avoid the whole lot from that point on rather than anchoring into an awareness of principles your not ready to embrace
4 Consciousness and thoughts do have density ... look into cymatics. It applies on every level of the matter/energy spectrum from the crystalline formation of mineral elements to the holographic synaesthesia phenomenon of visuals and sensations that Extrasensory aware individuals experience.
...
5 wasting your time to make another's obvious meanings construed to suit your own self appointed idolisation... priceless thanx for the laughs
-
Ryan is the best thing that ever happened to FE forums. Lord Dave got his ass whooped.
-
1 Selective interpretation does not make you look clever.....
I'm simply using the words as you write them. I can't help it if you use words incorrectly.
2 Ignorance by choosing not to read that which is advocated as a prerequisite to comprehend the holographic approach isn't a good enough excuse to claim I have failed in defining terms and phrases...
I know what a hologram is. Why are you trying to redefine it?
3 you stop reading because you were out of your depth hence why you probably would been wiser to avoid the whole lot from that point on rather than anchoring into an awareness of principles your not ready to embrace
It's hard to read something that uses words incorrectly.
4 Consciousness and thoughts do have density ... look into cymatics.
Err....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cymatics
Perhaps you should stop using words you don't understand the definition of.
...holographic synaesthesia phenomenon of visuals and sensations that Extrasensory aware individuals experience.
Holographic:
An illusion of a 3 dimensional object.
Synaesthesia:
Synesthesia (also spelled synęsthesia or synaesthesia, plural synesthesiae or synaesthesiae), from the ancient Greek σύν (syn), "together," and αἴσθησις (aisthēsis), "sensation," is a neurologically based condition in which stimulation of one sensory or cognitive pathway leads to automatic, involuntary experiences in a second sensory or cognitive pathway.[1][2][3][4] People who report such experiences are known as synesthetes.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia
So, Holographic Synaesthesia is an illusion that causes you to experience an automatic and involuntary sensory experience.
Or maybe it's the illusion of a second sensory experience.
In any case, it's an illusion.
5 wasting your time to make another's obvious meanings construed to suit your own self appointed idolisation... priceless thanx for the laughs
I'm still waiting for you to show proof that someone other than you and New Earth understands what you say.
So I did a search to see what you define Holographic as.
Here's something I found which I thought was odd...
This is due to the holographic principle of degradation whereby if a holographic film is cut into many pieces the same image exists on each piece but with lesser informational resolution/potential of angles to be viewed as a 3 dimensional projection. Eventually if the image is split enough times it will become an incoherent fuzz.
What's odd is that you seem to say that a holographic object is an illusion of light.
You also then say that cutting the image into pieces causes the whole image to be retained in each piece. This is false. I'm not sure where you got that information, but it's clear you have never cut a holographic film in half.
In fact, you have mentioned holographic exactly 13 times and in all of those times have never defined it directly. All you say is "The holographic ...." as though you know what a hologram is yet don't care that it pertains only to light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography
Please read up on holography before using that word.
-
hi i am new earth and i am internet black thug lol
-
hi i am new earth and i am internet black thug lol
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.
-
4 Consciousness and thoughts do have density ... look into cymatics.
Usually I skip your posts, but I read this and thought I would ask: what the hell are you talking about? Of what relevance is consciousness and thoughts to cymatics?
-
Plenty of others have confirmed my words if they hadn't I wouldn't post them.
"Read up on a Hologram".... been there done that
you really need to try being a little less know-it-all like, you "know" things form a very limited and biased perspective....many the presumtion and assumptions are thrown around and it unmasks what you aim to achieve on the covert
If my words do not describe reality as akin to a hologram (which it is ) but for the sake of pointing out your folly to others (not to you) here is a debunking of your logic and futility which actuall yreinforces what I say....
1. Lord Dave says that a hologram is an illusion. correct. I conccur I have said it to.
However I say space is like a hologram. An illuson.
2. Lord dave says that I have failed to define what a hologram is (assuming that I have never read about one) the very same wiki at least when I read it a year ago defined it exactly to the effect if the words I wrote which dave has done us the favor of diggin out to the forefront of this topic...(thank you for attempting a rebuttal)
Now if what i describe as universe is (cosmoses made of micro-cosmoses) as being akin to - not exactly like a hologram - then what I have described is not an illusion, as he so devalues it to being an illusion of mind. It therefore is far more than an illusion of mind, rather instead tis a tangible reality based on principles of metaphysics which function with perception as inculcating an illusion but which themselves as a fabric are very real and permanent. And above all else even if it weren't like a hologram the notion put forth is evidently holistic; unified which is another term derived by the characteristics of a hologram - many others seam to say the same thing here is an example
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090202161614AAPKngc
Now for you question Vindictus:
Ok presuming you actually understand cymatics has hidden shapes produced by loud sound vibrations on a plater, and its know that light and sound are the same thing - all other energy is the same self similar source quality of existence interpreted by our senses as different states
here is an excerpt from some of my most recent writing
Because the higher integers of the unknown energetic/EM spectrum overlap into the highest known mesurable physical integers, they would appear as something other than what beings in the base physical realm relate to as EMFs as they are in the epsilon+ range of light. The analogy which aligns with this way of contending with fractal integers /octaves of reality, is the notion that what humans perceive as light may be perceived as something other than visible light by other living creatures. The vice also applies too e.g. what is perceived by people as the invisible non luminous EMF spectrum may actually be perceived as luminous by termites who use the earths EMF to see underground (this is obviously impossible to be proven by conventional science).
In short energy is fractal which is self similar, therefore point of reference from one species to another yields differing perceived qualities associated with any given band of frequencies. Because all energy is fundamentally derived from the same source, this means all matter and states of energy emanate primarily from the same omnified level of infinite potential. Thereby any band of frequencies relative to one species as a specific phenomena, can therefore be expressed simultaneously as any or potentially all possible states in accordance with the point of reference of any other given species (both in the same reality and those of higher physical and spiritual levels).
So Synaesthesia where individuals can taste a sound/colour , hear/feel a colour , hear a sound and see/feel a shape internally with the same result each time including coloured auras around words (in the same book/ the colours are not fixed to specific words they change according to different sentences and authors). ANd Also feel their pours breath in and out, all this because their brain is operating at higher levels of awareness which directly percieves the holographic like fractal information of each perceived phenomenon overlapping into the preceding level before/above it. All vibrational phenomena essentially hold the imprint of every possible expression simultaneously
on a side note: funny that scientists actually use less of their brain than artists as brain wave EEG encephalographs show the left brained logic is limited and the right brain is integral of balancing and including the left in higher function...So woh is seeing the reality more truly as it is... the scientist or the visonary
P.S. dave you asked how one can sense the holographic imprints in words etc on a computer... quite easily since computers are base on quartz silicon chips which are holographic vessels of storing informational on multiple levels can you say Liquid Crystal Display.
-
Plenty of others have confirmed my words if they hadn't I wouldn't post them.
Yet you still haven't shown me any. How .... interesting.
"Read up on a Hologram".... been there done that
you really need to try being a little less know-it-all like, you "know" things form a very limited and biased perspective....many the presumtion and assumptions are thrown around and it unmasks what you aim to achieve on the covert
If my words do not describe reality as akin to a hologram (which it is ) but for the sake of pointing out your folly to others (not to you) here is a debunking of your logic and futility which actuall yreinforces what I say....
1. Lord Dave says that a hologram is an illusion. correct. I conccur I have said it to.
However I say space is like a hologram. An illuson.
2. Lord dave says that I have failed to define what a hologram is (assuming that I have never read about one) the very same wiki at least when I read it a year ago defined it exactly to the effect if the words I wrote which dave has done us the favor of diggin out to the forefront of this topic...(thank you for attempting a rebuttal)
Now if what i describe as universe is (cosmoses made of micro-cosmoses) as being akin to - not exactly like a hologram - then what I have described is not an illusion, as he so devalues it to being an illusion of mind. It therefore is far more than an illusion of mind, rather instead tis a tangible reality based on principles of metaphysics which function with perception as inculcating an illusion but which themselves as a fabric are very real and permanent. And above all else even if it weren't like a hologram the notion put forth is evidently holistic; unified which is another term derived by the characteristics of a hologram - many others seam to say the same thing here is an example
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090202161614AAPKngc
[/quote]
So a hologram is an illusion but space, which is like a hologram (and referenced by you as holographic instead of pseudo-holographic) is an illusion of mind. But it's not an illusion of mind, it's tangible and therefore real. So how is space like a hologram? Because it's all unified as one interference pattern of matter?
P.S. dave you asked how one can sense the holographic imprints in words etc on a computer... quite easily since computers are base on quartz silicon chips which are holographic vessels of storing informational on multiple levels can you say Liquid Crystal Display.
What if I use a CRT?
-
Plenty of others have confirmed my words if they hadn't I wouldn't post them.
Yet you still haven't shown me any. How .... interesting.
1. That's not my responsibility
2. I post my threads on FB and other social networks
3. it's none of your buisness
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
And P.s. Dave before you trudge on over to light workers to dig up my threads and point at the lack of responses...There is a chat room on there where I post them and get replies....Heheheh
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Oh and since the burden of proof is on you and you've already said that your writings can't be proven, it should be interesting to see what the chat room there has to say about you. Heheheheh....
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
Yes, I have a basic understanding of what you are trying to say. It doesn't make it any less gibberish.
Also, I haven't seen anyone say thank you for sharing except New Earth, but we suspect that's you.
You know, you're easily goaded into a response even after saying you won't respond to me again. I guess whatever perception you gained from almost dying didn't help your need to prove yourself huh?
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
Yes, I have a basic understanding of what you are trying to say. It doesn't make it any less gibberish.
Also, I haven't seen anyone say thank you for sharing except New Earth, but we suspect that's you.
You know, you're easily goaded into a response even after saying you won't respond to me again. I guess whatever perception you gained from almost dying didn't help your need to prove yourself huh?
Im responding to prove to everyone else that you are the one who needs otehr s to belive you nothing more...The seeds are planted
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
Yes, I have a basic understanding of what you are trying to say. It doesn't make it any less gibberish.
Also, I haven't seen anyone say thank you for sharing except New Earth, but we suspect that's you.
You know, you're easily goaded into a response even after saying you won't respond to me again. I guess whatever perception you gained from almost dying didn't help your need to prove yourself huh?
Im responding to prove to everyone else that you are the one who needs otehr s to belive you nothing more...The seeds are planted
So far I haven't seen many comments for either of us. It seems that if I was trying to get people to believe me, I'm doing a poor job. And so are you.
Also: what seeds? It seems to me that everyone besides me just skip your posts. Your seeds aren't even out of the bag.
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
Yes, I have a basic understanding of what you are trying to say. It doesn't make it any less gibberish.
Also, I haven't seen anyone say thank you for sharing except New Earth, but we suspect that's you.
You know, you're easily goaded into a response even after saying you won't respond to me again. I guess whatever perception you gained from almost dying didn't help your need to prove yourself huh?
Im responding to prove to everyone else that you are the one who needs otehr s to belive you nothing more...The seeds are planted
So far I haven't seen many comments for either of us. It seems that if I was trying to get people to believe me, I'm doing a poor job. And so are you.
Also: what seeds? It seems to me that everyone besides me just skip your posts. Your seeds aren't even out of the bag.
hehehe
-
although for one we know that Jraffield attests that he comprehends the bulk of it, stated by the man himself in several posts.
You said I understand it "in a nutshell" too. Just because I can replicate what you say doesn't mean it's actually correct.
Ahhh but your contradicting all your points by saying you understand it when you say its all gibberish, which actually means every thing you say is all gibberish how do I know this... because everyone else with a relaxed approach gets it and go wow thank you for sharing this
Yes, I have a basic understanding of what you are trying to say. It doesn't make it any less gibberish.
Also, I haven't seen anyone say thank you for sharing except New Earth, but we suspect that's you.
You know, you're easily goaded into a response even after saying you won't respond to me again. I guess whatever perception you gained from almost dying didn't help your need to prove yourself huh?
Im responding to prove to everyone else that you are the one who needs otehr s to belive you nothing more...The seeds are planted
So far I haven't seen many comments for either of us. It seems that if I was trying to get people to believe me, I'm doing a poor job. And so are you.
Also: what seeds? It seems to me that everyone besides me just skip your posts. Your seeds aren't even out of the bag.
hehehe
A Narbonic fan?
-
Here she iiiiis, the most boring thread in the univerrrrrrse.
-
Here she iiiiis, the most boring thread in the univerrrrrrse.
How can the truth about the universe from someone who had a Near Death Experience be boring?
-
Here she iiiiis, the most boring thread in the univerrrrrrse.
How can the truth about the universe from someone who had a Near Death Experience be boring?
so lame
-
Here she iiiiis, the most boring thread in the univerrrrrrse.
How can the truth about the universe from someone who had a Near Death Experience be boring?
so lame
Sorry sir. I'll do my best to come up with a wittier comeback next time. :(
-
Quantum physics is so boring. No one understands it and the ones that think they do spend so much time trying to figure out how it really works that they never end up doing the world any good.
Engineer > Physicist
-
Quantum physics is so boring. No one understands it and the ones that think they do spend so much time trying to figure out how it really works that they never end up doing the world any good.
Engineer > Physicist
Weren't you advocating that NE read up on quantum entanglement ?
to advocate it in one breath and then denounce it the next....why
I'm just curious as to whether you're going to explain why you change your mind all of a sudden... if that is what this is about - a shift of opinion from earlier
-
Quantum physics is so boring. No one understands it and the ones that think they do spend so much time trying to figure out how it really works that they never end up doing the world any good.
Engineer > Physicist
Weren't you advocating that NE read up on quantum entanglement ?
to advocate it in one breath and then denounce it the next....why
I'm just curious as to whether you're going to explain why you change your mind all of a sudden... if that is what this is about - a shift of opinion from earlier
Quantum entanglement is observable and testable. It has real world applications. We don't know how it works, but we put it to use (engineering). While we're applying the phenomenon to good use, the quantum physicists are trying to explain how it works.
-
I thought he was being sarcastic.
-
I thought he was being sarcastic.
david, I don't do sarcasm unless it is dealt out to me first...none of my responses were sarcastic before you yourself... initially they were blunt. yes.. very blunt and direct
-
P.S. dave you asked how one can sense the holographic imprints in words etc on a computer... quite easily since computers are base on quartz silicon chips which are holographic vessels of storing informational on multiple levels can you say Liquid Crystal Display.
What if I use a CRT?
[/quote]
P.S. I missed this before...
Crystaline matrix is everywhere from your P.C. to the macro-quantum silicon chips in the infinite magnitudes of cosmoses above which yours is within....its the very essence and cause for the Akashic Records
-
Weren't you advocating that NE read up on quantum entanglement ?
to advocate it in one breath and then denounce it the next....why
I'm just curious as to whether you're going to explain why you change your mind all of a sudden... if that is what this is about - a shift of opinion from earlier
I usually advocate inferring things from posts but damn that is out of the ball park. Did you read my post or did you just see the term "Quantum Entanglement" and assume you knew what it said? Please point out the sentence where I said anything near what you just stated that I said.
-
I thought he was being sarcastic.
david, I don't do sarcasm unless it is dealt out to me first...none of my responses were sarcastic before you yourself... initially they were blunt. yes.. very blunt and direct
No, I meant SCV's comment was sarcastic.
P.S. dave you asked how one can sense the holographic imprints in words etc on a computer... quite easily since computers are base on quartz silicon chips which are holographic vessels of storing informational on multiple levels can you say Liquid Crystal Display.
What if I use a CRT?
P.S. I missed this before...
Crystaline matrix is everywhere from your P.C. to the macro-quantum silicon chips in the infinite magnitudes of cosmoses above which yours is within....its the very essence and cause for the Akashic Records
Large quantum silicon chips? Ummm... you do realize that silicon is an atom and that anything in the quantum universe isn't an atom.. right?
Sheesh, you're just making things up as you go eh? You know, you'd be a fairly decent fantasy writer.
-
I thought he was being sarcastic.
david, I don't do sarcasm unless it is dealt out to me first...none of my responses were sarcastic before you yourself... initially they were blunt. yes.. very blunt and direct
No, I meant SCV's comment was sarcastic.
P.S. dave you asked how one can sense the holographic imprints in words etc on a computer... quite easily since computers are base on quartz silicon chips which are holographic vessels of storing informational on multiple levels can you say Liquid Crystal Display.
What if I use a CRT?
P.S. I missed this before...
Crystaline matrix is everywhere from your P.C. to the macro-quantum silicon chips in the infinite magnitudes of cosmoses above which yours is within....its the very essence and cause for the Akashic Records
Large quantum silicon chips? Ummm... you do realize that silicon is an atom and that anything in the quantum universe isn't an atom.. right?
Sheesh, you're just making things up as you go eh? You know, you'd be a fairly decent fantasy writer.
Pretending you cant comprehend my writing again huh...hehehe how cute