Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 23:05:19 (GMT)
From: Mar 16, 2000 To: Mar 26, 2000 Page: 3 Of: 5


Way -:- Hey Jim, have you ever seen these numbers? (OT) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:21:32 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Yes, it's amazing -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:39:50 (GMT)
__ __ gErRy -:- Baby I'm amazed... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:13:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Baby I'm amazed... (WOT - way off topic)... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:27:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Not guily yer honor Mr.Quirkus -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:53:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Quirkus? if you wish, but BTW, Stonor ... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:06:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Quirkus? if you wish, but BTW, Stonor ... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:13:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Didn't mean to suggest that, Gerry, and thanx ... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:25:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Chris, one more... -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:35:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Chris, one more... -:- Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 15:59:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- HUH? - you've lost me there, Ger (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 21:38:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- Re:Baby I'm amazed... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:28:50 (GMT)

Loafji -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 07:15:13 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Remember the faining craze in the late 70's? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:38:58 (GMT)
__ __ Susan -:- Were some feigning fainting? (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 15:32:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ G -:- Were some feigning fainting? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 17:23:37 (GMT)
__ __ Peter Howie -:- Remember the faining craze in the late 70's? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 05:04:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ Hunaman -:- Remember the faining craze in the late 70's? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 09:57:03 (GMT)
__ cq -:- But why do we have to project 'God' outside us? nt -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:30:55 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- But why do we have to project 'God' outside us? nt -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 02:30:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- 'Only' us? All of life is there ... -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 16:52:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ G -:- Atheism, agnosticism, belief systems -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:01:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Atheism, agnosticism, belief systems -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 19:13:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Good joke, atheist forum -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 20:22:52 (GMT)
__ a-z -:- the carpet effect -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 12:09:28 (GMT)
__ __ Hal -:- the carpet effect -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:17:36 (GMT)
__ Oliver -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 10:18:13 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 02:45:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ Oliver -:- Kis and Tell !! Too Right They Should. -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 04:31:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Kis and Tell !! Too Right They Should. -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 05:12:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- Kis and Tell !! Let's Hear A Real Live Premie Too -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 06:29:04 (GMT)
__ __ gErRy -:- MY NO DARSHAN STORY (repeat, sorry) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:11:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ G -:- mud/rotten crap as food, some things never change -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:43:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ DOD -:- MY NO DARSHAN STORY (repeat, sorry) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:57:03 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:07:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ Happy -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:32:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ G -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:53:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- DARSHAN STORIES -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:07:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Darshan and the money envelopes -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:27:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Ian Dury -:- Darshan and the money envelopes -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 23:18:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Lord of the Many Envelopes! Hahaha!! ROFL -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 14:07:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Darshan and the money envelopes -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 23:30:06 (GMT)

Runamok -:- 'In this age of darkness, I have come to reveal... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 05:43:56 (GMT)
__ slackandsteel -:- 'In this age of darkness, I have come to reveal... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:06:32 (GMT)
__ __ Happy -:- Children of ex-premies -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:43:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ SB -:- Children of ex-premies -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 22:42:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ Susan -:- From the archives -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:40:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- That's not our nasal-fixated Anth is it??? (nt) -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 20:42:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ Runamok -:- Children of ex-premies -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:18:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ eb -:- Children of ex-premies -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:40:00 (GMT)

JB -:- Movie recomendation ( OT)- 'BLISS' on video (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:30:27 (GMT)
__ Jackie -:- Movie recomendation ( OT)- 'BLISS' on video (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 04:23:08 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- Re:Movie recomendation -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:54:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- Re:Movie recomendation -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:25:23 (GMT)

Way -:- A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT) -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:27:15 (GMT)
__ hamzen -:- Climate/Environmental Changes? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:32:51 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT) -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 17:12:42 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- Quite right, Jim... -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:39:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- You accepted knowledge- comprehendingly? (nt) -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:45:56 (GMT)
__ __ Susan -:- Jim read my post under Helen's St Patty's post -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:39:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Jim read my post under Helen's St Patty's post -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 06:45:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Susan -:- Hey Jim, -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 16:04:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Yes Susan, how insensitive of you -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:42:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Hey Jim, -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:42:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- yes, parent's rights to f... up their kids is a -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:50:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- yes, parent's rights to f... up their kids is a -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:06:44 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT) -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:38:33 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- Thanks, Sir Dave, but -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:59:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave -:- We've already taken control -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 16:56:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:We've already taken control -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:28:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Help is on its way -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Re:We've already taken control -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:49:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- Re:We've already taken control -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:13:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- JB -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:52:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Hal -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:46:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- That was very well put. I see the logic (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:04:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Earth to JB! -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 01:27:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- In one way your right Jerry -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:48:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Is believing seeing ... what you want to? ... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:17:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Can't be sure. Can't prove anything............... -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:07:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- Thank you, Hal (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:12:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- I've seen a real alien spaceship -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 10:39:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- So what? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 14:28:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- So what? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:15:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- So what? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:42:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Here's what, you show a non scientific view -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:00:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- You go, Sir Dave. Yes. (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:28:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- No offense intended, David -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:01:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- That sort of thing doesn't offend me -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:53:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Wrong, Dave (forget the 'open mind' shit) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:55:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Your very very wrong Jim, totally wrong -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:09:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Your very very wrong Jim, totally wrong -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:12:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- skeptic - sceptic -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:04:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- Happy -Skeptic Inquirer -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:38:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- Happy -Skeptic Inquirer -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 14:32:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Dave , I'm nuts too! -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:27:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- Hal, What's Algarve,pls.? nt -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:23:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Algarve=Southern Portugal JB (nt) -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 15:08:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Dave , I'm nuts too! But I'm more than nuts, Hal -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:05:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- I promise, your secret's safe with me Dave (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:10:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- The secrets out! -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 04:54:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- You know so little, Jerry. About remote viewing.. -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:42:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- I know a little -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 16:53:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- I know a little too -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 18:23:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- I know a little too -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 22:06:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- You're not supposed to know, Jerry -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 01:29:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Do you know how paranoid you sound? -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 02:10:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Do you know how reactionary you sound? -:- Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 10:27:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Oh no! You believe in trolleys too? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:01:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Well you believe in elves in other universes (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:21:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, I'm only right and wrong -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:24:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Dave's right: 'sceptic' mind is spot on... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 16:06:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You must mean 'septic' and how's David Icke? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:47:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Oh yes, 'septic' I knew something wasn't quite -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:00:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Are you serious? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:22:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Are you serious? -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:47:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ abducted -:- But I was anal probed and ... -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 14:32:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ abducted2 -:- That's nothing, I was abducted by alien ghosts and -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 20:34:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my! -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 01:34:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- I've had them -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:38:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- I've had them also, -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:55:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my! -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:03:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- It could play tricks on the sCeptics too -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:43:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- 'an hallucination' - you are so British (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:58:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- What is the color black and what does it have to -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:02:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- What is the color black and what does it have to -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 13:59:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Even the priests? (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:28:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- The Buddist ones wear orange -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:31:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- And ghosts wear white sheets (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:36:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- But the sCeptical ghosts wear nothing (nt) -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:46:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- enjoying -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:09:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- enjoying -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:16:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- enjoying now - it simplifies things -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:21:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:enjoying -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:18:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jackie -:- Re:enjoying -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:47:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- To Jackie -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:56:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Re:enjoying -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:42:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:Chopin -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:00:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Try telling that to a ghost -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:09:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Try telling that to a ghost -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:02:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- ghosts -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:28:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- re:ghosts -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:49:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- re:ghosts -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:31:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- re:ghosts and closed minds -:- Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 23:29:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- re:ghosts and closed minds -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:17:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- re:ghosts and closed minds -:- Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:26:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- The 'open mind' myth -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:19:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- The 'open mind' myth -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:28:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- The 'open mind' myth -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:24:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Are they still aliens if they're 3rd generation? -:- Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:53:25 (GMT)


Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:21:32 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey Jim, have you ever seen these numbers? (OT)
Message:
Jim,

I still haven't read the chapter about mutations, (that I mentioned yesterday), but last night I did read the chapter providing background information about genetics and heredity.

Have you ever seen the DNA code actually written out for a single human gene?

It takes 7000 base pairs of the four proteins, written out as C,G,A, and T. And that is for just one gene. It takes at least 80,000 genes to make a human being. And to incode these instructions, it takes 3 billion pairs of DNA. These instructions are copied, in full, in every single one of our living cells.

Pretty impressive. Especially when the atomic codes are translated into our perspective using actual letters written out. It's kindof like reading the entire phone book for New York City.

At our level of existence, matter does not organize itself. Ever. Why would anyone assume that things are different at the atomic level? Perhaps a little crystalization of molecular structures, but the equivalent of a whole library full of information? Hmmmm. Kindof hard to imagine, for me anyway.

As I said I haven't even gotten to the mutations yet, which I already know are simply errors that occur when the 7000 letter combinations of one gene are copied out wrong and you have a CGA someplace where you should have a AGC, for example.

What do you think when you see these numbers? Whatever our philosophies, I think we can agree it is damned awesome!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:39:50 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Yes, it's amazing
Message:
When I got into this stuff, I really took a clue from Dawkins' caveat that our brain's just not used to properly comprehending time frames on the scale of our own evolutionary past. So yes, the numbers impress me. But they don't for a second suggest some sort of divine agent. Just one hell of a long time span.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:13:17 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Baby I'm amazed...
Message:
Will you fuckin' guys knock it off please? This stuff is WAY off topic. How 'bout we talk about something sensible and interesting...like conspiracy theories.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:27:57 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Baby I'm amazed... (WOT - way off topic)...
Message:
Baby I'm amazed... (WOT - way off topic)...

BAD, GOOD AND REALLY GREAT NEWS

When Mr. Wilkens answered the door late in the evening one day after he'd lost his wife scuba diving, two grim-faced policemen greeted him. 'We're sorry to call on you at this hour, Mr. Wilkens, but we have some information about your wife.'

'Well... Tell me!' he demanded.

The policeman said, 'We have some bad news, some pretty
good news, and some really great news. Which do you want to hear first?'

Fearing the worse, Mr. Wilkins said, 'Give me the bad news first.'

So the policeman said, 'I'm sorry to tell you sir, but we found your wife's body this morning in San Francisco Bay.'

'OH MY GOD!' said Mr. Wilkens, overcome by emotion. Then, remembering what the policeman had said, he asked,
'What's the good news?'

'Well,' said the policeman, 'When we pulled her up she had two five-pound lobsters and a dozen good size Dungeoness crabs on her.'

'Huh?' he said, not understanding. 'So, what's the great news?'

The policeman smiled, licked his chops, and said, 'We're going to pull her up again tomorrow morning.'





Talking of catching a crab, I think I'd better just mention this in a thread that sites Richard Dawkins:

Somehow or other, the guy who hosts an eminently pro-Dawkins site (John Cataleno) was forwarded the post I recently gave on this site about '250,000 bucks' for proving creationism to be wrong.

Mr Cataleno replied to my Uni email address, thinking that I was the one who had emailed him. I wasn't.

Now, we all share what we find on the internet, from time to time, but misleading others as to who is emailing them is NOT the decent thing to do.

So, an open question to all forum participants - did you email John Cataleno recently about that post?

Please be decent enough to come clean on this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:53:49 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Not guily yer honor Mr.Quirkus
Message:
Did you include your e-mail address in your post? Perhaps the person who forwarded your post included your e-mail address unwittingly. But maybe I don't really understand what happened.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:06:33 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Quirkus? if you wish, but BTW, Stonor ...
Message:
Quirkus? if you wish, but BTW, Stonor ... if you're reading this, - while we're on the subject of misappropriation (if that's what it's called) - I just read your reply re. 'Theosophists' (now in the inactive index).

You're mixing me up with Anth, - it was his journey that mentioned his son's reaction to a Maha event (reminded him of films he'd seen of Hitler).

Me? I have no children - that I'm aware of (at least not by my ex-wife).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:13:45 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Quirkus? if you wish, but BTW, Stonor ...
Message:
Hey, no offense, or offence, either.

I'm not Stonor, though I like his stuff. Yours to, btw.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:25:32 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Didn't mean to suggest that, Gerry, and thanx ...
Message:
Didn't mean to suggest that you were Stonor, Gerry, - just didn't want to start a new thread on something that wasn't too important. (Conspiracy, you say?!)




Here's one for the feminists (bless 'em)



5 REASONS WHY COMPUTERS MUST BE FEMALE

1. No one but their creator understands their internal logic.

2. Even your smallest mistakes are immediately committed to memory for future reference.

3. The native language used to communicate with other computers is incomprehensible to everyone else.

4. The message, 'Bad command or filename,' is about as informative as 'If you don't know why I'm mad at you, then I'm certainly not going to tell you.'

5. As soon as you make a commitment to one, you find yourself spending half your paycheck on accessories for it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:35:07 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Chris, one more...
Message:
I'd like to add: And they get obsolete fast. (Sorry Patty I'm upgrading !!!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 15:59:35 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Chris, one more...
Message:
Sorry, it's Friday now and I sorta lost the drift myself, but we were talking about women and computers and my addition was that computer hardware gets obsolete and needs to be replaced every few years, like wives. Patty is my wife's name.

An attempt at a joke, admittedly kinda lame, Sorry, Chris. Guess I'm a little 'quirkus' myself :-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 21:38:58 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: HUH? - you've lost me there, Ger (nt)
Message:
HUH? - you've lost me there, Ger (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:28:50 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Re:Baby I'm amazed...
Message:
Well, to be more on-topic, I remember Maharaji making a few comments about evolution once or twice during his discourses. I can't remember exactly what he said, but I remember thinking at the time: 'Well, that was pretty lame.' Anyone remember?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 07:15:13 (GMT)
From: Loafji
Email: Loafji@yahoo.com
To: Everyone
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
This will probably get the fur flying.

Oliver asked for Darshan recollections....and this is such a big topic - for many reasons. I had darshan about 13 times in my earlier life - and found it a variable experience - the first one was mind blowing - genuinely - I was gone. After that I found it at times fraustrating because I wanted something from him/it - a smile, eye contact, a blast of feeling... etc etc.

It was only many years later, when looking back on the whole thing - having spent a week with M at an instructor training session with No darshan experience at all - even when he looked at me - that I have looked at the power and effect of darshan in terms of a piece of theatre.

The focus, the staging, the tunnel of anticipation, the personal investment (this means sooooo much to me), the status play (I am soooo grateful to you maharaji for letting me approach you) - and YES this PLAY produced a flower of great worth and feeling - BUT is a product of time and circumstance, belief system, attitude and mutual concent. (Two adults... whats the problem).

I then began to study accounts of young fans meeting their heroes in a different light... '... he was soo beautiful, he filled me up inside...' '..this was the most incredible day of my life...nothing will ever be the same again' ' he is God Man !!'

Who would have thought that Michael Jackson (amongst others) would have produced an almost religious personal catharsis in his devotees... but they DO.

Shamanism - the 'election' by the tribe of one individual to commune with the gods - and to be their earthy body - the Divine Right of Kings - where we are appointed by God to our thrones - the Pharoah who was both god and man..... it is an old old story and an old old passion play - not exclusively Indian, not exclusively Maharaji - but a matter of tribal instinct - to create a father/mother/baby/man/child or woman for us all.

If it is seen for what it is - it becomes no less personally relevant or joyous - but just more understandable (as do we and he).

Which is no bad thing eh ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:38:58 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Loafji
Subject: Remember the faining craze in the late 70's?
Message:
After m starting the renewed devotional and self-loathing guilt period of the late seventies (after the national co-ordinators conference in Essen, Germany, at the end of '76), people started dropping like flies in darshan lines. I know because I 'worked' the 'recovery' rooms once or twice.

Okay, here's a confession. Once or twice a few of us attendants actually went through a few of the faintees pockets, no that there was much loot. Maybe a few food tickets, a couple of bucks. And yes, I heard stories of a couple of recovery room attendants fondling one or two of the more attractive faintees. Hell, how could you blame them? The place just wreaked of that love....

(JOKE!

More seriously, it did feel so special doing that service. Why? Because the faintees had worked themselves into a very, very dilated-pupil state of faith which, for fellow devotees, was entirely infectious. It was like we all knew in an 'intellectual' way (that's a laugh!) that 'Maharaji was everywhere' but, alas, here were some premies who, for a few brief moments, were graced with absolute immersion in THAT truth. They'd look at you and allthey see was Maharaji. You'd look back and think you were almost sharing their heightened moment. We are one in the spirit, oh yeah!

What a mind-fuck, huh?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 15:32:18 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Were some feigning fainting? (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 17:23:37 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Were some feigning fainting?
Message:
I never fainted, but did get/act 'wobbly' more than once. It was the thing to do, very in vogue, and so much fun. The more drunk you acted, the more devoted you looked. Of course, the big shots and m didn't act drunk at all. Hmmm. One time I put on a production of crying my head off while in the recovery room. It's a little embarrassing to write that, but whatever.

I think partly self-induced, partly put-on might be a better way to describe it. That on top of the suggestive/hypnotic environment. Consider that hypnotists get people to act like chickens or dogs. He was getting people to act like premies, and still is.

Looking back on it, there were a lot of intense emotions, but experiencing 'God'? Not for me, unless those emotions are labeled 'God'. Let's see: Some hyped-up goody-feely emotions created the universe, nah, doesn't make sense.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 05:04:26 (GMT)
From: Peter Howie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Remember the faining craze in the late 70's?
Message:
Dear Jim.

I was a faintee at times. There was never any unconsciousness from my end though. I wanted to hang around longer and not go straight back to whatever perculiar service trip is was into at the time.

It was very easy to do. The first time I stumbled very slightly and the ever present premies doing service thought 'here goes another - cath him early he's a big one' and they steered me to a mattress before I went horizontal. After that I realised that it was very easy to do. Did you notice that when they got rid of the area it wasn't needed or barely needed! Maybe we were the real devotees then and they've all be second rate ever since.

At Kissimee in 1979 I plonked out for a while - had a good nap as I was exhausted. Later a premie(whom up 'till that time I had great respect for, expecially their intuition) doing service in the area commented on how it was clear to him that I had really connected with MJ and that I was clearly in samahdi. I can tell you that my faith in the intuition of that premie was dented.

What had actually happenned was that I was constipated(very common at programs for me) and in pain and had been for some short time (1 day or so). The experience was a real failed attempt to hype myself into merging. So I was dissappointed and I didn't fancy walking back to my tent(miles away) and decided to rest it out, and catch some more vibes from the area.

The trick in the recovery area was not to catch anyone's eye. If you caught somone's eye then you were conscious enough to bugger off out of there and make room for other faintees. After a while the pain got really bad and I wandered off into the line outside the first aid tent. Bummer.

Cheers

Peter Howie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 09:57:03 (GMT)
From: Hunaman
Email: None
To: Peter Howie
Subject: Remember the faining craze in the late 70's?
Message:
You silly Prick! Did you think we didn't know?And let's face it Pete , the fact is you alway's have been full of *%#@
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:30:55 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Loafji
Subject: But why do we have to project 'God' outside us? nt
Message:
But why do we have to project 'God' outside us? nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 02:30:28 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: But why do we have to project 'God' outside us? nt
Message:
Why do we have to bring God into the picture at all, if it's only us? Have you ever 'seen' God, cq? Have you ever felt 'his' presense in your life? I'm curious. What is your experence?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 16:52:01 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: 'Only' us? All of life is there ...
Message:
Good question, Jerry, why indeed do we “have to bring God into the picture at all?”

In fact, now that you come to mention it, I don’t think I’ve ever really sat down and asked myself “do I believe in a God?”. So, at the risk of boring you to death, allow me to do a bit of thinking out loud, as it were, while I talk myself through this whole issue.

So where do we start?

The word “God” means many different things to many different people, and I don’t think that just because we use the same word we’re necessarily talking about the same thing.

To an atheist, the God-concept is a simply a product of mankind’s insecurity, a projection of humanity’s hopes and fears, and something that we would do better living without.

The agnostic (not, as I used to think, someone who is against knowing, but one who is without knowing) says: we haven’t enough evidence to decide firmly one way or the other on whether or not God exists, but is meanwhile content to keep an open mind on the subject until such evidence does appear.

The theist or deist (and there’s many varieties of both of them) accepts a belief system which ascribes authorship of the universe to a “God” or gods). Whether that belief actually helps the theist in his/her search for answers to the big questions in life is open to some doubt IMO, - just look at the likes of Maharaji, who aims to convince people that knowledge is the answer & so prevents them from looking for and finding their own solutions.

The old canard about the experience of knowledge being “knowledge of God” - “see, hear, taste God etc.” ...! - well, it’s over twenty odd years since I fell for that. The sales pitch was less than credible, but I was a naive youngster.

So, to get back to the subject, I can’t really call myself an a-theist (without - God), ‘cos to me the life-force itself is the nearest thing to what the word “God” represents for me.

Having said that, it would be wrong of anyone to presume that I also take on board all/any of the commonly held beliefs about God. You know - the kind of dependence-creating creeds that churches of all kinds try and hook their congregations into submitting to.

Personally, my interest at the moment is in discovering WHY so many people have an apparent need to believe in a personalised, anthropomorphic God. Is it a matter of “tribal instinct”, as Loafji seemed to imply, does it satisfy a basic inner need for security, or can it serve a greater purpose? Then again, can it do any harm to imagine God as an empty canvas on which the believer paints his/her own picture of their highest aspirations?

The problems start when my picture of God disagrees with your picture, or has a different title or whatever, and then all the qualities of decent, humane, altruistic respect that we endow our portraits with go straight out the window and we start that old, old game of religious persecution. And it’s not only the religious mind that can get “possessive” over its precious belief systems. It can happen to atheists too (though in their case it’d be a precious NON-belief system!)

So, if I’ve not bored you to tears yet, I’m sure I soon would if I went on any longer. I’ve not answered all your questions, but ... maybe later.

Here’s to that old life-force!

Cheers,

Chris.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:01:05 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Atheism, agnosticism, belief systems
Message:
While I'm not an atheist, at least not a 'hard-lined' one, I think I can say that there are also many varieties of 'atheists'.

Some people call themselves atheistic because they do not believe, or in fact disbelieve in a certain Judeo-Christian concept of God, being the 'good' Father who created the universe out of nothing, is separate, all-knowing, all-powerful, and everywhere - even though He is separate. He's good, but don't make Him angry, so He will send you to Hell forever, and it's good that He does that, you evil worthless scum sinner. He may or may not have a beard (or other male anatomy), either way, somehow He has male qualities. And He created Adam and Eve out of clay. If disbelieving in that God is atheistic, well, I'm an atheist.

I would describe the 'non-belief system' of 'hard-lined' atheists as really being a belief system, a firm belief in the absolute reality of physical matter and energy, and that there is nothing else. Not just a lack of belief, but a total disbelief in anything else. Without this total disbelief, a person isn't really a 'hard-lined' atheist. I've seen some waffling in this area. IMO the term 'hard-lined' atheist is not an accurate term, materialist is more accurate, see materialist. IMO, this is a non-scientific philosophy.

Those are just two types of 'atheists'. There are many other belief systems that could be described as atheistic.

According to the dictionary, agnosticism is a particular belief system. But it looks to me like the term agnostic has multiple meanings in actual use.

Everyone has beliefs, sometimes conflicting beliefs, unless there's something seriously wrong with them.

I believe that the classification of belief systems into theistic, atheist, and agnostic is false, that now, more and more, many people will have belief systems that defy classification or labeling. These labels can get in the way. It may be better to consider the component beliefs individually and see how they really relate, instead of lumping them together artificially. I dislike these overly-simplified labels. They are used all too often to get people to buy into oppressive package deal systems.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 19:13:01 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Atheism, agnosticism, belief systems
Message:
Hi, G

Emo Phillips has a great line on this subject:


I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said 'Stop! don't do it!' 'Why shouldn't I?' he said.
I said, 'Well, there's so much to live for!' He said, 'Like what?'
I said, 'Well...are you religious or atheist?' He said, 'Religious.'
I said, 'Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?' He said, 'Christian.'
I said, 'Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?' He said, 'Protestant.'
I said, 'Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?' He said, 'Baptist!'
I said,'Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?' He said, 'Baptist church of god!'
I said, 'Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?' He said,'Reformed Baptist church of god!'
I said, 'Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?' He said, 'Reformed baptist church of god,
reformation of 1915!'
I said, 'Die, heretic scum', and pushed him off.
-- Emo Phillips





seriously, - I've been posting over on the atheists.com Forum for some time, and recently a gent called Eric has been delving into this very topic.

Here's a taster from him:

'Being an atheist isn't about superior intellect, but rather stems from intellectual integrity. Note, I'm referring to 'weak' (negative) atheism, which is simply a lack of belief in gods, not a positive belief that gods do not exist. The latter is atheist fundamentalism, IMO. '

Try this link http://www.atheists.com/Forum/forum.html if think you might be interested in the full thread, called 'God gets a face-lift', under 'Non-Ex-ChristianAtheists ' (in the General Discussion pages)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 20:22:52 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Good joke, atheist forum
Message:
The atheist forum sounds interesting, maybe I'll go post there as an antagonist, as a whatever-the-hell-I-am. I believe that there is a Truth and believe it is in some way 'Divine', but I realise that I don't know. As to materialism, I think it doesn't make sense and contradicts scientific observation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 12:09:28 (GMT)
From: a-z
Email: None
To: Loafji
Subject: the carpet effect
Message:
The carpet in the tunnel is increaseingly cushioned till by the time you get to him you are walking a inches of fluff.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:17:36 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: a-z
Subject: the carpet effect
Message:
Looking at the darshan effect now from a different perspective as an ex I have to agree with Loafji that it is very much in the eye of the beholder.

It is a very theatrical set up with as mentioned the most cushioned carpeting imaginable which does tend to make the legs feel a bit jellyish.Some used to say that his feet had the most incredible fragrance which of course had to be nectar. I know for sure that it was very expensive scent like Floris or something.

As you said Loafji the first time I went through I got really blasted by some drug type experience. This was peculiar as at the time I didn't even like M much at all. Whatever happened there it was that experience which convinced me that I should dedicate my life to this person.

In later years I had some tingling type buzz as I kissed the tootsies. Most of the time I thought he was pissed off with me because he looked so severe.This pissed off look I imagined was him being powerful.

It all seems so bizarre to even think about it now but I'm sure that anyone with enough focus could give a darshan type experience to another person provided that person was in a state of awe and respect.I'm also sure that it wouldn't do anything for a total cynic.

All in all just an Indian parlour trick to hook people in deeper I think.Perhaps a psychologist would explain it as transference of one's own desire to serve the lord or something. Any psychiatrists out there who could offer any further understanding of this nutty phenomena?
Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 10:18:13 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Loafji and All
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
Dear Loafji,

As you know,I posted the following in a previous thread which motivated you to start this thread.

'In the ten years I sort of practiced K I avoided Darshan because I did not feel comfortable about prostrating myself before the Lard and couldn't imagine what was in it for me.
As a consequence I have no knowledge of the actual 'experience' of going through darshan as even my premie friends would say, 'If you want to know you have to go.' Bastards.
Would anyone out there like to give a word picture of their experience for the benefit of me and other interested ones.'

I'm feeling a little shortchanged as you didn't put me in the line, or lead me past the honcho security and into the tunnel untill at last there was that first glance blah, blah, blah. Do you know what I mean, and am I expecting to much?

Or maybe someone else. A real live premie would be interesting!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 02:45:21 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
Oliver,

I've never been on a darshan line, either. But what is it you're hoping to learn? They waited on line to kiss his toes. Doesn't that say enough?

In any event, it's not nice to kiss and tell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 04:31:15 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Kis and Tell !! Too Right They Should.
Message:
Don't you think that aspirants and innocent net surfers should know the story of this event. Because aspirants are ignorant of darshan aren't they? I certainly was.

So that's why I brought the subject up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 05:12:43 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Kis and Tell !! Too Right They Should.
Message:
Oliver,

I was just joking. Yes, I think aspirants should know the whole insane history, and should ask questions about it, and demand meaningful answers to those question, not just the standard brushoff that it was the premies' fault that all this nonsense took place.

Hey, a picture is worth a thousand words, and there's M, on his throne, having people file passed to kiss his feet. That's all anybody needs to see to understand what M expects of them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 06:29:04 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Kis and Tell !! Let's Hear A Real Live Premie Too
Message:
No worries Jerry, I was a bit tongue in cheek too.
This has been a very good thread for me. On the whole the messages have been of a high quality and it's satisfied my curiousity.

But have you noticed there have been no practicing premies anywhere in evidence? Why is this so? Maybe a one or three of them could make a comment. But don't hold your breath.

Oliver.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:11:55 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: MY NO DARSHAN STORY (repeat, sorry)
Message:
Oliver, I can't help you out on this one bud.

I did go to one festival when I was a premie. It was in England in the summer of 1973. Summer my ass !!! About as much summer as we have here in the Pacific NW USA. Which means it was cold and rainy. Froze my ass off.

The big day came for darshan, but I'd had enough of the mud and the rotten crap they slopped us common hogs with as food, so I headed off on the train (great system, btw) into London for some fun. Had a great time seeing the sights, watched Parliament wrangle and generally took in as much as possible on my meager ashram allowance.

I think I got the better deal.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:43:00 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: mud/rotten crap as food, some things never change
Message:
When I was at La Tierra de L'Amour in the '90s, guess what, mud and crappy food with flies all around. An unbelievable amount of mud. Even had to walk a very long way through mud to get to the bus. Not much mud at Amaroo, but crappy food and flies (and warnings of poisonous snakes).

Amazing considering the hype the 'lands' had been promoted with. I figure now it was another fund-raising ploy, and maybe Rawat being sadistic.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:57:03 (GMT)
From: DOD
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: MY NO DARSHAN STORY (repeat, sorry)
Message:
The big day came for darshan, but I'd had enough of the mud and the rotten crap they slopped us common hogs with as food, so I headed off on the train ...

I loved your line--so eloquently put. So many times I felt like a lamb to the slaughter. Waiting in those liiiiiinnnnnnnes forever and ever and ever (you get the picture) for lousy food or the opportunity to such the Fat One's toes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:07:11 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
Oliver,

As per your request for a moment to moment account.

I'm sitting in my seat,in the giant, fully occupied, but hushed hall. A premie is standing in the isle, slowly moving when more people can enter the line, like communion at church. When she steps up to our row, everyone takes off their shoes, stands, and solemnly enters the line of devotees. We move, snail pace, closer and closer to the stage area, which we have only seen from a distance so far.

Now I have reached the blue tunnel. There is an initiator, who I recognize and who once insulted me in public, standing at the entrance. I quickly bannish all thoughts of hatred and prepare my head and heart for the immenent meeting with their maker.

The floor is lined with fresh gardenia blossoms on either side along the entire length of the tunnel, at least a hundred yards long. I try to calculate the cost of the blossoms, but again remember that this is hardly the time and place to entertain such speculations.

I try not to look at the priviledge people standing all along the tunnel. The feeling toward them is more envy than love. And it's very hard to read the feeling that is coming from them. Again, 'Concentrate, you Idiot!' I say to myself.

Maharaji is just about in view and I'm still thinking of bullshit. I try to think of something devotional. Too late, there he is. Looking very...what?...stern? solemn? bored? Somehow the line is going very fast now. It's over.

(I don't have the stomach to describe the actually act, or the feelings of respect I sometimes felt toward that little man up there. UGH!!!!!!!!!!)

It's over. I walk away, relunctantly, wanting to turn and take one last look, disappointed that I didn't faint, like F.T. always does.

I'm still separate. Separate from Guru Maharaji. From everyone in the hall. From my higher self. I'm back in my seat. Back in my little self. I'm watching the people in the line. Do people really do this? I think I'll go get a BLT.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:32:19 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: happyheretic@hotmail.com
To: Loafji, Oliver
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
Usually, I did not feel very much. Had darshan lots of times. I tried to hype myself up, but not even then. I saw people get dizzy, faint, get carried away to the recovery tent - but I never fainted myself. Now, I'm actually glad I didn't. At that time, I used to envy those who 'loved him so much' that they fainted.

No, in fact, I felt already then that it was all hype. I think Loafji's analysis is very much to the point (I am not a psychiatrist, Loafji, but I have a Ph.D in psychology. I actually studied hypnotherapy for three years, too - but I have left that also...) I think it has a lot, if not everything, to do with dissociation processes, autosuggestion, and that sort of stuff. No magic power at all. When people faint, it's just like a very good report between 'hypnotist' and 'hypnotized' (I put these in brackets, since there is a huge debate about whether hypnotism exists at all.) But suggestion surely exists, and the blue tunnel and everything is just there to provide as perfect a setting as possible for people to have an 'experience', hype themselves up until they faint. Hell, they faint at pentecostal meetings too! There's no end to what people can make themselves believe, or be made to believe if they're susceptible enough.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:53:34 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
The first time I 'got' darshan and 'holy breath', I was expecting to be transported to the seventh heaven as soon as I kissed his feet. I kissed his feet, nothing happened. This was outdoors, no tunnel or carpet, he was on a moving vehicle that went by the premies. After he went by, I looked at him and thought

'You're a fraud.'

That was my clearest darshan experience.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:07:41 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: All of the above
Subject: DARSHAN STORIES
Message:
Thanks a lot for all the responces so far.
Another thing I was wondering was whether darshan was used as another money making venture. Did you have to slip some bills into an envelope and slip it somewhere on the way in? I remember the Lard saying at Amaroo that next to giving K he liked darshan best so I suppose there must be a dollar in it for him somehow.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:27:50 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Darshan and the money envelopes
Message:
Did we HAVE to give money? Well, I suppose some premies apologists would say 'NOBODY PUT A GUN TO YOUR HEAD!'.

However...

I forget the exact sequence, but...

You are handed an envelope. You know what the envelope is for, it's for a 'love gift', i.e. money. Approaching the blue tunnel, there are big shot Mahatmas/Initiators standing there looking at the premies in line. There is a box to put your envelope in. So what do you do? Now if you don't put your envelope in the box, the big shots will see that you didn't do it. Bad premie. You could fake it by putting an envelope without the precious money into the box, but then M would know, He knows everything, after all, He's God. So what do you do?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 23:18:47 (GMT)
From: Ian Dury
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Darshan and the money envelopes
Message:
From what I remember, we were given 10 or 15 'opportunities' to take an envelope from one of the many 'initiators' standing in and in front of the darshan tunnel.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 14:07:03 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Ian Dury
Subject: Lord of the Many Envelopes! Hahaha!! ROFL
Message:
Too funny ....

ROFL!!!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 23:30:06 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Ian Dury
Subject: Darshan and the money envelopes
Message:
That's how I remember it, but I wasn't sure, my memory of it is fading. It's almost like a repressed memory.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 05:43:56 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: 'In this age of darkness, I have come to reveal...
Message:
the Light.' Remember that quote on a little poster with M meditating in his spiffy white India Indian suit (and shorter greasy Indian hairstyle)?

OK, it's not quite as damning as the 'I am God' quotes
(my paraphrase) or the 'I declare I will establish peace on earth' quote, but it does really summon up the sense of the ultimate that was the raging hype of Rawatt's early PR.

And it made us feel that our own little pain was actually a cosmic event which was part of the world's current epoch, some official timeclock of nature, the Kali Yuga. Not just the usual angst about growing up, but a cosmic opportunity to dedicate our life to the source of the Light.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:06:32 (GMT)
From: slackandsteel
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: 'In this age of darkness, I have come to reveal...
Message:
You hit the nail on the head, Runamok.

This morning I was driving my daughter (who is about the same age I was when I received Knowledge) to the dentist, and I was telling her about Maharaji and my life back then. This was
the first time I'd really brought the subject up with her (ex-premie.org has inspired me to think about this stuff again and come to better terms with it).

I was trying to explain the allure that DLM etc had for me at the time. She seemed sympathetic, but a little mystified by the 'burning desire' for self-realization that many us were experiencing in those days.

I plan to visit this site with her soon so she can have a good look at the whole trip. She's a freshman in college several hours from our home and I'm concerned that she might be vulnerable to similar claims and cults.

Of course, she's pretty amused by the whole thing, and says that she hasn't seen any evidence of Indian guru or other cult activities on her campus.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:43:07 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: happyheretic@hotmail.com
To: slackandsteel
Subject: Children of ex-premies
Message:
You're getting into a subject that for me is interesting, slackandsteel.
As I have mentioned before, also in my journey, I have two
kids. The older one got to experience the premie stuff, at least to some extent. She has now joined a cult. Another one.
The younger kid has become an absolute, diehard atheist. I have showed her the ex-premie sites. She just commented: 'I was always sure M was a fraud, anyway'. Her biologogical mother is still an active pwik.

I would be quite interested in hearing how other exes have dealt with the issue? How much do your kids know about your previous involvement with DLM/EV? What do they think about it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 22:42:18 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Children of ex-premies
Message:
Hi Happy,

My young teens son is very happy that I left the cult. His exact words were: I always knew he was fake! Just like your kid... His problem is that his father, my ex-husband, he's still a premie. His father got furious when our son mentioned he learned the techniques from JM's site. hahaha. And no, he doesn't practice them.

When I asked him how he felt about Rawat he mentioned liking
all the traveling we did when going to events with Lard. At first he had trouble understanding my emotions/anger toward Rawat, because he thought that reading and writing in the forum was a way of reminding me of K, but he finally understood that what it's for me, is a support system, reading and reacting to experiences of people that have gone through the same as I did. I see a general sense of relief from his part that I do not follow Lard anymore. I don't think he really comprehend what it ment to me and that is better. Someday I'll have a talk with him about it, when he's older. I do not want my kid to fall for any similar crap. That is it.
S

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:40:19 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: From the archives
Message:
Gunther is my son who found the site while looking over my shoulder the week I found the site....the following is a true story :)

Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 01:35:41 (EDT) Poster: Gunther Glockenspiel Email: To: Everyone Subject: Why? Message: My parents were involved with the Divine Light cult. I am about 17 now and my mom pretty much ended contact with the cult before I was born, my dad (who I am not on good terms with) might stilled have a connection. My mom is a little reluctant or ashamed to answer why she thought Mahaji(sp.) was some sort of God. So I thought I would put the question to you folks. I personally can't understand it and want to look at it from somebody who might want to talk about it so I can spare myself from getting my brain washed. Anything you could tell me whould be much appreciated and I look forward to the replies. Thank you for my time. Do you think my name sounds to fake? I do.

Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 02:31:47 (EDT) Poster: JW Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel

That is the $64,000 question. I think most premies in the past really believed Guru Maharaj Ji was god, mostly because he said so. I know I certainly did. No wait, he actually said he was GREATER than god. He also allowed himself, without comment, to be called Lord of the Universe, Satguru, The Perfect Master of Our Time (who was in the same league as Jesus Christ, Lord Krishna, Lord Buddha, and Mohammad.) So, I guess that's where the idea came from. It was always kind of confusing because he always referred to himself in the third person. Napoleon also did that. Since 99.9% of his devotees never talked to Guru Maharaj Ji directly, never knew him personally at all, and only saw him a couple times a year on huge thrones in front of thousands of adoring premies (or in darshan lines where thousands of people were bending over and kissing his feet), and since he NEVER did anything to dispell, or correct if it wasn't true, the widespread belief that he was god, people tended to hold on to that belief. Even intelligent people from degrees from Ivy League schools like me, and OP, who also posts on this site held that belief. But, apparently, after 1985, Maharaj Ji decided he didn't want to be anymore, or that he never really was, god. AND instead of even bothering to explain what happened prior to 1985, he just dropped the whole thing and now presents himself as a sort of extremely wealthy meditation teacher who communicates through the use of videos and international festivals in places like Australia. Seriously, as nutty as the above explanation sounds, I firmly believe it to be the case. I don't blame your mother. I have been embarrassed for years to tell people about who or what I thought Guru Maharaj Ji was and that I followed and dedicated my life to him for 10 years. It's kind of confronting to have to admit that to anyone. Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 02:54:15 (EDT) Poster: Chris Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Re: Why? Message: How did you know about Maharaji and find this site? Did your mom ever say she thought M was a sort of God or are you assuming that? The basic premise is to experience something inside yourself that exists beyond the thought processes of the mind. What is the life inside of you looking out of your eyes? What would you experience if the mind became very still? Maharaji told people that such an experience was possible and gave people a method to try it out. Each person then got to make their own judgement of that experience. Some people were impressed and felt M must be special in some way. He was a tangible symbol of a peaceful possibility. I consider his teaching to be very positive. It leads a person to live inspired by an inner feeling which is not tainted by belief systems or prejudices. Is Knowledge a magic pill? No, it takes commitment and effort just like learning to do anything well does. CD

Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 14:32:01 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspeil
Email:
To: Chris
Subject: Re: Why?

CD 1) My mom was looking at this and I was wathing her over the shoulder, thats how I found out about the site. And I knew of Maharaji from the both of them when I was very young. 2) She said she did think that but now belives he's a dirty rotten scoundrel. 3) The life looking out of my eyes, my mom named Gunther Glockenspeil when I was born. 4) If my mind became very still I'd either be asleep, in a coma, dead, or uncouncius. 5) Knowledge might be a magic pill. My mom says, that this knowledge is some sort of inition where you touch your eyeball? Stick your finger in your ears? Listen to yourself exhale? and Stick your tongue up your throat and taste snot? Now if I wanted to taste snot I could just pick my nose. My mom also says she's going to hell in a handbasket because she shared this knowledge with me. You must have some leak because I see a lot of three year old running around touching the eyes and sticking the fingers in their ears and eating snot at the parks. I think they call it recess... or fun something like that. Thats just one man's humble opinion.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 20:42:43 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: That's not our nasal-fixated Anth is it??? (nt)
Message:
That's not our nasal-fixated Anth is it??? (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 22:18:27 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Children of ex-premies
Message:
There's probably more fundamentalism than cultism. At least, that's what I see around. Not that I am trying to draw a larger distinction between the two phenomena than already is there.

What kind of cult is your daughter in Happy?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:40:00 (GMT)
From: eb
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Children of ex-premies
Message:
I used to take the kids to every festival, spent lots of time in childcare, but made sure I took them with me through the Darshan lines. Held them up so they could kiss his feet. Someone told me they would have 10,000 lives worth of karma removed each time they kissed his feet.

Last year, we watched the Lord of the Universe video together, and they just laughed. They were sort of angry that I *made* them kiss those lotus feet. But the 15-year old, who never did pranam, thinks it was cool.

Nowadays, two are magicians, two are atheists, and one is too young to decide.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:30:27 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Movie recomendation ( OT)- 'BLISS' on video (nt)
Message:
Terence Stamp, BTW
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 04:23:08 (GMT)
From: Jackie
Email: Nonr
To: JB
Subject: Movie recomendation ( OT)- 'BLISS' on video (nt)
Message:
Dear JB,

I used to work in Terry's restaurant in the 60's. I played Leonard Cohen records over and over again.... What's bliss about?

Jackie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:54:58 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jackie and JB
Subject: Re:Movie recomendation
Message:
Wow!

I read Ebert's review of 'Bliss' and will check it out.

My all-time, no.1 favorite movie is Teorema, by Pier Paulo Pasolini, starring Terence Stamp, early 60's I think. Terence plays a Christlike, avatar sort of role, but it's entirely in sexual terms.

Jackie, what do you mean, you worked in his restaurant? Please tell more! Terence was definitely in his prime in the 60's!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:25:23 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:Movie recomendation
Message:
I just rented a Terrence Stamp movie called 'The Limey'. I only watched a little of it. I like him as an actor, but I was unconvinced by him as a tough guy hellbent on revenge. He's too old. It's kind of like watching Charlie Bronson in some of his later movies. You just can't get passed thinking that all a bad guy has to do to poor old Terrence or Charlie is blow on them and the fight is over. But of course that's not the way it happens. They destroy guys 40 years younger who have got muscles on their muscles. I can't go for it. These guys should just play roles where they're more convincing. Now, Ian MacLellan (sp). There's an old guy who takes roles that he absolutely sparkles in. If you want to see for yourself, check him out in Richard III, or more recently, Gods & Monsters, a role for which he won Best Actor from the Independent Spirit Awards.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:27:15 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Neo-Darwinists
Subject: A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT)
Message:
A question for the Neo-Darwinists here:

Currently I'm in the middle of reading several books (as usual). I am reading two books on evolution, both pro-evolution. See Jim, I do read the pro books. (I'm also in the middle of two books on Marilyn Monroe, both pro-Marilyn, of course).

My main reason for reading the evolution books is an attempt to understand this thing about random mutations and how they supposedly become established in a whole species. I mostly understand, and generally accept, most everything else about the theory, but am still very fuzzy on the particulars about mutations.

Last week, I submitted an idea to Jerry that the homo-sapien line evolved from some ape in a recent, dramatic, and remarkably quick way (quick being relative to evolution's standards, of course); and that perhaps homo sapiens would undergo some equally dramatic evolution in the future. Jerry seemed to accept the proposition as a possibility, and a pleasant one.

But, here's my question. Isn't it an impossibility now for our species to evolve any further, at least in the Neo-Darwinian way, i.e. a favorable random mutation appearing in one human individual and slowly becoming established through generation after generation into the entire human population?! Isn't it true that this is now impossible, at least for the human species?

The way I see it, any mutation in some Joe Blow in Boise Idaho, for example, could not possibly confer on him and his line such a reproductive advantage that the whole species would eventually acquire it. Nor is there any possibility in today's world for this hypothetical Joe Blow line to isolate itself and develope an entire new branch, diverging from present humans. The proper conditions for such an evolution to happen just do not exist (the way they may have existed in the Cambrian era). Therefore, the human species is stagnant and will acquire no new genetic information to distinquish it further from the apes.

Furthermore, the only evolutionary alternative left to the human species, following Darwinist principles, is a minor reshuffling of the existing gene pool, perhaps eventually blurring the races, (as the white supremists are so afraid of), or some such development. It is unlikely, I should think, that we could hope for much improvement, even along these lines. For instance, I doubt that intelligence will increase, in a Neo-Darwinian way at least, since stupid humans are just as likely to pass on their genes as intelligent humans are, perhaps even more so. Look at it - Einstein left no progeny, and Rowandans are almost rabbits. (I realize this last statement is politically incorrect and almost Nazism, but if you want to jump on me for it please do so in a separate thread).

Isn't it also true that most species on present-day Earth are likewise static and have in fact been so for eons?

My main concern with this line of questioning is ultimately to determine for myself some sort of understanding about the likelihood of random DNA duplicating errors naturally selected ever being the vehical of evolution. For the sake of the human race, I'm hoping it's not. The most specific case where I see the difficulty is with the human, a line that supposedly began just 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. How can lucky accidents selected by nature work so quickly?? That's why I'm reading the books I mentioned, but I haven't got to the chapters about mutations yet. One book is 'Teaching about Evolutoin and the Nature of Science' c1998; and the other is the 1999 edition of Colin Patterson's book 'Evolution.'

Any thoughts? I see that Nigel is taking a vacation from the Forum but I'm really hoping to get his input as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:32:51 (GMT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Climate/Environmental Changes?
Message:
You're doing more reading than me, and it's a while anyway, but I was under the impression the speed of change was related to major climactic/environmental changes?

There'll certainly be plenty of those coming our way soon enough.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 17:12:42 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT)
Message:
But, here's my question. Isn't it an impossibility now for our species to evolve any further, at least in the Neo-Darwinian way, i.e. a favorable random mutation appearing in one human individual and slowly becoming established through generation after generation into the entire human population?! Isn't it true that this is now impossible, at least for the human species?

I don't think it's impossible but we sure have complicated the game by two things: 1) learning about it; and 2) culture.

What I think you have to avoid, cause I hear the implied argument elsewhere in your post, is the supposition that if we've thus affected our future evolution that that necessarily says anything about our past evolution.

We'll talk later ... gotta run.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:39:50 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Quite right, Jim...
Message:
Jim,

You're quite right that I'm hoping my attempts to properly imagine the whole scenario in the present will help me imagine the scenarios of the past.

I might be less adverse to the mutation theory if someone could provide me one concrete example that I could at least comprehend. It would have to start with a mutation occuring in some individual creature, how that genetic copying mistake occured and where in the body it occurred, how that mutation enters into the sperm or egg cells of that individual and is passed on to its offspring, and how that new genetic information results in some new physical characteristic that provides some survival advantage, and how that advantageous trait is acquired by the entire population or new species, and how you can go from fish fins to lizard legs using this mechanism.

I can't accept something I don't even comprehend.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:45:56 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: You accepted knowledge- comprehendingly? (nt)
Message:
You accepted knowledge- comprehendingly? (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:39:13 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim read my post under Helen's St Patty's post
Message:
below. I want to hear your opinion.

Feel free to blast me ( as if I could stop you! )

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 06:45:08 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Jim read my post under Helen's St Patty's post
Message:
'Blast you'?

Susan,

I don't know where I'd draw the line. Tough call.

There. Consider yourself blasted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 16:04:34 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey Jim,
Message:
I hope I did not hurt your feelings with the blasted thing. It just seemed like the sort of subject you would me insightful about. The blasted thing was sort of tongue in cheek, and inviting you to disagree.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:42:55 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Yes Susan, how insensitive of you
Message:
Jim DOES have feelings you know. (snicker)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:42:38 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Hey Jim,
Message:
No, of course not. I was just kidding myself. But I realyl don't know what to think about parents' rights to fuck up their kids. It's a tough one. Do you know how many families even today take their kids to church regularly?!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:50:05 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: yes, parent's rights to f... up their kids is a
Message:
very interesting topic to me.

Parent's obviously have rights to raise a child in their own faith. But then, some faiths are really bizarre about some things.

Like Jehovah's Witnesses and blood. I have agree, however painful it could be to be involved in the care of one, that a mother has a right to bleed to death rather than accept blood if that is her conviction. This happened where I live and she left behind a huge family. But I think ethically, adults have the right to refuse any treatment, especially if it is a religous conviction.

But what about the right to refuse medical care because of a religous conviction when it is the child's life at stake? Obviously, court orders have overrided religous convictions in these instances many times. I think they should. I mean, what if infanticide was a part of one's religion? What if torture was a religous tenet of a faith? Female circumcision, involing removal of the clitoris, is part of some Muslim religous faiths, allowing this to happen in this country, would be carrying religous freedom too far. There are those who compare that we accept male circumcision, but the long term damage done by the two procedures just does not compare.

It really is a hard issue. The Krishnas and David Koresh had fairly well documented cases of treating children abyssmally in the name of their faith. Children in Jim Jones cult were murdered in the name of faith. Where does one draw the line?

Very hard stuff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:06:44 (GMT)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: yes, parent's rights to f... up their kids is a
Message:
There's a book called 'The Spirit Catches You And You Fall Down,' by Anne Fadiman which documents the collision of two cultures: The Hmong and medical doctors in Northern California. It's a beautifully written book about an ill Hmong child and what happens when the Hmong parents/culture believe the exact opposite of what the medical culture believes the child needs in order to be cured/healed/treated. It's one of those situations where everyone believes they're acting for the benefit of the child, and that very child is the one who suffers because of the intransigence of both cultures to bend to the other's belief system. Highly recommend this book if you like non-fiction medical tales. I also recommend 'Mortal Lessons,' a book of essays by Richard Selzer, who's a doctor/surgeon and a beautiful writer.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:38:33 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: A question for the Neo-Darwinists here (OT)
Message:
I think genetic engineering will be the way forward now. It's a kind of do-it-yourself evolution. Either that or we'll all be Chinese in 200 years time.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 15:59:42 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Thanks, Sir Dave, but
Message:
Thanks, Sir Dave, but

Genetic engineering is scary. If it really takes off, everyone could eventually look like Marilyn and think like Einstein. Or, by some horrible mistake, vise versa. Many people have a visceral reaction against humans takings over the controls, at least at this stage of the game. The human will may not be the best will by which to proceed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 16:56:46 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: We've already taken control
Message:
But the humans have already taken over the controls and have been doing more and more since we started agriculture. Wheat and rice don't naturally grow in large quantities in conveniently square fields. Oxen and sheep don't naturally graze in large herds close to farm houses.

Homo Sapien Sapiens wouldn't naturally live beyond about forty or fifty years. Short sighted people wouldn't naturally be able to see much. More women would naturally die in childbirth. More children would naturally die before they reached their seventh birthday if humans hadn't taken over control.

We haven't done a bad job, so far. We've done a nice job of genetically engineering the animal population. All those nice friendly dogs that used to be wolves. And every time we step into a pleasant garden we are admiring humans' handiwork since most of the flowers have been genetically engineered.

I think genetic manipulation of humans is inevitable. There's already some places where couples can go and choose the sex of their next baby. Diseases such as Downs Syndrome or Spina Bifida will become things of the past along with Alzeimers Disease, heart disease and the like.

And all this, all because of Maharaji. Mindblowing!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:28:26 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Re:We've already taken control
Message:
Sir Dave,

Interesting pro arguments. But are you really as comfortable with the whole idea as you seem to be? I agree that human manipulation will inevitably continue, and there are great benefits, like you mention, but there are also concerns.

For example, you mention the choosing of a baby's sex. One of China's biggest potential problems is that their population in the future will now almost assuredly be unnaturally predominantly male. This has occurred because so many pregnancies have been terminated when the ultrasound has shown the baby to be a girl. The ratio is so high for boy-births now that many boys won't be able to find girls when they eventually want to. And the Chinese are very adverse to finding their mates outside their own ethnicity and country. Who knows what turmoil this will cause. And I hate to think of the words China and turmoil in the same sentence.

I can't really agree completely with your cheery assessment of what a good job the human race is doing so far. Yes, but. How many human children die of starvation each day? How many human children die from handguns each day? I could go on, but I think you get my point, namely that if they find the genes for compassion and cooperation maybe they could enhance those a little as well.

Think of the money that is spent on policing the bad guys. Think of how much money is spent on killing each other for political agendas. I look at the human race and mostly shutter with fear and loathing.

Spiritual values are obviously just as needed for our collective well-being as are genetic advancements. I agree that 'spiritual' is an extremely problematic word, perhaps the most problematic word of all. But somehow we've got to get it. I'm personally hoping that there is such a thing as original higher mind and the possibility of human beings growing more and more into it. Afterall, who cares how long and how easy we live if there is ultimatley no meaning?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Help is on its way
Message:
Worldwide, 500 children a day die because of poor sanitation. But an equal number if not more, die on the roads in auto accidents each day.

This world is far from perfect but we're stuck with it and the people who've tried to practically do something about it are the ones who've really changed things for the better.

The man who invented seat belts has probably relieved more suffering than all the Third World Help charities put together.

Overall, things are improving. If our awarness of the world's suffering has increased then that is an improvement because there's more people willing to do something about it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:49:19 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:We've already taken control
Message:
I pretty much agree with Sir D, Way. Evolution is pretty much in our hands from this point on, whether some like it or not. Only time will tell what the result of that will be.

Afterall, who cares how long and how easy we live if there is ultimatley no meaning?

You've bemoaned this before, Way. Look at it this way. When you're gone, you're gone, and you'll never know. So don't worry about it.

I think that it's unfortunate that you can't enjoy yourself in this life unless it leads to something in the hereafter. I mean, when you're engaged in an activity that you enjoy, do you give it meaning only if there's a life to come? Does that activity cease to provide pleasure, here and now, because you can't take it with you?

It's just a matter of attitude, as Harry once said. The problem isn't that this is all there is. The problem is that for some people, that's an unbearable proposition.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:13:14 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Re:We've already taken control
Message:
'when you're gone, you're gone.' Jerry says.

Where the hell do you get this crap. My princess status is really declining - or else I'm just a mad Princess (that was for Harry).

My higher self would be kinder to you Jerry. As in - you poor guy that you haven't experienced that when you're gone - you're NOT gone at all. But when someone makes a semi-proclamation - ' when you're gone, you're gone.'
It makes me nuts! ( This has nothing to do w/ M or techniques, by the way. ) Just experience (or lack of) and pig-headed proclamations.

JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:52:25 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: JB
Message:
It's a really odd thing to me that non experiencers always come on so strongly that there is no experience.
I'm with you on this one.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:46:42 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Hal
Message:
Hal,

You're right. I haven't experienced any OBEs, NDEs, seen any ghosts, nor regressed and seen myself in past lives. I have felt the presense of what I perceived to be the creator of all things. At first, I just assumed that this was the case. I hadn't been educated, yet, in how our central nervous system works. Now that I know a little more, I've had to re-evaluate this experience. I call THAT openminded. If I had refused to question my belief in God, in the light of new evidence, THAT I would have called closeminded.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:04:29 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: That was very well put. I see the logic (nt)
Message:
n
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 01:27:28 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: Earth to JB!
Message:
JB,

I kind of like you, but you're, er, out there, babe. What is so 'pig-headed' about 'proclaiming' that 'when you're gone, you're gone'? It looks to me, from all I've seen, that this is the most rational stance to take. Why would you think otherwise? Let's be specific. How many lifetimes have you lived? Do you recall them? Where are you going after this one? Do you have a clue?

What does anyone here know about death outside of they haven't met it yet, and they know of no one, personally, who has ever returned? I'll say it again. From all I can see, when you're gone, you're gone. Game over. Curtains. I've got no reason to believe anything else, and don't nobody start talking about NDEs and OBEs, and ghosts of all things, as proof that there's a hereafter. When people die - for good - they're gone for good.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:48:13 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: In one way your right Jerry
Message:
But in another you are not. I have had many experiences of past lives . Seen in the form of vision during meditation. these visions were incredibly lucid and emotional to see. I also have had many mystical experiences where I've travelled to other dimensions and been informed of where we go after death and the purpose of my life. Along with instruction on reincarnation etc.

Of course I accept that all this can be fabrication of imagination or changes in brain chemistry etc. but to me those experiences were absolutely fantastic and inspiring. I can never prove anything however and have no desire to.

We'll find out one day so there is really no argument on this.

Interesting how those who haven't always insist that those who claim to have must be deluded. Why not just say well I personally haven't but that may be because I'm closed to it.

Is seeing believing or is believing seeing?

Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:17:07 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Is believing seeing ... what you want to? ...
Message:
Is believing seeing ... what you want to? ...

Hal,

Those 'past-life' experiences -

How can you be sure that you were experiencing a vision of your OWN past life, rather than ... maybe ...sharing someone else's dream/memory/fantasy?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:07:53 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Can't be sure. Can't prove anything...............
Message:
But it is quite fascinating fun. I don't take it too seriously. It just happens occassionaly that I'm taken into mystical types of experience.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:12:40 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Thank you, Hal (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 10:39:01 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Jerry
Subject: I've seen a real alien spaceship
Message:
And what amuses me is that some people will try and say it was an hallucination or a weather balloon or some such ridiculous thing. Or Doctor Susan Blackmore (what a babe) will say it was an hallucination brought on by magnetic fields etc.

But it was there as large as life. Looking really beautiful with a lovely green luninous glow and strange heiroglyphic type markings round the edge. And I had a good long look at it through my hand held telescope before it started to move away, giving off brilliant flashes of orange light.

It amuses me that the skeptics say that I didn't see it. In fact, I love to hear them say I didn't see it because it throws their whole argument into the nonsense catagory.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 14:28:35 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: So what?
Message:
David,

It's been proven time and again that 'alien spaceships' were nothing more than natural phenomena that was misinterpreted by the human mind trying to make sense of it. But, of course, in your case that wouldn't apply. You REALLY saw an alien spaceship.

Have a good laugh. You're not the first one who's seen metallic objects giving off flashes of orange light. In 1968, there's a case where peole saw something similar, and like you, constructed an alien spaceship based upon what they saw. But what they really saw was a Soviet spacecraft re-entering the atmosphere. But because their minds were unable to grasp this fact, they had to construct something that made sense to them. Sorry, David, but I suspect this is the case with your spaceship as well. Laugh all you want.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:15:59 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: So what?
Message:
Jerry,
I really had no idea you were quite this cynical.
JB
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:42:38 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: So what?
Message:
JB,

Cynicism has nothing to do with it. It's just a matter of educating yourself and shaping a more informed opinion as a result.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:00:54 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Here's what, you show a non scientific view
Message:
This was about half a mile from my house in South London. It could be seen quite clearly with the naked eye. Through my telescope I could see all the detail. You simply could not miss it and could not mistake it for anything else. It was there, stationary in mid air, for about 5 minutes. No sound and it turned on its axis when I looked at it thru the scope.

Anyone who disputes that I saw this, does have a very closed mind indeed. I mean, I was a sceptic until I saw this with my own eyes. I watched it for so long thru the scope that I satisfied myself that it was not of this Earth. It was real, solid and three dimensional. It was not some airy fairy 'light in the sky' phenomenon.

The fact that you immediately think I saw something other than what I did see, means that you are only looking at this from one point of view; a sceptic's point of view. Therefore, you don't have an open mind and are not considering all the facts layed out in front of you. Not very scientific that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:28:30 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: You go, Sir Dave. Yes. (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:01:18 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: No offense intended, David
Message:
I watched it for so long thru the scope that I satisfied myself that it was not of this Earth.

Is that a fact? How would you know? Don't be so sure of yourself. Professional pilots trained to be wary of mistaking natural phenomena for UFOs have, nevertheless, made such mistakes. On one ocassion a fighter pilot thought he had a near collision with a UFO. He actually encountered a meteor shower with a long, luminous, electrical tail that was 125 miles away. People make mistakes.

Don't be so offended that I suspect you did, as well. It happens. That doesn't mean I'm certain that you didn't see a real, bonafide, UFO from another planet. It's just that, with all the evidence that exists of people making such mistakes, I'd be foolish not to think you may have made one yourself. Sorry.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 19:53:50 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: That sort of thing doesn't offend me
Message:
Meteor showers aren't lumimous green and don't hang in the sky for several minutes half a mile away before flying off. Neither do helecopters.

I thought at first glance that it was an airship but when I looked again, I could see that it wasn't. When I looked through my scope I could definitely see that it wasn't an airship. Airships aren't that shape and they make a lot of noise. Neither can they turn on their axis or move away silently. Neither can they give off brilliant flashes of orange light which light up the whole sky.

Er, I didn't tell you about the other two UFOs which were hanging around further away. Neither did I tell you about the police helecopter which came zooming over my house in hot pursuit of the UFO as it sped off. Sound like a scene out of 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind'?

It was just like that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:55:29 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Wrong, Dave (forget the 'open mind' shit)
Message:
The fact that you immediately think I saw something other than what I did see, means that you are only looking at this from one point of view; a sceptic's point of view. Therefore, you don't have an open mind and are not considering all the facts layed out in front of you. Not very scientific that.

It's 'skeptic', Dave. Better get used to it cause we're taking over. An 'open mind' can mean a lot of things. Sounds like you want a mind that's not-discriminating too much to judge your story. But a properly open mind is going to be open to all the many, many reasons that militates against taking your account at face value. No, you shouldn't be offended. You should just accept the fact that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You don't have it (the evidence, that is) and, objectively speaking, you're probably wrong anyway. Yes, Dave, you're probably wrong, no matter what you say. Such has been the long, funny history of UFO sightings.

Hey, maybe you're right. Jerry knows that. But, fact is, you've just got a naked story with no proof. Odds are, you're wrong. A truly open mind has to stay open to that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:09:18 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Your very very wrong Jim, totally wrong
Message:
And I can't tell you just how totally and utterly wrong you are. No, words fail me because your error is incalculable and beyond my understanding!

In the Penguin English Dictionary, which I keep in a drawer in my desk, it says; - sceptic noun. A person disposed to scepticism, especially regarding religion or religious principles.

Skeptic is not in the dictionary.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:12:33 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Your very very wrong Jim, totally wrong
Message:
'Your very very wrong Jim, totally wrong'

Dave,

The jump from UFOs to anglo-american differences of spelling is kind of surreal.

Skeptic is the way they spell sceptic on the other side of the pond. Honest.

scheme me up...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:04:53 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: happyheretic@hotmail.com
To: Sir Dave
Subject: skeptic - sceptic
Message:
Excuse a non-anglo, but has this something to do with English vs. American-Canadian? There is the magazine 'Skeptical Enquiry', and there is the 'Indian Skeptic' (which I read regularly, myself).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:38:41 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Happy -Skeptic Inquirer
Message:
I'm name dropping here. But notice on your magazine - the publisher - or darnit maybe it's the editor - or maybe the owner -- anyway --notice if there's mention of Albequrque,NM.

I stayed at his house 3 years ago while he and his family were away and took care of his cats and mail. He didn't like the way I did anything - I heard later. I snooped a bit in his office and saw he was the big wig behind The Skepical Inquirer Magazine. I had never seen it before that. He was a friend of a friend and I was helping him out - no pay - I'm not a house sitter. Nice Southwestern home.
JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 14:32:13 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: happyheretic@hotmail.com
To: JB
Subject: Happy -Skeptic Inquirer
Message:
thanks for the correction. I like the magazine, I use to read it online.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:27:33 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Dave , I'm nuts too!
Message:
Hi starship commander Dave. I too have seen starships several times and so have my children. Many, many people in the Algarve have very clearly viewed unusual flying objects that are definitely not aeroplanes or weather balloons.

You are not alone

Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:23:56 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Hal, What's Algarve,pls.? nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 15:08:39 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: Algarve=Southern Portugal JB (nt)
Message:
i
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:05:40 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Hal
Subject: Dave , I'm nuts too! But I'm more than nuts, Hal
Message:
Don't tell anyone else here because they will think I'm crazy; but I actually felt that the 'people' or whatever they were (whether singular or plural, I don't know); anyway the living entity which was piloting the UFO was actually reading my thoughts.

I distinctly got that impression because the flashes of orange light came just after a certain thought had gone through my mind. And this happened three times.

Also, the way it spun on it's axis. I was just thinking, 'I wonder what this UFO looks like on the other side' and then as soon as I thought that, it spun around on its axis.

Anyway Hal, keep this a secret otherwise Jerry and Jim will really think I've gone off my trolley!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 07:10:17 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I promise, your secret's safe with me Dave (nt)
Message:
t
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 04:54:42 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: The secrets out!
Message:
I didn't want to say anything, David, but, uh, well, I think Jim expressed my thoughts pretty clearly on this last, er, revelation(?), so I won't add anything to it, except to say, thanks, David, that really made my night. Good man.

You should have just left it at the flashing orange lights and the hieroglyphics. You might have had some credibility with that. But, now look what you've done. David, David, David...you truly are a knight in Her Majesty's service, aren't you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:42:11 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: You know so little, Jerry. About remote viewing..
Message:
I am talking Area 51. Did you know that the US Government has been funding 'Remote Viewing' research with people involved in that facility?

I saw two of the guys talking about it on the Discovery Channel. They were involved in the remote viewing program. They said it's a skill anyone can develope, similar to the martial arts. And yes, they had proven to the satisfaction of the Government authorities that remote viewing was indeed a fact and they demonstrated it to the Government officials with ease. That's how they got the funding.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 16:53:11 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I know a little
Message:
David,

I watch the Discovery Channel too. My understanding is that funding for investigation into psi as a viable weapon for use by the armed forces, or as a means of espionage, stopped because of unsatisfactory results. The evidence, based upon the research they performed, proved inconclusive that psi even exists.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 18:23:52 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I know a little too
Message:
That's not what the Discovery program said that I was watching just a few weeks ago. And these two guys who were involved with the remote viewing program were just regular guys and not some sort of New Age wierdos.

I may have that program on video tape. If I find it I'll post the dialogue here or on AG.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 22:06:09 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I know a little too
Message:
And these two guys who were involved with the remote viewing program were just regular guys and not some sort of New Age wierdos.

That's a matter of opinion. The question is, are they still employed, or have they been let go because the government was dissatisfied with their services? I still maintain that the government, while once interested in psi and it's possibilities, no longer is. Are you aware of any programs still in effect? If so, then you know something I don't.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 01:29:57 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: You're not supposed to know, Jerry
Message:
You're not supposed to know about it. It doesn't exist and it doesn't work. That is the official Government line. It's only because some people actually are prepared to talk about it that we ever hear about this stuff.

They were also talking about UFOs the size of football stadiums on this program, which had been seen by numerous Area 51 employees. I don't think they'd find my sighting that unusual.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 02:10:41 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Do you know how paranoid you sound?
Message:
David,

The government has been very forthcoming about it's investigation into psi. Look up the National Research Council and the Army Research Institute to learn all about it.

You sound like that Mel Gibson character in Conspiracy Theory. Ironically, the character he portrayed was named Jerry. He should have been named David.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Mar 23, 2000 at 10:27:16 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Do you know how reactionary you sound?
Message:
All I'm doing is relaying what I saw on the Discovery Channel a few weeks ago. I'm not paranoid. I'm not afraid of UFOs. The one I saw was not frightening for me. Yes, it was awesome but more because of its beauty than anything else.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:01:55 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Oh no! You believe in trolleys too?
Message:
Anyway Hal, keep this a secret otherwise Jerry and Jim will really think I've gone off my trolley!

Too much. Too fucking much.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:21:01 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Well you believe in elves in other universes (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:24:09 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: No, I'm only right and wrong
Message:
Oxford says 'skeptic' is a U.S. spelling. Sorry.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 16:06:26 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Dave's right: 'sceptic' mind is spot on...
Message:
And they've got a great big anal probe with your name on it Jim...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 17:47:55 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: You must mean 'septic' and how's David Icke?
Message:
How are you finding your new paranoid conspiracy tutor? Having you gotten to the aliens that have taken over our minds yet? They're right after the 'Protocols of Zion' and the jewish plot to take over the world.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:00:56 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Oh yes, 'septic' I knew something wasn't quite
Message:
right.

And it 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,' btw. It's not ALL aliens who are bad, Jim. Mainly just the shape-shifting reptoids you need to watch out for. The probers. Your new best friends.

Yes David Icke. Well if you ever bother to read his dead on accurate books yourself (I read one) you'll see that it his opinion that the 'Protocols' were written by the 'Illuminati' as a cover document. Just substitute 'globalists' for 'jews' and everything becomes crystal clear.

Hey I uncovered yet another conspiracy (i love this stuff.) The cover up of the US Navy shoot down of TWA flight 800. Remember that one? The worst air disaster in US history? Turns out there were exercises being conducted in the area and oops an unarmed missle struck the airliner.

And guess who was on KAL flight 007? Larry McDonald !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:22:06 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Are you serious?
Message:
How'd you 'uncover' this amazing story? And, though the name's familiar, I forget: who's Larry Macdonald? (Gotta go to court!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 18:47:53 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Are you serious?
Message:
Well the TWA 800 story is true. Read The Downing of TWA Flight 800 by James Sanders if you want the details.

It's a quick read. The US gov't actually prosecuted this man and his wife for 'stealing' evidence. Convicted him, too. He had an inside guy provide him with a swatch of the seat material which contained evidence of missile propellent on it.

Larry McDonald is Ronald's brother.

No seriously, this guy was a US Congressman who opposed the Fed and the NWO big time.

OT: Hey if you want a real pants pisser, rent Stephen King's 'Storm of the Century.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 14:32:26 (GMT)
From: abducted
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: But I was anal probed and ...
Message:
And the aliens told me that the reason they were doing it is so no one will believe me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 20:34:28 (GMT)
From: abducted2
Email: None
To: abducted
Subject: That's nothing, I was abducted by alien ghosts and
Message:
they used a spectral anal probe.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 01:34:48 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my!
Message:
There not proof, but they warrent consideration.

NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my!

NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my!

NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my!

and don't forget after-death communications!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:38:03 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: G
Subject: I've had them
Message:
After death communications, that is. I've had two, to be precise.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:55:49 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I've had them also,
Message:
so have many people I've spoken with. They include physical things happening, witnessed sometimes by more than one person.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:03:17 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: G
Subject: NDEs and OBEs and ghosts oh my!
Message:
G,

They warrant consideration, yes, but with tongue firmly in cheek. I personally think that when more is discovered about the inner workings of the brain, we'll find that NDEs and OBEs and ghosts (oh my!), are just manifestations of a mind gone wild, no more. Strictly subjective experience. And that's a gut level feeling I have about it. How un-scientific of me. But, let's never forget that the mind plays trick. I think that warrants more consideration than anything.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:43:50 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: It could play tricks on the sCeptics too
Message:
If as you suppose, even what people see and hear isn't really happening, that it's all a trick of the mind and that ghost that 20 people have seen was a group illusion. Just suppose that the mind plays tricks to that extent; then how do you know that your sCeptical views aren't just as much an hallucination too?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:58:30 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: 'an hallucination' - you are so British (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:02:54 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: What is the color black and what does it have to
Message:
Speaking of death...

What is the color black and what does it have to with death?

Before I brought up the color red for consideration. Even more perplexing is the color black. Here is an experience that is not triggered by an external stimulus. People think of it as a non-experience, but it isn't. It's a real experience. And why the association with death? If death were 'the end', we wouldn't be experiencing anything, we wouldn't even be. That's not something anyone can even properly conceive of. Perhaps another reason for the association is fear, fear of the dark and fear of death.

Another interesting color is purple, which has no corresponding wavelength of light.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 13:59:29 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: G
Subject: What is the color black and what does it have to
Message:
Black at funerals is a Western thing. I know in Vietnam they wear white at funerals.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 21:28:28 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Even the priests? (nt)
Message:
Even the priests? (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:31:04 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: The Buddist ones wear orange
Message:
But I think even they don white robes at a funeral.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:36:10 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: And ghosts wear white sheets (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 00:46:43 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: G
Subject: But the sCeptical ghosts wear nothing (nt)
Message:
There's nowt in here mate.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:09:14 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: enjoying
Message:
I think that it's unfortunate that you can't enjoy yourself in this life unless it leads to something in the hereafter. I mean, when you're engaged in an activity that you enjoy, do you give it meaning only if there's a life to come? Does that activity cease to provide pleasure, here and now, because you can't take it with you?

Good point. Whether or not there is anything after death, we can enjoy ourselves. If there is nothing, all the more reason. If there is something, why wait?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:16:17 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: G
Subject: enjoying
Message:
G
Don't get me wrong if you read my post to Jerry above - of course - I agree w/ you on your post.
Enjoying now is the thing.
JB
HI, long time ,G.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 00:21:44 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: enjoying now - it simplifies things
Message:
Hi, JB

G

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:18:17 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: G and Jerry
Subject: Re:enjoying
Message:
Jerry,

Well, I feel you misjudge my position a bit. I understand that enjoying comes in a variety of levels, and it is only natural. For example, I personally enjoy listening to and playing Chopin on the piano, regardless of the afterlife.

Music is a bit of harmony and we naturally enjoy it.

Harmony of all sorts is enjoying to us, and the greater and more real and inclusive the harmony, the greater the enjoyment.

By all means, we should all enjoy what we can. Let's not limit ourselves.

Many people have said that the consciousness of oneness is the highest enjoyment. That remains a matter of personal experience.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:47:47 (GMT)
From: Jackie
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:enjoying
Message:
Dear Way,

I also enjoy playing Chopin on the piano. I would like to listen to more classical music than I do but continue to have piano lessons and practice an hour a day.

I am taking a Royal Conservatory Piano exam this summer.

Jackie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:56:03 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jackie
Subject: To Jackie
Message:
Jackie,

What pieces are you playing for the exam? I took lessons as a kid but never played seriously. What a way to wreck your nerves. Must be worse than a typing test. Good luck!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 20:42:33 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:enjoying
Message:
Personally, I find it easier to enjoy life when I believe that death is not the final complete end. I don't feel I need to accept that death is 'the end'; no one knows that. I guess some feel they are being tough and proudly realistic by assuming it's 'the end', but are they facing imminent death? That's a whole different story.

I recently been listening to Chopin's piano concertos, it's gorgeous music. I have some sheet music of other Chopin works (ballades, sonatas, impromptus) that I've tried, but it's a bit out of my league. Still fun to try though, it gives me more appreciation for the music.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:00:32 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Re:Chopin
Message:
Hi G,

Well, I started out discussing mutations and didn't dream I'd end up with Chopin. Three or four of the Preludes are quite easy, and the Waltzes are easier and more straighforward than the other stuff. There's a ballade, in B-minor, that is absolutely beyond me, with four notes in the Treble over six notes in the Bass. Impossible. I agree about the Concertos, especially no.1 in E-minor, which I just listened to last night!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 19:09:10 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Try telling that to a ghost
Message:
Jerry spake thus:

'The problem isn't that this is all there is. The problem is that for some people, that's an unbearable proposition.'

I know. Try telling that to a ghost that he/she doesn't exist. I know people who've seen ghosts which were independently seen by more than one person, sometimes at the same time. The truth is, nobody in their right mind can say there's nothing after this or that this is all there is; not say it with any certainty.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:02:03 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Try telling that to a ghost
Message:
The truth is, nobody in their right mind can say there's nothing after this or that this is all there is; not say it with any certainty.

Ok, it's a little arrogant to say with certainty that this is all there is, but I'm not banking on there being more. As for ghosts, I've never seen one and I'm skeptical of people who say they have. The truth is, nobody in their right mind believes in them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:28:35 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: ghosts
Message:
I'm not banking on there being more, but I hope there is. What we believe about it doesn't change anything anyway. At least I don't think so!

I've never seen a ghost, but I have reason to believe that, whatever 'they' are, they do exist. I and people I have talked to have witnessed very strange things happen around the time of a loved one's death. These are people who are obviously not insane.
I talked to one person who actually 'saw a ghost' in the house where she lived once. I don't know whether to believe her, but she claims she described the appearance and first name (short and beginning with M) of 'the ghost' to someone in the town, who said, 'You must be talking about May Newell'. May Newell had lived in the house many years ago.

I suppose I'll be flamed for saying this. I already know what will be said, it's not scientific evidence, they are all crazy or lying, etc. Well, that's one interpretation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 21:49:35 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: G
Subject: re:ghosts
Message:
Last November, I attended a program with James van Praugh. He spoke to five different people during the program. All five of them were very impressed, even astounded, by what he told them regarding their recently-passed loved ones. I wish Jerry had attended with me. Not that he would have been convinced, by any means. But still I would have liked to hear Jerry's reaction. I doubt Jerry will ever attend such an event. Oh, and by the way, I ENJOYED it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 02:31:59 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: re:ghosts
Message:
I've seen 'street' magicians do some pretty amazing things, Way, where I'd swear they were psychic if I hadn't learned the secrets of their tricks. As for James van Praugh, I would have been impressed, to be sure. But I also would have wondered how he did it. I wouldn't assume that he had psychic powers. I'd assume that trickery was afoot. And you're right. I probably wouldn't attend such an event. What for? To see some trickster make fools of people? I don't think so. Believe what you want. I think it's bullshit. And if it isn't, how are we going to know? I'd rather spend my time with reality, what actually IS, than what might be. But suit yourself. I prefer knowing, not wondering. I'd much rather understand what's real to me than jerk myself off, amazed at someone who might just be good at sophisticated parlor tricks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 23:29:06 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Way and Jerry
Subject: re:ghosts and closed minds
Message:
Way,
Why would you really care what Jerry's reaction would be. He said people aren't in their right minds or something like that that believe in this stuff. Why bother caring what a skeptic thinks. That's all it is - what he THINKS - doesn't mean anything without experience. Sorry Jerry,but that sentence above was so simpleminded,closedminded - both same thing.

Jerry-
I have a real problem with a closed mind. And then to proclaim those that are open or believe in something you don't as ' not in their right minds' . I mean really. Not much gets me - but closed minds do. This world is mainly screwed up bec of them.

JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 15:17:13 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: re:ghosts and closed minds
Message:
JB,

I'm just applying experience and rational thought based upon what I've learned. I believe I've come to a reasonable conclusion as a result. So many times claims of extraordinary events have been proven to be the mind playing tricks, or tricksters pulling the wool over peoples' eyes. Why would I assume that this is only sometimes the case, that sometimes it's legitimate.? On what grounds? None of this phenomena has ever been proven true. A plethora of it has been proven bogus.

Sorry that we disagree. But if I were you, I'd be more humble about human perception. We can easily be decieved. We'd be fools if we didn't acknowledge that, and proceed accordingly.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 21, 2000 at 20:26:17 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: re:ghosts and closed minds
Message:
Jerry,
That is funny you say that bec that is why I get nutty about closed minds in general...I feel that people w/ the closed minds are pompous and lack humility...to see that some things are maybe beyond their 5 senses or their intellect or their own experience. Some things do exist - whether ET's or grays or spaceships w/ heirogliphics - even tho you haven't seen them.

I personally am not saying that there are ET's on the planet - but the diff between you and me is that I'm humble enough to say - maybe there are and maybe they're not. I would never be 'pig-headed' or pompous enough to proclaim -' There are no ET's on the planet.' That was just an example. I figure you think the afterlife is as 'out there' as extra-terrestrials.
Correct?
JB

And I kinda like you too, Jerry.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 01:19:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JB
Subject: The 'open mind' myth
Message:
JB,

Jerry's never said conclusively that UFO's (as in aliens visiting the planet as per alleged sightings like Dave's) don't exist. He said that there's no strong evidence of them and that, extraordinary claim that it is, it needs strong evidence. There's nothing closed-minded about that. In fact, if he were to say otherwise, he'd then be closed-minded to all the very human and un-ET explanations for these accounts. And how open are you to them?

An open mind does not mean a non-discriminating mind although that's how the term's wrong used more oftne than not.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 19:28:50 (GMT)
From: JB
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: The 'open mind' myth
Message:
Well, Jim
As usual you're clearer than me - attorney's clarity and all - and you're right.
But, just for all concerned - I am definitely open to debunk all and every so-called para-normal experience. Sometimes it's hard to prove and also hard to debunk , usually bec it happens so quickly or to someone between their ears.
Thanks for the input.

JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:24:12 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: The 'open mind' myth
Message:
Uh, Jim, where have you been. You mean in little provincial hick town Bumfuck Canada you don't see UFOs? Get Serious !!! British Columbia is a hotbed for sightings for chrissake. What do you do, listen to 'The Lord of the Universe' AND SURF THE WEB ALL DAY???

LIVE IN A BOX ???

Get this everybody: I was at Jim's house and he has the old LOTUS album RIGHT THERE in plain sight AND HE PLAYS IT. A LOT. No correct that. It's at his girl friend's house. But I'm sure he has taped copies at his place and in his Bronco. No doubt about that.

So that's the kinda guy we're dealing with here. Throw in the atheism and the lawyer thing and what do you expect? Einstein and the Reptoids meet Jimbo of the Jungle??? Of course there's no aliens. There couldn't be according to the laws of science so there isn't any and that settles that.

No UFOs my ass. THEN TELL ME WHO'S DOING THOSE THINGS TO ME ON AN ALMOST NIGHTLY BASIS FOR MOST OF MY LIFE THEN??? WHO?? WHO?? YOU JIMBO???

inquiring minds want to know (TM)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 03:53:25 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: Are they still aliens if they're 3rd generation?
Message:
I'm not sure who's doing that to you. One thing you could do, if you have the money, is get a good vet to check the marks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index