Was "Gallic wars" a text similar to the Odyssey - so, describing the Younger Dryas cataclysms?

[axj]

I don't know if you used AI but it looks like one of those formatted answers that the AI usually provides.

Really? I read in Firestone's book about the maps you provided and summarized what he says in my own words.

Your crusade against AI use also seems to be misplaced. It is just a tool that can be used for positive or negative purposes, same as the Internet.

That Caesar was specifically speaking about the Younger Dryas events appeared to be the most relevant hypothesis.

You have given no good reason why this would be the most relevant hypothesis. It is a very unlikely theory at best.

I see; you would expect Homer to tell you that Odysseus was a fictional character and that the book is about the comets during the YD?

The Odyssey was an oral narrative that was passed down for a long time before being written down. So the possibility of ancient events being talked about there is much higher than Caesar writing about a war he just concluded.

 

[palestine]

You have given no good reason why this would be the most relevant hypothesis. It is a very unlikely theory at best

I feel... that if you did not find interest in the various points that I mentioned, I don't have to expand more. No, really, when reading your post, I feel kind of compelled to answer, or that I owe you something, an answer or something. I don't, at this stage.

 

[Jtucker]

I feel... that if you did not find interest in the various points that I mentioned, I don't have to expand more. No, really, when reading your post, I feel kind of compelled to answer, or that I owe you something, an answer or something. I don't, at this stage.

The C's have confirmed that Caesar wrote "The Conquest of Gaul" and also commented on the context of the embellishments that Laura suspected. I've gone through the book twice and tried my best to locate the geography and topography Caesar describes. With a bit of work, it seems obvious to me that he is describing actual people and actual locations he encountered. Cross-referencing his descriptions with modern stratigraphy and archaeology has come up with a number of confirmations as to the historicity of the events.

The Gallic Wars were very important geopolitical events that changed Caesar's role in the Republic and ultimately led to his legendary, or even mythical status. What he pulled off in some of those battles is unbelievable.

Caesar seems to me to be very located in the hear and now in his world, granted with some strong esoteric knowledge. I think it's unlikely that he would concern himself withe the Younger Dryas Impact Event thousands of years before. If the language of the Odyssey was very old by the time it was written down, it's likely that it was based upon a pericope style long lost. The original references probably made sense and told a clear story of locales and meaning, but were long lost by the time they were written down.

Deciphering exact locations and cultures is really hard. Randall Carlson's work may get the closest to deciphering what likely happened then. The source reference points for texts we still have in existence today, is a wild puzzle.

 

[Moine]

So, I see a novel inquiry ... I guess I'll just post here what I otherwise intended to drop on the Odyssey thread...

However I'm generally curious as to what brought about this blade of inquiry?

With or without that, I'll offer my thoughts as to why I'm looking at a completely overlooked, or unnoticed perspective on these things, perhaps? That perspective being esoteric in origin, purpose, and destination.

--------------------

Fundamentally, there are three issues which deride the basis of any superficial investigation into this matter:

Fore-mostly, there is the basis of historiography, or in plain English -- where is all the supporting documentation and evidence, i.e: letters, tax bills, censuses, economic and industrial paraphernalia, and generally all of the dead bodies that were either left on a field, or in some shallow grave? The surviving literature on not only this matter, but around the general period, was essentially lost for "a thousand years", and only made its way back into the miserly cognition of western awareness through the scholarly efforts of the Byzantines and Islamics, via al-Andalus, in the early medieval period, and subsequently through the learned patronage that funded many treatises and translations of whatever else managed to survive, through the Renaissance and into the Enlightenment+ . For the most part it is honestly difficult to take tangibly, as scant literature/records, ruins, and other issues, make the entire tradition more dead than alive, if it ever were.

Axiomatically, there is the issue of lexicography, or -- what do the terms in the original documents actually convey, not only in meaning, but also of location, of personage, of character and especially of virtue or vice? Does the term Gaul confer to the general confines of Western Europe, to the tribe of courageous and oftentimes barbaric Keltoi, to a materialistic disposition, if not predilection, of one's behavior, or should I even dare say, to graven spiritual failures inherent not only individually, but also generally to the point of the whole term being typified into polemic usage? What of the nature of Rome, or a Roman, perhaps?

And Principally, there is the notion of interpretation. Gurdjieff noted the three strata of human awareness, as noted by P.D. Ouspensky in his book In Search of the Miraculous: Fragments of an Unknown Teaching...

You have the exoteric, who interpret things literally -- cataclysms, journeys, wars, plagues are exactly that, in every instance of iteration, from the mythical, to the news-worthy. Then you have the mesoteric, who intuit fractal and cascading relationships between such things, and others. Finally you have the esoteric, who utilize the same language and terminologies, but for different things. At times, you may find very good writers and translators of such things, who may impart to you the exact meaning of some interesting concept, with which those accurate definitions/translations transcend all three levels of awareness. But you won't exactly know what you're reading, or what is being conveyed, esoterically, since this last piece involves a different sort of appreciation...

Beyond these three issues of superficial investigation, when in consideration of the three layers of human strata, a curious individual may find that you, @palestine, may be standing on extremely firm bedrock, if you would only slightly reconsider your current understanding of the mythos of the C's Experiment. I will point you in the direction of a few readings.

The first is within the bounds of that classicist known as Thomas Taylor [Thomas Taylor (Tr. & Comm.). The Wanderings of Ulysses. Appendix in: Select Works of Porphyry. (1st ed. 1823); Frome: The Prometheus Trust, 1999 (2nd ed.), Vol. II of “The Thomas Taylor Series,” pp. 201-24]. His elucidation of the Odyssey, in light of Greek mythological and linguistic tradition, is something to consider, in my opinion.

The second is within the bounds of another, yet un-renown, classicist known as James Pryse. His interpretation(s) of the whole Christianity thing, in relation to the above, is not to be avoided, particularly his magnum opus, The Apocalypse unsealed : being an esoteric interpretation of the initiation of Iôannês (Apokalypsis Iōannou) commonly called the Revelation of (St.) John.

Somewhere between those two noted works, thematically, likely lies the fable, which was likely inspired by something, somewhere, in the forgotten annals of whatever happened long ago. While Pryse may offer a compendium of errata, regarding the peculiarities of what he writes in his extant works, whatever is still yet intangible to the modern reader, may be discernible through a related author who was around that era, who was somewhat knowledgeable on such matters and who was able to put it into a modern English for general readership -- that being Dion Fortune, and her work of Sane Occultism.

If there's other questions, then you might be able to find what you're looking for, with the items listed in my signature below -- if not fully, then eventually, I suppose.

 

[palestine]

I've gone through the book twice and tried my best to locate the geography and topography Caesar describes. With a bit of work, it seems obvious to me that he is describing actual people and actual locations he encountered.

I see a not that obvious consequence chain here. A guy describes places, in a book > those are real.

I've gone through the book several times. Honestly: don't you think that something is "off"? I mean - all the military, etc things? At some point, even if the style is okay, it's a bit nauseating. It becomes pointless. I mean this is so obvious that it becomes puzzling.

On the archeology point: several centuries after Caesar, much destruction, Atlantean tech, people dedicated to bury the Christ's legacy. Eh, why not tampering with the archeology? All we've got, from Caesar, is ONE bust. Only one. On the side, numerous things, and coins, etc. I wouldn't be stopping there.

I think it's unlikely that he would concern himself withe the Younger Dryas Impact Event thousands of years before.

I believe that there is room for an STO being, manifesting on the plane, teaching mankind about the big mattering events.

 

[palestine]

So, I see a novel inquiry ... I guess I'll just post here what I otherwise intended to drop on the Odyssey thread...

However I'm generally curious as to what brought about this blade of inquiry?

With or without that, I'll offer my thoughts as to why I'm looking at a completely overlooked, or unnoticed perspective on these things, perhaps? That perspective being esoteric in origin, purpose, and destination.

--------------------

Fundamentally, there are three issues which deride the basis of any superficial investigation into this matter:

Fore-mostly, there is the basis of historiography, or in plain English -- where is all the supporting documentation and evidence, i.e: letters, tax bills, censuses, economic and industrial paraphernalia, and generally all of the dead bodies that were either left on a field, or in some shallow grave? The surviving literature on not only this matter, but around the general period, was essentially lost for "a thousand years", and only made its way back into the miserly cognition of western awareness through the scholarly efforts of the Byzantines and Islamics, via al-Andalus, in the early medieval period, and subsequently through the learned patronage that funded many treatises and translations of whatever else managed to survive, through the Renaissance and into the Enlightenment+ . For the most part it is honestly difficult to take tangibly, as scant literature/records, ruins, and other issues, make the entire tradition more dead than alive, if it ever were.

Axiomatically, there is the issue of lexicography, or -- what do the terms in the original documents actually convey, not only in meaning, but also of location, of personage, of character and especially of virtue or vice? Does the term Gaul confer to the general confines of Western Europe, to the tribe of courageous and oftentimes barbaric Keltoi, to a materialistic disposition, if not predilection, of one's behavior, or should I even dare say, to graven spiritual failures inherent not only individually, but also generally to the point of the whole term being typified into polemic usage? What of the nature of Rome, or a Roman, perhaps?

And Principally, there is the notion of interpretation. Gurdjieff noted the three strata of human awareness, as noted by P.D. Ouspensky in his book In Search of the Miraculous: Fragments of an Unknown Teaching...

You have the exoteric, who interpret things literally -- cataclysms, journeys, wars, plagues are exactly that, in every instance of iteration, from the mythical, to the news-worthy. Then you have the mesoteric, who intuit fractal and cascading relationships between such things, and others. Finally you have the esoteric, who utilize the same language and terminologies, but for different things. At times, you may find very good writers and translators of such things, who may impart to you the exact meaning of some interesting concept, with which those accurate definitions/translations transcend all three levels of awareness. But you won't exactly know what you're reading, or what is being conveyed, esoterically, since this last piece involves a different sort of appreciation...

Beyond these three issues of superficial investigation, when in consideration of the three layers of human strata, a curious individual may find that you, @palestine, may be standing on extremely firm bedrock, if you would only slightly reconsider your current understanding of the mythos of the C's Experiment. I will point you in the direction of a few readings.

The first is within the bounds of that classicist known as Thomas Taylor [Thomas Taylor (Tr. & Comm.). The Wanderings of Ulysses. Appendix in: Select Works of Porphyry. (1st ed. 1823); Frome: The Prometheus Trust, 1999 (2nd ed.), Vol. II of “The Thomas Taylor Series,” pp. 201-24]. His elucidation of the Odyssey, in light of Greek mythological and linguistic tradition, is something to consider, in my opinion.

The second is within the bounds of another, yet un-renown, classicist known as James Pryse. His interpretation(s) of the whole Christianity thing, in relation to the above, is not to be avoided, particularly his magnum opus, The Apocalypse unsealed : being an esoteric interpretation of the initiation of Iôannês (Apokalypsis Iōannou) commonly called the Revelation of (St.) John.

Somewhere between those two noted works, thematically, likely lies the fable, which was likely inspired by something, somewhere, in the forgotten annals of whatever happened long ago. While Pryse may offer a compendium of errata, regarding the peculiarities of what he writes in his extant works, whatever is still yet intangible to the modern reader, may be discernible through a related author who was around that era, who was somewhat knowledgeable on such matters and who was able to put it into a modern English for general readership -- that being Dion Fortune, and her work of Sane Occultism.

If there's other questions, then you might be able to find what you're looking for, with the items listed in my signature below -- if not fully, then eventually, I suppose.

Hello,

Thank you for your kind post.

To answer your question, I was looking for inspiration not long ago, pondering a puzzle without quite grasping its meaning. There was something to unravel, but nothing came clearly to mind. I wasn't even able to formulate what this was all about. Almost without thinking, I picked up my copy of "The Gallic Wars"—because "it's by Caesar", and because there's always sufficient potential for inspiration in a text related to the true Christ. Even if the influence is hidden beneath a few layers, it's technically possible to access, perhaps through prayer, the positive/STO aspect.

And then, during a moment of quiet reflection, without any particular direction in mind, I looked at the maps at the end of the book—the appendices. I saw the map of Alesia, and I thought to myself: what does all this mean? And then, I saw the illustration, which reminded me of a comet that had landed (I posted this image).

I thought to myself, "Hey... why not... If the Odyssey is really a book about the cataclysms of the YD, why not Caesar? And honestly, the battle descriptions are just too prevalent; I think there must be something else being said in this book."

That's what sparked this idea. I hope people won't misunderstand this, because I understand that it's not based on a scientific approach. Some will use this opportunity as a tempting stick. I won't really have a response to that, except something akin to disappointment for taking the easy way out.

Thank you for your ideas and suggested directions, which I find very creative because your approach considers several aspects of reality. There are people who swear by the scientific approach, and I can't claim to be one of them, at least not for my idea (for the moment). Your approach to the myth of the C's is very interesting to me—because you seem to have turned it into a method. It's very interesting, thank you.

I'm at the very beginning: I had an idea, and I'm doing some research on it. I'm sort of in a research and verification phase. As I said, I don't know if it's truly an objective idea. Perhaps not. I've received some rather categorical messages, which clash with a research and verification approach. Reading them, it seems I should abandon this research immediately "because I haven't been able to prove it to them". I'm somehow approaching something from a different angle. I have no other option but to search for it and then pray that it's right!

So I just wanted to present the "preliminary idea", with a few points. I'm more or less at that stage. It seems to me there are many threads where members are trying their hand at hypothetical research. I'm doing the same. I'm not claiming anything at all, for the moment. If people are determined to make me say that I'm asserting things, I don't have time for that, because it's dishonest of them. That's because... I don't know.

Furthermore, there's a whole wave of messages that aren't positive at all. Rather than trying to encourage research, they're taking the opposite approach, which is to shut things down. I think there's a fundamental approach that isn't strictly positive, and that consciously seeks to undermine and stifle effort. That's not how reality works, and I believe it's important to encourage people who are sincerely engaged in this process, while advising them to remain cautious. The attitude of "there's nothing here because you haven't convinced me" is too polarized for me. That's not how we should fundamentally treat others. I find it a bit too present in some messages.

For the moment, I'm trying to compare the texts. I'll look at the texts you suggested. This is because if mythological elements are explained and summarized in relation to the Odyssey, we could use them as a framework for other texts. I observed the principle of the Laurasian myth in a text by Laura. I was already familiar with Mircea Eliade's Myth. If there were indeed a person capable of embodying the original Mythical Archetype, it would be Christ (and less so Homer - unless Homer was, too, an STO incarnate).

I don't think Caesar left us a book explaining how a slingshot works. To then claim that his book deals with comets of the Younger Dryas is, of course, a huge risk. That's why I'm deliberately being vague, detached, cautious, and hypothetical. The number of messages demanding proof is pushing me to present my hypothesis as a confirmed assumption. It's tiresome.

I prefer to keep looking into this topic from time to time, which is what I'm doing now. Maybe I'll find something. Maybe not. In the meantime, I hope the other members will have done the same as me with other topics and that they'll have managed to come up with interesting, insightful ideas, enough material for new books for the forum!

 

[NCfugee]

I see a not that obvious consequence chain here. A guy describes places, in a book > those are real.

I've gone through the book several times. Honestly: don't you think that something is "off"? I mean - all the military, etc things? At some point, even if the style is okay, it's a bit nauseating. It becomes pointless. I mean this is so obvious that it becomes puzzling.

On the archeology point: several centuries after Caesar, much destruction, Atlantean tech, people dedicated to bury the Christ's legacy. Eh, why not tampering with the archeology? All we've got, from Caesar, is ONE bust. Only one. On the side, numerous things, and coins, etc. I wouldn't be stopping there.



I believe that there is room for an STO being, manifesting on the plane, teaching mankind about the big mattering events.

The Gallic Wars wasn't just a literary record of what happened, it was essentially a political text extolling Caesar's genius. The endless details are designed to show how brilliant he was; and he was. Was he a manifested STO being? He liked to think so, at least believing he was the (very distant) son of a goddess.

Maybe I'm over-reaching here, but Caesar didn't exist in a vacuum. I studied Roman History a long time ago under some very learned men who passed on their passion about the Fall of the Republic to many of us students. Admittedly, it's not hard to be fascinated by the titanic power struggles between a handful of brilliant, possibly psychopathic, individuals of whom Caesar was the most brilliant. Over centuries, scholars have dedicated their lives to unearthing the most minor details of Late Republican Rome and so, compared to his contemporaries, we do have extensive physical and documentary evidence pertaining to Caesar.

@Moine does have a point about the possiblity of errors about the Ancient World being mediated through the Arab cultures of the late Dark Ages, but there is enough corroboration through a number of different cultural written sources (Roman, Greek, Arab, Christian), which corroborate in turn with physical evidence, to shore up a coherent and cohesive history of the Late Roman Republic.

As for an esoteric reading of the Gallic Wars... Caesar's latin was famously clear and direct. Esoteric texts from the Roman Republican era are anything but clear and direct and not really Roman, more Greek or Jewish or Egyptian. Thus, attempting to impose a twenty-first century (pseudo-)literary interpretation onto an ancient latin text stretches credibility. Who would he be writing for, as no Roman would read his text as anything but a record of a brilliant military campaign and explicit political propaganda? If we just entertain the thought for just a moment that he was writing for a later audience, surely he would have been more explicit? Well, no, as he was expressly writing for the Senate to show off his military and political genius. That's what mattered to Romans. Military strength and political power, and Caesar excelled at both.

However, Caesar had risen through the Roman Religious ranks to become Pontifex Maximus (High Priest) in his early political career and met Druids in Gaul, so it is possible that he gained a form of esoteric knowledge, but as one of the most patrician of patrician Romans he was brought up to be a philosophical sceptic and to see religion as principally a tool for political control (sound familiar?) of the plebs, and divination and auguries, etc. were the machinery of the State to keep society under control. There is nothing that leads us to believe that the Roman elites would have been concerned with mass extinctions, cometary bombardments or cataclysmic floods, or even knew about them. Even now, the Younger Dryas event remains highly controversial in scientific circles... what could Caesar have done to convince any of his readers to take his 'teaching' seriously? Who would his audience be? Even after years here reading the C's, Laura's books and the posts from other learned forum members, it will take a hell of a lot for you to convince me that the Gallic Wars has an esoteric subtext.

Nevertheless, it's clear that you'll defend your idea tooth and claw, which is your prerogative. Good luck with your research.

 

[axj]

If your theory was that maybe Caesar's writings have deeper meaning that has not been discovered yet (based on him apparently being the main inspiration for the Jesus stories), it would be a much better approach.

Picking a very narrow and random theory that his Gallic wars book talks about past cataclysms and focusing mostly on that seems to be not a very productive or helpful way of doing research.

It is certainly possible to get inspiration to look into something very specific like that - though in that case it seems to be a good idea to do some preliminary research yourself first to see if there are any good, convincing clues or facts supporting this specific idea or theory.

The problem is that otherwise threads like this can become basically noise that is not helpful to anyone and wastes both your and other people's time.

And on the topic of respectful interaction and basic courtesy on the forum, you never apologized or clarified whether you still think that the forum is getting ponerized through AI use so that you had to leave in March. Now you are back and acting as if you never said those things:

Given the too high use of Ai on the forum, chances are that, indeed, the forum is right now undergoing a ponerization process. It cannot be else, otherwise, the ponerology section would be more alive.

There is nothing there, the last post dates 2021 or so, and the most crucial topics are literally forgotten and sunk, there, without any form of follow-up.

As above, so below. This is pretty unfortunate, and I wish you for a good remedy. This has nothing to do with me, and I don't need a crystal ball to foresee that things will just eventually go kaflooey. Emerite members will continue to leave, etc, new bossess will eventually seize power, etc etc

the basic ponerological model.

The result of endorsing AI on a forum intending to cultivate the mind would be the concordant consequence: brain killing. It is reasonable to assume that such work is already in progress - I am sorry that your statement which may have been valid at the time, about me seeing the devil instead of looking in my own mirror, may be off track.

There seems to be an over-reliance on AI around here. Are some members, by occurence, using "forum post generator" / "forum post analysis"? Admins? This would translate with a very quick demise. There have been very unnatural and insane reactions to some of my posts and an absence of reactions from the part of the admins. Such things, if duly considered, would have been deserving an appropriate answer, too. This shows me that something is slipping through the drops.

[...]

At St. Peter, a C will be waiting for you & will require firm & solid explanations & clarifications in regard of this license to go chatgpt. They will re-precise you that they had been warning you not to go, etc etc. I urge you, before I leave, than to proceed to an immediate full ban on everything AI on the forum, in order to get "the brain" back! I am sorry than to leave like that but I face as well the consideration of NOT participating in such an entreprise - because I will get hit. I will now log off. Sorry and good luck

One thing I will point out is that your posts are more understandable now than they were half a year ago, which shows that you have made good progress in that.

 

[palestine]

The Gallic Wars wasn't just a literary record of what happened, it was essentially a political text extolling Caesar's genius. The endless details are designed to show how brilliant he was; and he was. Was he a manifested STO being? He liked to think so, at least believing he was the (very distant) son of a goddess.

Maybe I'm over-reaching here, but Caesar didn't exist in a vacuum. I studied Roman History a long time ago under some very learned men who passed on their passion about the Fall of the Republic to many of us students. Admittedly, it's not hard to be fascinated by the titanic power struggles between a handful of brilliant, possibly psychopathic, individuals of whom Caesar was the most brilliant. Over centuries, scholars have dedicated their lives to unearthing the most minor details of Late Republican Rome and so, compared to his contemporaries, we do have extensive physical and documentary evidence pertaining to Caesar.

@Moine does have a point about the possiblity of errors about the Ancient World being mediated through the Arab cultures of the late Dark Ages, but there is enough corroboration through a number of different cultural written sources (Roman, Greek, Arab, Christian), which corroborate in turn with physical evidence, to shore up a coherent and cohesive history of the Late Roman Republic.

As for an esoteric reading of the Gallic Wars... Caesar's latin was famously clear and direct. Esoteric texts from the Roman Republican era are anything but clear and direct and not really Roman, more Greek or Jewish or Egyptian. Thus, attempting to impose a twenty-first century (pseudo-)literary interpretation onto an ancient latin text stretches credibility. Who would he be writing for, as no Roman would read his text as anything but a record of a brilliant military campaign and explicit political propaganda? If we just entertain the thought for just a moment that he was writing for a later audience, surely he would have been more explicit? Well, no, as he was expressly writing for the Senate to show off his military and political genius. That's what mattered to Romans. Military strength and political power, and Caesar excelled at both.

However, Caesar had risen through the Roman Religious ranks to become Pontifex Maximus (High Priest) in his early political career and met Druids in Gaul, so it is possible that he gained a form of esoteric knowledge, but as one of the most patrician of patrician Romans he was brought up to be a philosophical sceptic and to see religion as principally a tool for political control (sound familiar?) of the plebs, and divination and auguries, etc. were the machinery of the State to keep society under control. There is nothing that leads us to believe that the Roman elites would have been concerned with mass extinctions, cometary bombardments or cataclysmic floods, or even knew about them. Even now, the Younger Dryas event remains highly controversial in scientific circles... what could Caesar have done to convince any of his readers to take his 'teaching' seriously? Who would his audience be? Even after years here reading the C's, Laura's books and the posts from other learned forum members, it will take a hell of a lot for you to convince me that the Gallic Wars has an esoteric subtext.

Nevertheless, it's clear that you'll defend your idea tooth and claw, which is your prerogative. Good luck with your research.

Hello,

Yes, I see you raise (among other things) an interesting question, which is that of Caesar's consciousness in light of what the C's have revealed to us. Did he know? Was he aware? I think so, because I would say that an incarnation of Christ would imply this knowledge. But that's just a subjective hypothesis on my part.

You've raised some interesting points. Thank you. I think I'll study the books @Moine suggested before posting further.

@axj mentioned that the pirate episode came from Plutarch. I also need to look into his writings. I did some research and found Parallel Lives, in 7 volumes. It doesn't bode well for its authenticity. I've already looked at "those major series," and there's a lot of tampering in them. Dio Cassius, History of the Jewish War against the Romans, etc. There's also a series called "History of Constantinople." At first glance, when you see these books, with their medieval typography, you think they're valuable. Something I've noticed is that all these chronicles seem to have appeared in the 1800s. When I saw Plutarch, I thought, "Oh, the same old thing."

Thank you for your comment.

 

[palestine]

If your theory was that maybe Caesar's writings have deeper meaning that has not been discovered yet (based on him apparently being the main inspiration for the Jesus stories), it would be a much better approach.

Picking a very narrow and random theory that his Gallic wars book talks about past cataclysms and focusing mostly on that seems to be not a very productive or helpful way of doing research.

It is certainly possible to get inspiration to look into something very specific like that - though in that case it seems to be a good idea to do some preliminary research yourself first to see if there are any good, convincing clues or facts supporting this specific idea or theory.

The problem is that otherwise threads like this can become basically noise that is not helpful to anyone and wastes both your and other people's time.

And on the topic of respectful interaction and basic courtesy on the forum, you never apologized or clarified whether you still think that the forum is getting ponerized through AI use so that you had to leave in March. Now you are back and acting as if you never said those things:




One thing I will point out is that your posts are more understandable now than they were half a year ago, which shows that you have made good progress in that.

Yes, I think the question I could raise is whether there's steganography in the Gallic Wars.

After some thought, my thread has received so little attention that I'll do what external consideration requests. If what I'm saying is correct, it will be discovered one day. Perhaps it can wait. In any case, it doesn't seem to fit the forum, because otherwise I would have encountered different comments. Even if I am right, even if I am wrong, the echo is too weak.

Yes, about AI... I think it's an important topic that shouldn't be overlooked. Contact with an stuff that lies in the first place can lead to familiarization with lying. From there, to tolerance of lying, and then to its license, the path is risky. It's difficult for a sensitive mind to overcome these kinds of things. One day you wake up and lying will not seem as forbidden that it was previously.

I think that as long as AI is used, there will be some degree of ponerization, of course. It's inevitable if there's a pathological component to AI use.

Honestly, we don't need AI. We on the forum are quite capable of thinking and discovering things on our own. That's what's most good about it, after all. Developing an organ to channel C's represents the pinnacle of spiritual—and intellectual—use.

Perhaps we could establish a rule requiring users to specify if AI was involved.

Your previous post really made me think of AI, so I'm sorry if that wasn't the case. Look, I don't mean to disrespect anyone who uses AI for anything. But from my perspective, I see it as a VISA card—you get the idea. Like consuming sugar, associating with criminals, and so on. I believe it should be banned, out of respect for knowledge and spirituality.

I find that it goes against the forum's core values, which is why if I have to say anything about it, it won't be a half-measure, a soothing balm.

Furthermore, I think the conclusions the AI provides are things we could easily reach ourselves. It would take more time, that's for sure. The AI draws from the mainstream database. I don't think there's anything truly transcendent—or potentially transcendent, in addition. Could cross references, etc - but for the nitty gritty, well, we would have to tap outside of the main stream database.

If people want to use it, well, that's their choice and their freedom. But I don't see any real progress thanks to the AI. There haven't been any major discoveries since its use—and the real work is still done by hand, with a notebook.

I can accept and understand that you don't share my opinion.

But seriously, you don't think using AI poses any pathological risks? You were offended by my comments, so I apologize for that. It was more to warn people. Seriously though—I don't think the C's would be all smiles if they found out we were using AI. The old sessions show some hard-line minds. I noticed you're a former member. Me too. Back then, things were really straight on the forum, and education was tough. I don't think we could have raised the issue of cell phones without encountering opposition. Talking about AI or its use back then? Just imagine!

So I wanted to try and remind members of the "it's not on the list" ethos. In my opinion, this AI thing is something to be treated with fire. I've stuck to certain "values." The "anart" spirit? There are definitely some things that shouldn't be taken lightly. I hope that this won't marginalize too much and that this will not be a motion to pull me out, because it's not going according to the consensus.

 

[axj]

Yes, about AI... I think it's an important topic that shouldn't be overlooked. Contact with an stuff that lies in the first place can lead to familiarization with lying.

As Laura's experiment with Grok has shown, AI can also be used to reveal the truth. There are of course risks as in overrelying on AI and not noticing its biases or the errors it makes. But to say that AI "always lies" is not the truth either.

As an example, the Deepseek AI is very good at making complex orbital calculations (and checking them several times) which were very helpful to identify the path of the brown dwarf companion. It calculated when the brown dwarf entered and exited the heliosphere and agreed that this coincides quite exactly with the solar minima.

AI is certainly used for nefarious purposes too, just like the Internet in general or even simple tools like kitchen knives. What you do with it is up to you, the tool itself is neither good or bad without the context of how it is used.