2008 Crop Circles

[anart]

Interesting ... there also is a pentagon with patterns surrounded by two circles on the 14th, but no aerial shots yet, so hard to tell.

For the record, here's an aerial shot of the pentagon (pentagram) pattern - (14th of August)

 

[StrangeCaptain]

The circles on the outside remind me of Ark's computer simulation here (towards the end of the first post):

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=9338.0

 

[anart]

The circles on the outside remind me of Ark's computer simulation here (towards the end of the first post):

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=9338.0

And a stellar window (with the circle in the center) -

A: Remember, you do have cycles but that does not
necessarily mean cyclical. 3 Dimensional depiction of loop,
seek hexagon for more. Geometric theory provides answers
for key. Look to stellar windows. Octaon, hexagon,
pentagon.
Q: Are those the different levels of density?
A: No, but it relates. Geometry gets you there; algebra sets
you "free."

Or a gateway

Q: Okay, M*** asks further: The six mountains at Rennes-le-
Chateau form a natural pentagon surrounded by a circle. This
reminds me of ancient spell-casters surrounding themselves
with a circle when summoning spirits or demons. Was this
area set up as a giant gateway or place of summoning?
A: Gateways occur where the conditions are right.
Q: Is this area a gateway?
A: Window.
Q: If it is, do the five surrounding peaks contain or shield
whatever...
A: Contain is o.k.
Q: So, he is right, it DOES contain. Does this have to do with
Atlantean technology and energy production?
A: In an offhand way.
Q: Are there other significant natural formations that follow
similar patterns that we should be looking for?
A: Yes, of course. And they are numerous. Monument Valley
is but one example.
Q: Well, on the same subject: did Abbe Saunier put clues in
the Stations of the Cross in the Church at
Rennes-le-Chateau?
A: Some, but they are gilded.
Q: What do you mean by that?
A: You will see.
Q: Does the message involve all the Stations of the Cross?
A: Just look. Now folks, remember: Rennes-le-Chateau is a
means, not an end. Sort of like unlocking the trunk, expecting
to find the gold, and merely finding a map.

Or bridging the physical and ethereal?

Q: (A) How to bridge the physical and ethereal worlds?
A: Gravity is the key. One must formulate a hypothesis based
upon the quantum range of wave particulate transfer. In other
words, where does the wave go when it appears to disappear
into the very core of an object with a strong gravitational field.
Pentagon, hexagon, ya know?!?

And lots of references to UFT - and -

A: You are on the right track.
Q: (A) Now, this business about Sakharov, is this related, or
better, when I think about Sakharov, I think about his theory
that space, time metric can change signature; that space/time
geometry builds a kind of singularity, changes the algebraic
structure of the metric tensor; and I was trying to relate it to
changing of density at some point...
A: Yes. Sakharov knew the answer was in the pentagon.
Q: (L) Do you mean 'pentagon' as in the government building,
or as in the geometric structure?
A: Why do you suppose they are linked? Why is the
"pentagon" a pentagon?
Q: (L) I don't know. Why is it?
A: Answers are within your grasp.
Q: (L) When you say 'grasp,' does it relate to five fingers...
(A) or to the fifth dimension?
A: Yes, and what you possess.
Q: (L) What do you mean 'what you possess?'
A: The key is in this room and your office. But that is not the
only meaning. Suggest you begin your quest by looking for
patriots.

Speaking of the government building, The Pentagon - it could just represent the supposed dimensional window under it. However, the obvious question that pops to mind is whether Ark was working on something specific around the 14th? ;)

 

[mamadrama]

Isn't it spectacular? Here's just a little esoterica for consideration:

There are 5 points to the numerology of the higher body - what Paracelsus called the pentagrammic or Five-Fold Man. This corresponds to the Five Elements, Earth, Wind, Water, Fire and the fifth element, the Quintessence but it also pertains to the five pointed star of the Etheric.

So we see that Plutarch's "five branched" is more than man: once the human has been through the painful burning of initiation, he becomes the purified man, the man whom all dross has burned away. In alchemy - in which the burning away of dross to reveal the inner gold is a main theme - the pentagrammic man is called "the star of the microcosm," stella microcosmi This redeemed man - or woman - is a star which does not shine in the heavens (the macrocosm), but on the Earth itself, which is the realm of the little - cosmos, or microcosm.
Traditions of reincarnation maintain that Mankind consists of two systems, each of which penetrate, yet have separate existences. One system is that centered on the head, which pertains to thinking. The other centres on the human body, which pertains to Will. The mediaeval alchemists bound together these different systems by means of a numerology derived from Pythagorus and the mathematici, or astrologers, who linked the Etheric with the power of the sun.

 

[anart]

Isn't it spectacular? Here's just a little esoterica for consideration:

There are 5 points to the numerology of the higher body - what Paracelsus called the pentagrammic or Five-Fold Man. This corresponds to the Five Elements, Earth, Wind, Water, Fire and the fifth element, the Quintessence but it also pertains to the five pointed star of the Etheric.

Hi Laurel, what, exactly, does the 'numerology of the higher body' really mean - in real time - nuts and bolts? You've quoted 'Zelator' a few times in this thread and it might be wise to realize that while there are a few nuggets within that body of work, a lot of it is dross.

There is such value to Gurdjieff's Work, (and Fulcanelli's work) because it cuts through that dross to what is actually valuable and applicable to those human beings with a seed of a soul (and, theoretically, that is, perhaps, half) to Work with what and who they are to progress to a point of Seeing the unseen. It is a jungle out there and there is so much 'feel good', 'warm and fuzzy', 'smoke and mirrors' stuff to cloud the mind and vector attention. This 'stuff' is, in four words, 'The New Age Movement' - tiny nuggets of truth that are used to carry those seeking away into warm and fuzzies so they stay asleep; having gotten lost in the shiny filaments of imagination and wishful thinking.

It has been my visceral experience that the limitless vault of our potential is best approached through those things that do not make us feel warm and fuzzy - as long as humankind is focusing on levels above his/her current experience - instead of doing the excruciating Work of becoming Real where they are - they will forever remain asleep - exactly where those who do not have our best interests at heart, want us to stay.

It is rather an aside, but as I have noted previously, your posts tend to veer in the 'newage' direction - a powerful magnet indeed, but to get to the truth, those with potential must resist that magnet. At least that's been my personal experience - fwiw.

And, yes, this 'crop circle season' has been quite spectacular indeed - and there is likely more in store. :)

 

[mamadrama]

Hi Laurel, what, exactly, does the 'numerology of the higher body' really mean - in real time - nuts and bolts? You've quoted 'Zelator' a few times in this thread and it might be wise to realize that while there are a few nuggets within that body of work, a lot of it is dross.

Thanks for pointing this out to me, anart. I did not know "The Zelator," was such an sketchy source. I have just begun reading it and have found lots of interesting asides as well as more information about Fulcanelli, Gurdjieff, etc. but now that you have refuted it, I will stop referring to it here. Just for clarification of your question about "the numerology of the higher body," it was just a reference to an esoteric concept of the pentagrammic man. :)

 

[StrangeCaptain]

Hi Laurel, what, exactly, does the 'numerology of the higher body' really mean - in real time - nuts and bolts? You've quoted 'Zelator' a few times in this thread and it might be wise to realize that while there are a few nuggets within that body of work, a lot of it is dross.

Thanks for pointing this out to me, anart. I did not know "The Zelator," was such an sketchy source. I have just begun reading it and have found lots of interesting asides as well as more information about Fulcanelli, Gurdjieff, etc. but now that you have refuted it, I will stop referring to it here. Just for clarification of your question about "the numerology of the higher body," it was just a reference to an esoteric concept of the pentagrammic man. :)

I am not sure that Anart's goal was dissuade you form using Zelator as a source but to suggest one be very skeptical about it. Laura herself references it a few times with respect to Hedsel's rather poetic discussion of the way of the fool, some church art in Europe that depicts an 11-house zodiac, and mentions briefly I think a Fulcanelli anecdote in that book. Here is one link:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13e2.htm

I think the idea was to let you know that it is as sure as anything can be in this world that Fulcanelli and Gurdjieff have a much higher gold to dross ratio than Hedsel's work. On a similar note, a respected 500-page academic tome might have one interesting fact, which does at all make the rest of it quotable. that one fact may be quite important though.

There seems to be some need to know when to have tunnel vision and when to back up and look at the big picture when necessary when combing through all of this. Or perhaps more accurately... A knowledge of when to be skeptical and when to look at the material as a child might; without preconceptions and with novelty. I personally do not have this skill. Luckily, some around here do. Laura, obviously... Happy researching!

 

[anart]

I am not sure that Anart's goal was dissuade you form using Zelator as a source but to suggest one be very skeptical about it. ... I think the idea was to let you know that it is as sure as anything can be in this world that Fulcanelli and Gurdjieff have a much higher gold to dross ratio than Hedsel's work. On a similar note, a respected 500-page academic tome might have one interesting fact, which does at all make the rest of it quotable. that one fact may be quite important though.

Yep, that's it - thanks for the clarification, Patience.

 

[mamadrama]

which does at all make the rest of it quotable.

Would you clarify this sentence please, Patience? Did you mean this sentence as it is written or did you leave off the word "not" by accident? Thanks, and thanks for your response.

 

[StrangeCaptain]

which does at all make the rest of it quotable.

Would you clarify this sentence please, Patience? Did you mean this sentence as it is written or did you leave off the word "not" by accident? Thanks, and thanks for your response.

My mistake... It should read "which does NOT at all make the rest of it quotable." i.e., One might need one fact from a 500-page book, but it can turn out that there is not another useful fact or idea in the entire book.

 

[mamadrama]

It should read "which does NOT at all make the rest of it quotable." i.e., One might need one fact from a 500-page book, but it can turn out that there is not another useful fact or idea in the entire book.

So I guess that means you and anart do not find anything useful in my quote about the pentagram crop circle.
Ok.

But I think the crux of the concern, and correct me if I'm wrong, is really this:

It is rather an aside, but as I have noted previously, your posts tend to veer in the 'newage' direction - a powerful magnet indeed, but to get to the truth, those with potential must resist that magnet. At least that's been my personal experience - fwiw.

Well, given the lastest post here, I can see why you want to stay on top of that sort of thing but I do not think I am "veering" in a "newage" direction that is any cause for concern. Yes, I do read all kinds of resources (which I must for my work and my Work) and this forum is invaluable when it comes to vetting and discerning what's a reliable referrence and what isn't. That being said though, I do try to look at (some not all) ideas and information without any "preconception," neither good nor bad, as much as possible, while thinking with a hammer (hopefully), because that is the Way of the Fool.

The Way of the Fool is the way of the independent traveler on he Path of Initiation. Such a traveler may study under a variety of masters, yet will strive always to preserve his or her own identity and rarely undertakes vows of silence which will bind him or her to a particular school or teaching.
The most enduring arcane image of this wandering Fool is that found on the early Tarot cards... [Hedsel, 2000]

In the monastery of Santa-Maria-la-Real, Najer, La Rioja, there is a 15th century carving of a fool. He has two dogs at his feet similar to the Fool in the Tarot deck. But, the interesting thing about him, as Mr. Hedsel points out, is that he wears a robe which is so designed as to fall open at both front and back. In this way, his private parts are always visible. He is a "naked fool."

His nakedness is a sign that the true Fool is prepared to show those things which others prefer to hide. Those Fools who show the way to that higher vision arising from initiation are often seen by the Sleepers as Foolish. (The Sleepers are those who have not elected to follow a spiritual path. They are content with the realm of appearances, and want only to be left alone, to sleep.)

...A man or woman's life reveals the archetypes they have followed. That's why the Fool is prepared to go through life naked to the world, knowing that the lower is nothing more than a reflection of the higher....

The Fool progresses only by means of the questions he asks...

So hopefully, this addresses your concern and does not unleash a host of nonsensical new age posts on the forum. I do appreciate your insights and discernment.

But, we digress from the topic... So 'nuff about me, ;) let's talk crop circles :D

 

[anart]

So I guess that means you and anart do not find anything useful in my quote about the pentagram crop circle.
Ok.

I didn't said any such thing and you seem to be missing the point, a bit reactively.

But I think the crux of the concern, and correct me if I'm wrong, is really this:

It is rather an aside, but as I have noted previously, your posts tend to veer in the 'newage' direction - a powerful magnet indeed, but to get to the truth, those with potential must resist that magnet. At least that's been my personal experience - fwiw.

Well, given the lastest post here, I can see why you want to stay on top of that sort of thing but I do not think I am "veering" in a "newage" direction that is any cause for concern.

As far as the discussions on this forum and approaching an objective understanding of reality, yes, it is a cause for concern. It is about vectors and Dreaming. However - there is no need to fall into black and white thinking here as if you are being attacked. You are not. You left the forum for several months at one point due to this same type of 'feeling attacked' reaction, though on a larger scale, regarding your donations to soldiers in Iraq. If you feel a corn has been pressed, then it might be worthwhile to try to get to the root of that identification.

As you know by now, this is a research forum with a very distinct purpose - approaching an objective understanding of reality and ourselves and that there are millions of ways to be diverted from that path - one of the most common, for people who are looking for answers outside of the normal 'range' of available information, is vectors and disinformation in the Newage movement. This has been discussed at great length. All we are trying to do here is bring your attention to the sign posts on the path, and away from the fairies in the trees.

 

[Windmill knight]

My thought is that if crop circles are a language, then this language is the same from one to the other (from the same source) and one has to find the mental key to deceifer this language.
Does anyone know if such a study has been done somewhere?

The closest to what you describe, that I'm aware of, is the analysis that can be found in here:

http://www.kornkreise.info/schindler/index.html

Click on "pentaframe" (one of the icons on the left), and then look at "the sequence" and "evolution and geometry". It's quite interesting, and I do think this guy is into something.

Oh :O I see, blades rather then waves! :/

I don't see blades in there.

 

[mamadrama]

However - there is no need to fall into black and white thinking here as if you are being attacked. You are not. You left the forum for several months at one point due to this same type of 'feeling attacked' reaction, though on a larger scale, regarding your donations to soldiers in Iraq. If you feel a corn has been pressed, then it might be worthwhile to try to get to the root of that identification.

Nope, I don't feel attacked, just trying to clarify your post.

All we are trying to do here is bring your attention to the sign posts on the path, and away from the fairies in the trees.

I appreciate that :)

 

[StrangeCaptain]

So I guess that means you and anart do not find anything useful in my quote about the pentagram crop circle.
Ok.

I didn't said any such thing and you seem to be missing the point, a bit reactively.

You seem to be in a loop of black and white thinking that has you reacting to what we are pointing out, that our criticism somehow refers to everything you have written. Actually, we were elaborating on a principle that is applicable to this thread but also to all research in any area. We were simply saying that one useful data point does not negate the need for questioning other data from that source.

Let's look at a particular example. Hedsel points out that a sculpture in a particular church implies the use in the past of an 11-house zodiac. Some of our interests in this fact are that it is lateral affirmation of a C's comment, it now allows us to see this 11-house zodiac as a signature for certain cultures, and it allows us to ask a specific question, "Why the change from 11 houses to 12?" BUT... Just because this fact was useful does not automatically validate Hedsel's discussions of other topics.

What is the difference between the this data point and others she did not use? The 11-house zodiac point had context from OTHER research Laura had done. The other things in Hedsel's book did not have a compelling context with respect to Laura's other work.

The way you reacted to what were pretty clearly elucidated statements might indicate there are some interesting lessons for you here.