ElizabethDempsey
Jedi
It's not the cradle but the craft that interests me :)
_http://www.jasonscradle.co.uk/downloads/JC003%20Issue%205.pdf
_http://www.jasonscradle.co.uk/downloads/JC003%20Issue%205.pdf
Clif High- halfpasthuman.com
- Thread starter crazycharlie
- Start date
shijing
The Living Force
Vulcan59 said:Hi Elizabeth,
Sorry but I fail to see how the link you provided is relevant to the topic under discussion.Could you care to explain?
I think she is referring to this:
un chien anadolu said:
The boat being used along with the cradle looks pretty hard to sink. Please correct me if my assumption is wrong.
ElizabethDempsey
Jedi
Clif High suggested that one item that could be useful in the event of major earth changes (described in his recent interviews and writings) would be a "Fully Enclosed Lifeboat." I googled that phrase and this is what I found. :)
Okay got it. Now here are some threads for you to check out. :)
Should we be focusing on survival???
Where To Move In The World To Be Safer?
Possible Courses of Action
Should we be focusing on survival???
Where To Move In The World To Be Safer?
Possible Courses of Action
Zaphod
Jedi
Hi everyone. I know this is my first post on the forum, so I'll introduce myself a little more formally later on.
I've been listening to Cliff High's various interviews, new ones of which seem to appear on YouTube on a weekly basis, from the time his name appeared in one of the Cass session-transcripts. He's obviously an intelligent bloke and has been interesting to listen to however, I have to say that his recent calamitous references to 2012, set off more than one or two alarm bells for me.
I think it's true, that people who make predictions of this nature, which seem to hinge on a certain date or time, are setting themselves up for a disappointing fall. It certainly seems to reflect my life experiences anyhow; for instance, I've lost count of how many times the world has failed to end even in my short 40 odd years of life. And let's not even get started on the wildly vacillating predictions I've heard over the same time period regarding catastrophic climate change by such and such a date, only to find when that date passes, that the universe just simply won't play ball.. I also can't help but think of the various Cass references I've read regarding future events being 'open' and of 'probability collapse'.
Of course conversely, it could be argued that perhaps 2012 is now sufficiently close that most other probabilities have indeed collapsed, but that's not the angle I'm hearing from Cliff, who implies that his 2012 disaster scenario has been a mathematical certainty for thousands of years. That just has a feeling of plain 'wrongness' about it.
Secondly, as I started listening to Cliff's interviews a couple of months back, I heard the build up to the auspicious October 25th 'change of language' scenario. Predictably enough to the sneering cynics amongst us, the date came and went and left a lot of people scratching their heads about why they were still thinking, doing and saying the exact same things they were two days prior. I must admit to being somewhat confused myself, about the lack of any sort of an event to mark the passing of this point of a global shift in human language. So I put my savings back in my bank account and tuned in to Mr High the following Sunday to find out what on Earth was going on.
Anyway, to cut to the chase, and let's be honest here, nothing happened. There was no turning point or global shift and although Cliff talked around this by saying that he wasn't predicting an 'event' for this date, I have to ask myself: without a globally visible 'event' of some description, how else are you going to get a global turn in language type? It seems unlikely that this would occur as a result of random happenstance or a low profile back-page advert for a rotisserie in the Sunday Herald. But even putting all that aside, the change simply hasn't manifested itself in any recognisable manner, so from within the context of the prediction, it's only reasonable to assume that it simply didn't happen.
After a couple of rather uncomfortable interviews, the 2012 disaster prediction entered the stage... and all of the difficult questions about October the 25th fell from the radar, to be quickly replaced by the all-consuming fascination with an end to civilisation as we know it. And if that isn't a prediction, tailored to perfectly 'capture and vector the thinking' of the majority of the 'Cliff High demographic', I don't know what is.
I'm trying not to cast aspersions here, but isn't the timing and nature of this data just a little bit too convenient for Mr High? I confess I haven't read his publications and he could have been talking about 2012 for months now, but I find it odd that an event of this magnitude, would've been evident in the data but left 'waiting in the wings' in his radio interviews. With information of that level of importance, you would think that his first and only interview would read something like this
Cliff High: Drink up ladies and gentlemen, the world is about to end... I've got more stuff about language-shift and aliens but none of it has much relevance any more .. Good night and God bless.
So it's reasonable to assume the data is recent. And I don't think it's timing or nature could've been more suited for taking his audience's attention away from the uncomfortable area of Oct 25
However, all that aside, I can agree that Cliff is probably 'on to something', at least conceptually. But I can't help but also think that what he's on to, needs a lot of refinement before the benefits outweigh the unreliability factor and Cliff's own expectations of what the data means. As for Cliff High's actual motivations, I don't know.. maybe honourable, maybe not .. either way he could still be 'on to something'. But I'm not entirely happy with the direction that recent events are taking my thinking on the question of motivation. Unfortunately, for now at least, it seems to me to be the most rational direction.
I've been listening to Cliff High's various interviews, new ones of which seem to appear on YouTube on a weekly basis, from the time his name appeared in one of the Cass session-transcripts. He's obviously an intelligent bloke and has been interesting to listen to however, I have to say that his recent calamitous references to 2012, set off more than one or two alarm bells for me.
I think it's true, that people who make predictions of this nature, which seem to hinge on a certain date or time, are setting themselves up for a disappointing fall. It certainly seems to reflect my life experiences anyhow; for instance, I've lost count of how many times the world has failed to end even in my short 40 odd years of life. And let's not even get started on the wildly vacillating predictions I've heard over the same time period regarding catastrophic climate change by such and such a date, only to find when that date passes, that the universe just simply won't play ball.. I also can't help but think of the various Cass references I've read regarding future events being 'open' and of 'probability collapse'.
Of course conversely, it could be argued that perhaps 2012 is now sufficiently close that most other probabilities have indeed collapsed, but that's not the angle I'm hearing from Cliff, who implies that his 2012 disaster scenario has been a mathematical certainty for thousands of years. That just has a feeling of plain 'wrongness' about it.
Secondly, as I started listening to Cliff's interviews a couple of months back, I heard the build up to the auspicious October 25th 'change of language' scenario. Predictably enough to the sneering cynics amongst us, the date came and went and left a lot of people scratching their heads about why they were still thinking, doing and saying the exact same things they were two days prior. I must admit to being somewhat confused myself, about the lack of any sort of an event to mark the passing of this point of a global shift in human language. So I put my savings back in my bank account and tuned in to Mr High the following Sunday to find out what on Earth was going on.
Anyway, to cut to the chase, and let's be honest here, nothing happened. There was no turning point or global shift and although Cliff talked around this by saying that he wasn't predicting an 'event' for this date, I have to ask myself: without a globally visible 'event' of some description, how else are you going to get a global turn in language type? It seems unlikely that this would occur as a result of random happenstance or a low profile back-page advert for a rotisserie in the Sunday Herald. But even putting all that aside, the change simply hasn't manifested itself in any recognisable manner, so from within the context of the prediction, it's only reasonable to assume that it simply didn't happen.
After a couple of rather uncomfortable interviews, the 2012 disaster prediction entered the stage... and all of the difficult questions about October the 25th fell from the radar, to be quickly replaced by the all-consuming fascination with an end to civilisation as we know it. And if that isn't a prediction, tailored to perfectly 'capture and vector the thinking' of the majority of the 'Cliff High demographic', I don't know what is.
I'm trying not to cast aspersions here, but isn't the timing and nature of this data just a little bit too convenient for Mr High? I confess I haven't read his publications and he could have been talking about 2012 for months now, but I find it odd that an event of this magnitude, would've been evident in the data but left 'waiting in the wings' in his radio interviews. With information of that level of importance, you would think that his first and only interview would read something like this
Cliff High: Drink up ladies and gentlemen, the world is about to end... I've got more stuff about language-shift and aliens but none of it has much relevance any more .. Good night and God bless.
So it's reasonable to assume the data is recent. And I don't think it's timing or nature could've been more suited for taking his audience's attention away from the uncomfortable area of Oct 25
However, all that aside, I can agree that Cliff is probably 'on to something', at least conceptually. But I can't help but also think that what he's on to, needs a lot of refinement before the benefits outweigh the unreliability factor and Cliff's own expectations of what the data means. As for Cliff High's actual motivations, I don't know.. maybe honourable, maybe not .. either way he could still be 'on to something'. But I'm not entirely happy with the direction that recent events are taking my thinking on the question of motivation. Unfortunately, for now at least, it seems to me to be the most rational direction.
I think that will all what it is said here and there on the web about 2012, it is very normal and natural that a system like Clif High's will detect something around that date. It is not a collective subconscious thing but a collective conscious thing. In this very case of 2012, the data are totally biased IMHO.
shijing
The Living Force
Hi Zaphod -- Welcome to the forum, and I'm looking forward to your introductory post!
I actually agree with you about both of your points. The fact that nothing apparently occurred in the window between October 25 and November 7 was, I think, a big embarrassment, and I agree that it came through in the interviews during and right after that period. This doesn't actually bother me so much, since HPH note regularly that while they are correct above-chance, they are still wrong a lot of the time. This was a particularly visible event to be wrong about, though, given the amount of build-up that they put into it.
I thought the 2012 show was more worrying, and that was a red flag for me. There is the fact that it was hosted as a special event on the Rense show, and the fact that the Patrick Geryl stuff seemed to come out of left field. I don't think that Clif ever actually endorsed 12/21/2012 as a specific date on the show (they have long forecasted events that go into 2013 and beyond), but the topic certainly dovetailed with the 2012 meme that I suspect is just now only beginning to be stirred up for the population at large, not the least by the movie that was just released this weekend.
I personally think there are two possibilities right now -- either HPH is a very slick Cointelpro operation, or they are sincere but being manipulated. I have said on another thread that what I find most impressive about Clif is not his actual web-bot work but his personal ethic and worldview -- it is possible that this could have been constructed for his audience, although I hope it is sincere. If he is sincere, then I think that his chain is being yanked at least by Rense (who, if Clif's modeling is legitimate, I would think would show up in his modelspace as a disinfo agent, in the same way that he has described Dan Burisch and Bill Deagle appearing), and possibly by powers higher up the ladder who can play with the timeline. I do find it interesting that if you visit the HPH site right now, the interview schedule is completely empty, which I have not seen happen for quite awhile.
Yes, that was the take that both Laura and anart had after the question was asked. In a way, the answer 'Definitely!' is more frustrating than something like 'open' or 'maybe', because you now have to wonder how exactly Clif is 'on to something' -- so still plenty of opportunity for us to practice discernment :)
I think this is a good point -- the HPH model is language-based, reflecting what is being talked about regardless of the veracity of the content. Just by being plugged into public awareness at the scale it is right now, it would be surprising if it didn't make some waves in modelspace.
Wouldn't it be interesting if that were it! I think that the way HPH forecasting works, the event should have been widely visible to the general population (were it the case that this was true for the birth of the FOTCM, but maybe in time...). But who knows? ;)
Zaphod said:
I actually agree with you about both of your points. The fact that nothing apparently occurred in the window between October 25 and November 7 was, I think, a big embarrassment, and I agree that it came through in the interviews during and right after that period. This doesn't actually bother me so much, since HPH note regularly that while they are correct above-chance, they are still wrong a lot of the time. This was a particularly visible event to be wrong about, though, given the amount of build-up that they put into it.
I thought the 2012 show was more worrying, and that was a red flag for me. There is the fact that it was hosted as a special event on the Rense show, and the fact that the Patrick Geryl stuff seemed to come out of left field. I don't think that Clif ever actually endorsed 12/21/2012 as a specific date on the show (they have long forecasted events that go into 2013 and beyond), but the topic certainly dovetailed with the 2012 meme that I suspect is just now only beginning to be stirred up for the population at large, not the least by the movie that was just released this weekend.
I personally think there are two possibilities right now -- either HPH is a very slick Cointelpro operation, or they are sincere but being manipulated. I have said on another thread that what I find most impressive about Clif is not his actual web-bot work but his personal ethic and worldview -- it is possible that this could have been constructed for his audience, although I hope it is sincere. If he is sincere, then I think that his chain is being yanked at least by Rense (who, if Clif's modeling is legitimate, I would think would show up in his modelspace as a disinfo agent, in the same way that he has described Dan Burisch and Bill Deagle appearing), and possibly by powers higher up the ladder who can play with the timeline. I do find it interesting that if you visit the HPH site right now, the interview schedule is completely empty, which I have not seen happen for quite awhile.
Zaphod said:
Yes, that was the take that both Laura and anart had after the question was asked. In a way, the answer 'Definitely!' is more frustrating than something like 'open' or 'maybe', because you now have to wonder how exactly Clif is 'on to something' -- so still plenty of opportunity for us to practice discernment :)
mkrnhr said:
I think this is a good point -- the HPH model is language-based, reflecting what is being talked about regardless of the veracity of the content. Just by being plugged into public awareness at the scale it is right now, it would be surprising if it didn't make some waves in modelspace.
JEEP said:
Wouldn't it be interesting if that were it! I think that the way HPH forecasting works, the event should have been widely visible to the general population (were it the case that this was true for the birth of the FOTCM, but maybe in time...). But who knows? ;)
shijing
The Living Force
Masamune said:
Oh, you're kidding! This was never listed on the main HPH interview list, so I missed it (it looks like this is the day after the Rense interview, so maybe they got set up in the same volley). Clif plugged a paper of Jay's not too long ago on Stanley Kubrick faking the Apollo lunar landings, so I knew he was aware of his work. I don't have time to listen now, but I will check it out later this evening -- thanks for the catch Masamune!
Well, it would make no difference to me if it turns out that he hasn't got the purest of intentions, I don't pay too much attention to prophesies.
However, we have to stroke everyone with the same brush, we can't dismiss Richard Dolan's appearance on a disinfo conference (Camelot), and then cry foul with Clif High (Rense etc). Seems everyone is seeking as large an audience as possible. Utilizing a disinfo platform doesn't proof much.
Clif is very closely affiliated with Michael St Clair though. How familiar are you with Michael St Clair, who incidentally had a bit of a fallout with Project Camelot?
However, we have to stroke everyone with the same brush, we can't dismiss Richard Dolan's appearance on a disinfo conference (Camelot), and then cry foul with Clif High (Rense etc). Seems everyone is seeking as large an audience as possible. Utilizing a disinfo platform doesn't proof much.
Clif is very closely affiliated with Michael St Clair though. How familiar are you with Michael St Clair, who incidentally had a bit of a fallout with Project Camelot?
The data collected by Cliff High and/or similar algorithms have an important
role in social control operations. A shock, trauma, or disinformation is initiated
by operators who need to measure the rate and amplitude of the wave from the
operation through the collective mind of humanity. This information is used to
calibrate future operations designed for mind control.
This information is useless to predict the future, unless it is understood as
a monitoring and calibrating operation by controllers, experts in psychological
operations. Cliff High may or may not be complicit in these designs. For us,
he serves a function of revealing methods of operation deployed to keep humanity
corralled within a frequency fence, or so it seems to me.
role in social control operations. A shock, trauma, or disinformation is initiated
by operators who need to measure the rate and amplitude of the wave from the
operation through the collective mind of humanity. This information is used to
calibrate future operations designed for mind control.
This information is useless to predict the future, unless it is understood as
a monitoring and calibrating operation by controllers, experts in psychological
operations. Cliff High may or may not be complicit in these designs. For us,
he serves a function of revealing methods of operation deployed to keep humanity
corralled within a frequency fence, or so it seems to me.
shijing
The Living Force
Hi E --
That's true -- I made a similar argument over on the other HPH thread: (http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=14379.0)
If Clif is sincere, then either one of two things is going on -- either he doesn't get who Rense really is (a little hard for me to believe, but maybe), or he does know and is just 'playing along' because Rense does reach a comparatively large audience.
I don't know too much, but my first impression of him is that he may be sincere, but not that street-smart in the world of New Age and disinfo, and doesn't really know what he's talking about even with his own stuff. I bought his book Light-Seeds last year, and couldn't make it to the end because it meandered so much and I never really got the point he was trying to make if there was one.
E said:
That's true -- I made a similar argument over on the other HPH thread: (http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=14379.0)
If Clif is sincere, then either one of two things is going on -- either he doesn't get who Rense really is (a little hard for me to believe, but maybe), or he does know and is just 'playing along' because Rense does reach a comparatively large audience.
E said:
I don't know too much, but my first impression of him is that he may be sincere, but not that street-smart in the world of New Age and disinfo, and doesn't really know what he's talking about even with his own stuff. I bought his book Light-Seeds last year, and couldn't make it to the end because it meandered so much and I never really got the point he was trying to make if there was one.
