Introduction

domwatts23 said:
I do not have a blog. I am not a new age channeler snake oil salesman. I do not want to 'draw anyone in'. I merely intended to put some information up for discussion. In doing this, I was shown some interesting/abhorrent aspects of 'myself' which I must work on. I am grateful for that.

Please allow me to clarify. I didn't mean that you were necessarily doing it consciously - it's the flavor of it that I am remarking on and the fact that that flavor attracts a certain mind set. That's all. At this point, I don't think you were doing it consciously, I was just noting the pattern, as it's a very common one.
 
domwatts23 said:
I do not have a blog. I am not a new age channeler snake oil salesman. I do not want to 'draw anyone in'. I merely intended to put some information up for discussion. In doing this, I was shown some interesting/abhorrent aspects of 'myself' which I must work on. I am grateful for that.

(Just as I was about to post my reply, I saw anart's reply and she addressed what I was thinking too- the part of doing something unconsciously).
I will post my reply in order to put out my perspective on your posts, domwatts23.

Umm... If I read anart's post correctly, she never labeled YOU as a "new age channeler snake oil salesman" (she was describing their modus operandi), and maybe you don't have a conscious intention to "draw anyone in" but looking at it from my perspective I think you're doing it unconsciously. If you allow yourself to stop and take a step back in order to reflect and really THINK about everything that has been said to you here up until now, then maybe you will realize the context of anart's post and what she meant with it. And lastly, your attitude of gratitude (for exposing your self importance here in this thread, and pointing out the contradictions in your posts) sounds to me like a case of false humility. Please don't take this personally, it's just the sense I get from reading your posts. I may be wrong though...
 
Thanks for your replies. I did not mean it to come across that I had taken your comment personally anart, I'm sure you are completely correct. I can see what you are saying. Denis, thanks for your opinion and I will reflect upon it. I really don't think, at this stage, that it is false humility as I am really aware of how difficult it is to see yourself completely honestly; friends will not point out things which they can see for fear of offense. Self-observation without outside help is nowhere near as effective as the methods used on this forum, and I can genuinely see their value. However, I will still, as I said, take your comments on board.
 
Hi domwatts23.

Seems like much apologies being thrown around. All I know is from my experience with shock. Grow, learn and progress. I have seen many come and go. Many agendas and sly words. If you are sincere, this is the place to be. If you are not sincere, then don't waste your time, nor ours.

edit: spelling again, again, and again... :P
 
domwatts23 said:
Thanks for your replies. I did not mean it to come across that I had taken your comment personally anart, I'm sure you are completely correct. I can see what you are saying. Denis, thanks for your opinion and I will reflect upon it. I really don't think, at this stage, that it is false humility as I am really aware of how difficult it is to see yourself completely honestly; friends will not point out things which they can see for fear of offense. Self-observation without outside help is nowhere near as effective as the methods used on this forum, and I can genuinely see their value. However, I will still, as I said, take your comments on board.

Maybe you should do less apologizing and explaining and more action. Dont beat yourself up as we all have been in your shoes at one point in our life. So, you don't have to constantly explain or apologize because we've been there. I think everyone is more concern with your actions then your words.

My two cents.
 
Hi domwatts23 I must say that I must also have more self-importance than I previously thought not that I ever felt that I didn’t have some, as the most difficult task that any of us face is teaching ones’ self objectively . Apparently your post was full of hooks and traps that I failed to see however I’m not sure what that has to do with your 10000 words. You and your friend were networking and perhaps it is not seen as that by others. I like you have been an avid reader of SOTT for about six plus years but felt I had little to offer and therefore have posted very rarely. In the meantime I have researched continuously and feel that I have made much progress with a small group of people that I network with. I research as much as I can but each one in the group has somewhat different interests and therefore come to discussion from varying different directions and viewpoints. What has become apparent is that everything is connected to everything else and therefore if you have any sacred cows like the law for example then you will miss a crucial part of learning and be stalled at that point. You see it is not so much what you believe that can hurt you or stop you, as what you KNOW. To believe is to believe in possibilities and they can change but to know is a subtle but crucial difference that can make change (learning) difficult if not impossible. This is similar to the subtle difference between empathy and pity. In years gone by I had many teachers and sometimes some courses would overlap some subjects so I would be required to sit in a class of study that I had already studied. That’s when you notice that when a novice student asks a hard or uncomfortable question that the teacher does not know. I have noticed that at that point one of two things happens: 1.The teacher admits that they do not know the answer and perhaps they can find out and get back to them. 2. The teacher gives them a BS answer.
Having said that we can all be teachers and we can all be students. I posit that when a teacher stops being a student then he ceases to be either.
 
Let me add at the end of all this back and forth that the original experience you posted about is not that uncommon in the lives of certain people. The question is: what is at the root of it? I've heard of it happening almost exactly as you describe from abductees. Of course, the question as to whether they were really abducted or just subjected to some general program being beamed out and picked up in their subconscious and unpacked to their conscious mind, is still open. In one case, I do think that the woman experienced a military abduction because there was forensic evidence, but in other cases, it really does seem to be possible that a certain psychological/emotional state was being produced as a result of some sort of mind control waves.

What about the behavior of all the people around you? What was happening in your environment? In the global environment? That is, were there any other phenomena occurring anywhere that might be linked?

Going the other direction, assuming it was a form of telepathy or limbic resonance, one still needs to analyze it in similar terms as the above.

Finally, the most important thing is this: what is the fruit of the dynamic over the longer term?
 
I think it's an interesting situation - watching who responds to the bait of domwatts23. Loud John responded, as did a few others - there is a certain flavor to domwatts23's posts, see - and it hooks in certain minds. It isn't a matter of whether or not the information offered may or may not be true or helpful - that's not the draw - it's the 'mystery of it', the enticing 'otherworldly' aspect - this is how the vast majority of newage channeler snake oil artists get their followers as well. Certain minds respond to that bait very emotionally and just want to read it because it's 'mysterious' - the signal to noise ratio isn't a factor in their decision. It all comes down to a lack of discernment - but even before one develops any level of discernment, it all comes down to hooks and bait and what a mind is attracted to. So, it's just interesting to observe.

Really ?

Is it not important, if not essential to consider all points of view to form a proper context, rather than blind conjecture - I can't see why at least considering "the bait", as you call it, would in anyway be harmful to anyone here... In fact without considering it ( which you instructed domwatts23 NOT to do ) this discussion seems incomplete.
 
For those who would like to explore the potential of "weak signals" and their importance to creative breakthroughs I might suggest a book below by an interesting author, Manu, who expands on the concept of "emerging signals" and "signal amplification".

_http://www.peachpit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0321413652
 
- I really think it could be a need/an option to fully consider what domwatts has written from:

-any and every possible perspective, ..including the mirror of all perspectives, which is the only real sketch of any hidden elephant being explored by blindfolded persons in every position.

- Also in my reading I can't find an objective account of what it is in this that 'matters', and I needn't, nor may I be able to be aware of or see it, ...but that is the context of the mirror, which is the same mirror for awarenesses which manifest every possible limit within the range of full individuality.
The question of what 'matters' about domwatts experience/the thread/all existence itself, won't be experience as the resolution of all intentional steps by any process which is motivated by what is experienced presently, and I suspect can't be deduced/calculated from channeled, collected knowledge, it is experienced at the moment where the context of this discourse and intent is destroyed, or eclipsed. The 'noise' that has to be kept down will not be correlated to the ammount of words/concepts expressed.
 
Happyville said:
I think it's an interesting situation - watching who responds to the bait of domwatts23. Loud John responded, as did a few others - there is a certain flavor to domwatts23's posts, see - and it hooks in certain minds. It isn't a matter of whether or not the information offered may or may not be true or helpful - that's not the draw - it's the 'mystery of it', the enticing 'otherworldly' aspect - this is how the vast majority of newage channeler snake oil artists get their followers as well. Certain minds respond to that bait very emotionally and just want to read it because it's 'mysterious' - the signal to noise ratio isn't a factor in their decision. It all comes down to a lack of discernment - but even before one develops any level of discernment, it all comes down to hooks and bait and what a mind is attracted to. So, it's just interesting to observe.

Really ?

Is it not important, if not essential to consider all points of view to form a proper context, rather than blind conjecture - I can't see why at least considering "the bait", as you call it, would in anyway be harmful to anyone here... In fact without considering it ( which you instructed domwatts23 NOT to do ) this discussion seems incomplete.

I think it all comes down to what you do understand by "consider all points of view", this is a research forum based on objectivity, that's what we strive for, domwatts23 post is full of read flags regarding the nature and result of the event.
There is an evident fascination and identification, that led him to lose sight of immediate reality and external consideration, the post is also plenty of signs of an ego driven motivation full of self importance, this has blinded him enough so as to loose perspective and forget about self questioning and end seeing himself as one of the many self-appointed keepers of knowledge ready to summarize "10000 words of understanding of the universe".

We need to learn how to see this signs and directly relate them with the inherently contradiction for a fruitfull understanding and sharing of true knowledge. That is discernment.
 
this is a research forum based on objectivity,

objectivity = undistorted by emotion or personal bias

Don't understand how the "matter" is objectively defined as worthless having not been scrutinized.

Seems:

domwatts23 post is full of read flags regarding the nature and result of the event.

to me that "red flags" could be assumptions / speculation? - which may or may not be valid - is this "objective"?
 
Happyville, why are you reacting so emotionally to this? Please re-read the thread and see if you can understand what has actually been said here and what has not been said, because you are confusing the two.
 
The things which came about from our discussions were intriguing. I did not mean for it to come across that I thought I had been made privy to universal secrets unknown to anyone else by some divine force; yet this seems to be how it has been interpreted by some. Undoubtedly, this is partly my fault due to the way I described the experience in my first post on this thread. However, I never looked at it this way.

Ever since encountering the Cassiopaean experiment, for some reason all of the information coming out seemed to ring true for me. It seemed valid. I would read transcripts day after day, questioning the information but still in the back of my mind feeling as though there was 'definitely something to it' (like many others I'm sure). Thus, I accepted that it might be the case that 'gravity is god' and that 'we have been tempted into limtation by higher dimensional entities', but obviously never understood HOW and WHY these things might be the case. The more I read the more I thought I understood, but without 'active mentation' regarding the precepts, my understanding was only increasing at a very slow rate.

The experience I speak of was a catalyst for an increase in understanding for my friend and myself. Through this conversation, we were coming to conclusions independently which support not only all of that which the Cs say, but also many things which Gurdjieff and others spoke of. Not only this, during the exchange we were bringing into discussion notions and ideas which we had never thought to analyse before. Lo and behold, any topic which was brought up would eventually come full circle back round to something said by the Cs. As you can imagine, this was all rather interesting for my friend who had NEVER even entertained a single one of these ideas before. I do not doubt others here have had experiences of a similar nature, which have 'crystallised further in them' understanding regarding these matters. For me, this experience brought some much needed clarity regarding certain matters. Before this, 'unstable gravity wave' was simply 3 'clever sounding words' which I believed meant something significant. To a certain extent they still are, but they hold a lot more weight (no pun intended) for me now. I can now see why it is 'unstable'. I had accepted that a 'wave' might be coming, but had not, IN ANY WAY, grasped the enormity of this, etc.

Laura, I thank you for your post. I was eager to hear your thoughts on this matter. The long term result of the dynamic is, indeed, the most important question but as to this I am currently not sure. I will endeavour to find out any environmental factors which may have contributed to the experience.

I apologise for possibly repeating myself here, but there has been a lot of discussion of what i mean and what i am trying to say; so i thought this might clarify slightly a couple of things.

As a side note, somebody who reads this may be interested in one of the things which came up during our discussion. (one of the things whose theme has already been discussed by laura)

What is somebody saying when they say, 'whats the point?' What do they mean? Why do people want to see things, events, relationships, as a point? Relating thoughts on this subject to the principles of visualising higher dimensions (re: imagining the tenth dimension - youtube videos) resulted in some fascinating conclusions for us. Additionally, it all seems to relate to the soul's journey to 'enlightenment' and 'realising one's own nothingness'.

Thanks to all who have/are contributed/ing to this discussion.
 
I also have a question which I am intrigued about.

The Cs say 'deja vu comes to you compliments of 4d STS'

What does this imply? What are 4d STS's 'plans' (if you could call them that) in deja vu? Why does it happen? Any answers appreciated (to a certain extent!)
 
Back
Top Bottom