sagiXsagi

distachya . the fruits are much juicier and sweeter and pleasant from foeminea

Thank for your kind words. I think its a really awesome discussion, and its kind of funny, considering the thread title.. Like you wrote in some other thread, facebook is not good for such discussions, but forums definately are. Some quick thoughts.... maybe its human inability to preceive it or grasp it on the whole, that results in so many different and wrong religious/theist/spiritual models. Wrong in that its never universal and differs vastly from person to person and from culture to culture. Or maybe we have to "let go" to hope we could perceive it some day. RE: Quantum mechanics + stuff. you additional arguements about how causality changes dont matter at all. Its still wrong. Its still about microcosmos . Its not so weird microcosmos functions in a totally different way that we cannot understand, hence the tons of mathematics... I cant help that all this stuff are coming from people that are pissed off at science and found a new way to challenge atheistic , rationalistic, materialistic philosophies that are on the rise in the modern world .. But I dont find anything worth of depunking there, in the same reason I wont go into details in the bible to prove to a theist that there is no god. Philosophically and politicaly, these kind of neo-theists are my enemies. Maybe more so than the old-skool theists and preachers. You parallel of myth and science (Ernst Cassirer quote) , is very interesting, as you put it. I will think a bit more on that. Also interesting, is what you call ""transcendental loop" ciao for now... (will propably revisit these points)

well I dont know what discord is, but from my FB experience, the best type of groups are private groups specialised in one subject, with relatively few (can be as few as 20 or 30, or even 8-10 people) but active members . I agree with northerner that SAB has somewhat that appeal, in a slower time line. Like he said, most visit once a month or rarer. Its pretty cool that is still alive though if its a chat - space, I am in

chiloensis sprouts

I didnt mention this before, but we have an awesome and active group in facebook dedicated to mandragoras, we are some ~35 individuals from all over the world, we trade, we discuss, we share our findings, analyze papers on the genus, we talk about sources of seed, and mostly we are having fun. We have even started a musical project dedicated to mandragoras!! So, a lot like what this place used to be.. If you are growing mandragoras or even starting now with seeds, and are interesting to join, PM me for more.

distachya fruits.. The female plans were much bigger than the male plant that provided the pollen.. remains to be seen is if it was enough to pollinate the whole thing or I would need a bigger plant next year (fruits/cones are currently maturing) The fruit is juicy , very slightly sweet, and dare I say tasty?? much better and with more flesh than foeminea, thats for sure. re/sinicas, still have no male, still waiting for one of my big ones to flower for the first time (and hope its male) re/chiloensis, unfortunately, the 2 biggy ones I have both turnt up male - got another two in the ground in the mountain house which are still small.. re/minima, the splitting of the tuft to propagate seems to have effected the flowering, only a few cones produced this year

Dunno.. I am in a creative streak those months and I thought its a pretty nice chance... maybe ephedra cultivation .. maybe mandragora stuff.. in the mandragora stuff I might get more people to participate in the video, as we have a really cool team of amateur research. maybe amanitas (I have made a pdf mini -guide on amanitas) .. or maybe all 3 topics (3 different videos) if I get this right and have enough juice and manage to do it technically .... Oh, well, nothing of these are ozzie, what do you mean by "apology it an Australian live stream" ??

thanks for the insight and for sharing your novel cause with the world

OK, I see.. I am mushrooms hunter myself. It seems I should read the Stamets book I bought a long time ago sometime. I have read about how myceliums could be used in construction, but I never got to read whats it about.

Very cool project. Wont the mycelium gradually eat away the structure??

wow thats amazing!!

can non- ozzies contribute??

well its a specialised topic in a specialized format.. I have been mostly alone in my quest with ephedra and compiling papers.. But lonely while it can be, it can also be very fascinating. Also takes time , as compiling some stuff is only the begining.

cool post. a thread on micro propagation would be interesting to read

All these were sent to me from a dude I met here, as a gift, most as small year-old seedlings in two separate occasions.. I am not sure were the seeds were coming from, possibly zelly/misplant. I grew them rather reluctantly because tbh I have long got bored with growing trichos, but eventually I got to tranplating them and papering them a bit, and got to the stage were I cut the now fatter tip and re-rooted, so these are that cuttings. Now this is the interesting phase! 1.starting from the older. this is scop x bridgesii and I think it sort of looks a bit like a PC. I have another that is more 'scop' shaped. 2. grandiflorus x scop. this is grafted on a small bridgesii stock. note the small variegata patch at the bottom 3. ss020 x scop .. the pattern Glaukus described appers to be true for my samples, I read his comments and then noticed that indeed, scop seems to play a dominant role either as a mother or as a father.. 4. scop x lumberjack.. this is of particular interest to me (as I understand lumberjack is an american bridgesii with periods of semi-monstrosa growth/ rib play) as the hybrid seems to be bluer than scop but also seemingly prone to rib play Does anyone have similar crosses with scop to show?

the scop x grandiflorus flowered red! I think I wrote this in reverse the previous time.

thats a cool format. pretty inspiring for retrospective reviews

I suppose all ozzies must know the real crime series Underbelly. I finished watching the 2nd season of Underbelly yesterday, which focuses on the period between 1976 and 1987 and taking place mostly in NSW and VICTORIA. As well as being a cool crime drama series, this series shows the cultural differences and especially the different levels of police corruption among other things between the 2 states. It also had me stopping and looking at the map of australia and reading about the climate in said states to better understand the story. Yes I am that kind of guy. If I like what I see, I might stop what I am watching to check for historical, geographical etc refences that are part of the plot and evem to check for unknown words and colloquialisms sometimes. One cant help but wondering: why was that, that such differences existed back then and propably still exists between the two states? does this come with a difference in political culture also? Was victoria more conservative ? I understand that this is common in federal states, and for people seasoned with american cinema and TV series the state a story takes place is often part of the story, either as cinematography/climate or as culture. Why was NSW the capital of pot in australia?? Was it the corruption or its a more libertarian state than say, Victoria? How does it link with the 'hippy' and post-hippy counter-culture? I consider it particularly interesting to see about the differences within a nation and reasons that might explain the differences: even in non federal states, different regions have their own particularities. In my mind this is part of the journey of exploring australia films. Austrialian cinema seems to take pride and focus on ozzie particularities, which makes the whole experience much more real and also educational. Which is one of the thrills to watch films from all of the world, especially films that through good stories , cinematography and acting manage to capture a realistic image of the local particularities. Lots , if not most of european cinema is like this, stuff from scandinavian coutries is very fascinating to me, also its very good cinema. In several occasions in the past I have felt that australian culture seems like a different version of american culture, but the more one discovers, the more he sees the distinct ozzie flavour.. I dont know if you can understand the appeal for a non native english speaker to explore different types of anglo-populated countries, in a world dominated at large by anglo culture which definately reflects in cinema and TV as well. I would also argue that some of the best quality american cinema and especially TV is the material that indeed features stories that focus on local particularities, from the infamous crime-drama TV series to non-mainstream american cinema. Its quite notable that this "focus on local particularity" is an integral part of ozzie cinema and I sense that it might be historicaly important for ozzie arts in general. I would love to read your comments.

^^ sounds fun sure , you know of Rick and Morty, right?? A fantastic TV series is Carnivale, which unfortunately was canceled after 2 seasons. It's still very special and unique, with lots of enthousiastic fans, me included. Excellent cinematography and atmosphere, Carnivale is pure magic. I am somewhat of a crime drama TV series completist, I have seen some of the best. Some Must-sees are: The wire, The shield, Homicide: life on the streets, Southland, True Detectives season 1, The killing (the danish version) Lots more to suggest, but these are solid, serious, crime drama, the best of the lot. Then you got the infamous Sopranos, which is excellent crime/comedy/drama. This stuff deserves the hype. The excellent prison-drama "Oz" .... the list in virtually endless, especially if we are talking about all possible genres. HBO has made some of the best.

LOL, this is a cool funny little thread.

cool replies. Hey Meditator, dont take this personally dude, my arguments might seem agressive at times, but it's just an attempt to compile the human experience under a single umbrella and then discuss. Part of what I was asking was coming from trying to compare the shaman way and the rational (atheist) way. Does it matter what colour transcendence has? I guess I might be wondering "how many different types of trance/exctacy/epiphany are there, and how do they compare?" . And since you mention euphoria, that's an interesting note (northerner says something relevant too) , what role does euphoria or dysphoria play in the way we perceive transcedent / mystical states of mind ?? Sorry if I took it too much into the atheist realm. But I think its cool even for such a topic to have an atheist perspective. Sorry if I came out as disrespectful to your thinking and beliefs. Keep it up, I will return to this thread..

Thanks for comment. I understand its a huge topic on a continent sized country, but I think its very interesting. Just to make clear, as the word "bush" is so widely used. You mean countryside / sparcely populated areas when saying bush?

https://seamac.info/sageseeds/

Bro its the same thing and the same discussion from the atheist perspective. Metaphysics are the same kind of stuff as religions and gods, you know, the same as psychedelic theism (f.e. cosmic entities etc). Largest difference is one of scope, metaphysics refer to beliefs not as powerful and as organised like a true organised religion. One could say that metaphysics is all the same mumbo jumbo without the political power that true religion has. But you said it yourself, a discussion on metaphysics needs mention of god. I admit, shamanic-inspired/derived neo-religions (meta-religions?) are a lot different in terms of quality in that the believer talks and experiences his 'god' directly, unlike the majority of the believers of established large religions. And then you have all kinds of hybrids, like for example a psychedelic theist which is also a christian. The possibilities are virtually endless. well its only science if we are measuring and monitoring with an EEG. Which would make it neurobiology and not theology. Lets hope in the future theologists will be more open minded (I doubt it) and will collaborate with neurobiologists, so that theology becomes a true science. That kind of ideal theology would examine meditation, psychosis, psychedelic experiences, mystical experiences etc the same way and would compare them. That would be awesome! ******** I like it that you brought the psychotic mind in the discussion. It's interesting what you say, that the psychotic atheist would have different types of hallucinations than a believers. You didnt state this clearly, but you seem to imply that a believers psychosis is more valid, more credible, more powerful and truer than an atheists. This is really interesting to think about. Makes you wonder if the tendency to be a rationalist is hard-wired in your brian and not coming from conditioning. Its also interesting that all states of mind like psychotic episodes, deep meditative states, apocalyptic experiences and psychedelic experiences all share the same neurobiology, they 'light up' the same passages in the brain. Could religiousness (belief in any form of metaphysics) be a direct or indirect product of different degrees of phychosis in the history of humanoids? Could this be a more complex phenomenon led by the evolutionary need of the species to believe in otherworlds? Is psychosis (and related pathology) the way of nature and evolution to create spiritual ideas and spiritual leaders? I have long wondered with this 'dangerous' question, what is psychosis "use" from an evolutionary perspective? What's the point of it? Is religion a milestone invention of humanity towards creating societies?? an inevitable step of apes that grow conscious brains? So, according to your thinking (correct me if I am wrong), psychosis and psychedelic drugs can have similar results, but the non-religious people cannot reach the same 'heights' as believers. Do 'metaphysics' , or any form of religious spirituality, or "mystical consciousness" REQUIRE that one is either a psychotic or consume psychedelic drugs? And if yeah, how does the rationalist / atheist fit if he is excluded from the "club" of the 'mystical'? If my train of thought about your assumptions is right, that would mean that his (the psychotic atheist's) lack of belief in the 'other' would be the only thing that prevents him from 'seeing'. Is believing a conscious choice? And also, are there REALLY psychotic atheists? So, leaving the psychosis arguement aside, what's the difference between a non-psychotic believers "mystical consciousness" and non psychotic atheists "spiritual trancendence" ? Is it only the metaphysical element?? And why would the metaphysical experience is superior to the non metaphysical one?? Can't an atheist have a 'mystical' experience, and btw what's 'mystical' ?? Why is the "wow" experience more worthy when its about cosmic entities than when its about another "type of wow"? Then again, if metaphysics / mystical consciousness require either you be a psychotic or the use of powerful hallucinations, or both, then how is any of it reliable? how do we know its not an illusion?? Do we even care? How do we tell the true OG shaman from a random bloke with illusions and hallucinations? ********** I also find it very interesting when I see how physics of the microcosmos fascinates people, notably religious people. With the popularisation of quantum physics and the large publicity of science's expensive attempts to find particles, we have seen the rise of a new school of meta-religious narrations. Clearly this whole new world of a microcosmos ruled by propabilities, a completely different kind of physics, fascinates people who believe in metaphysics. The same thing is propably happening and will happen more in the future with lots of cosmology's theories and concepts, like dark matter, dark energy, and more interestingly, different types of multi-verse's (various theories on multiple universes existing). Maybe its a matter of personal aesthetics, or maybe its my atheism, but I dont find the study of the structure of matter (microcosmos) that interesting. I dont feel it has so great existential power. Instead, I find it immensly interesting in the chemical level how a planet in a suns habitable zone can be like a huge machine that produces new elements and new minerals from the same building blocks. And how, like some poetically say, we are made from 'cosmic dust' , literally. Maybe I instictively stick to what McKenna had said because I am a realist: we need tangible ideas, not ideas as tiny that will go through the nets (microcosmos) or so big that we cannot process (the "cosmic whole"). Medium ideas/fish to take ashore and discuss/eat with the other folks. Peace

!!!!!!!!!!THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Over the years I have come to know oz through this forum initially, then from films. Last months I watched several more ozzie films, and wow they were ALL are amazing. Well I know how to chose films to watch, I have established a system many years ago, so I am sure I have seen some of the best , quality shit, yet all of them have very good atmosphere that shouts oz, which relates to both competent location shoots and what appears as pretty realistic casting / acting and fantastic scenography. Or its just me and as I am getting old and the good on-location cinematography amazes me even if the film is duller or even cliched for most people - yet ozzie films have a certain power in them, and dull would never be a way I would describe the best of the best of ozzie cinema. On the contrary. Bold, intense, powerful would be the words I would use. So you got Rolf De Heer, the more films I see of him the more I am impressed.. Well its a sad reality that no more people know this mans work, the numbers in imdb are devastating, but at least the dude seems to have been widely recognized as a pioneer by the film award circuit and film academia people. Thats really something in this weird world we live in. I have seen the following De Heer films, in the order I watched them: Bad Boy Bubby, Alexadra's project, The king is dead!, The tracker, 10 canoes. I mean come on!! Easily, he enters my short list of favourite directors that include Cronenberg, Almodovar, Solondz, Aronofski.. Each of these films is from very good to excellent to masterpiece on its own, but the films bare no resemblance with each other, both in content , genre, style, approach... But all of them are unique and original in some way and reveal a great artist that judging by the imdb numbers, is not really appreciated in Australia either.. As a major horror film fan I have of course seen 'Wolf creek' 1+2, which I found very good, and specially the 2nd part, hillarious in its more dark comedy horror piece. Also watched the wolf creek series which had also very good cinematograhy but didnt match up to the films IMO . I am sure I have seen several other ozzie thrillers / horror, some of the nature/survival kind, I remember a couple but not the names.. The depiction of life in the outback or the bush , at least in the films I saw, was gripping and very realistic. Good cinematography obviouly plays a role. Then of course you have Peter Weir, with many famous films - perhaps the most famous ozzie director with both quality and commercial films. I am sure there are interesting films of his I havent seen. But 'Dead poets society' and 'Truman show' are pretty fucking famous. I could not do a review of australian cinema without mentioning the little known horror/comedy social satire masterpiece "Body Melt", which is one of my earliest encounters with ozzie culture. I love this b-movie, almost a curiocity if you search about the artist/director Philip Brophy. Which makes Body melt make even more sense. I also saw 'Rabbit proof fence' the other day - again a fine combo of fine on location cinematography and realistic approach to a controversial subject matter. One of several films of the new wave of ozzie cinema that dealt with the dark heart of australias past. And then you got 'Wake in fright', which I watched yesterday. Wow. This was done from a canadian director, yet some might argue this is the most ozzie film of them all. This is one of the most extraordinary films I have every seen. You wouldnt expect me to say this for a 1971 film. During the years I have seen many if not the majority of the most extraordinary films covering a range of themes , genres and tones, but especially focusing on the extreme, violent, weird, darkly comedic, surrealist. This film is classed as a psychological thriller, but its actually a pretty straight forward drama. Well yeah its a thriller, or at least it looks as if it is, but even then its not thriller-like in the sense you would expect in a 70s film. Its more drama than thriller. What makes it excel is again the combination of the excellent scenography and on location cinematogrpahy with the bravery and determination of the director and actors to take it to the level they took it. Wake in fright, is exceptional in that it has several interpretations/ readings/levels. In that sense its a multigenre film, a thriller, a drama and a surrealist comedy, all at once. Sure, I must have a warped sense of humour to call this a dark comedy, but this amazing film geniously uses the isolation of the outback and the excellent tailored chacters of the mine town to drive our protagonist out of his comfort zone and along with him, us the viewers. I dont want to say more for fear of spoiling the amazing experience that this film is for those who havent seen it. I for one think this is so close to a masterpiece, that given the time it was filmed, it deserves the hype.. Its not unknown, but its not really known. At the end, this film is exceptional in that it divides, it provokes, and tells a pretty fucking awesome story while showcasing a piece of australia and mankind not often shown . It is also a film about alcohol. Never again have I seen a story dealing with alcohol overdose so realistically. Everything is amazing on all levels, and for me this film is the hype and maybe 100% times more. Deserves all the hype and then more. Understandably underrated, this is one of the best fucking films I have ever seen. And i have seen many "quality" films. I want to also mini-review "The tracker" by Rolf De heer which I mentioned earlier. This one is different and unique in that it had a soundtrack written for the film and each scene, De heer writting himself the lyrics and a singer of aboriginal descent singing. Also De Heer played alot with the narrating mediums in this film. He uses narration, then he uses the songs to imply characters traits, then he uses the songs to imply what the characters might be feeling. He also uses painting stills done for the film. Then this musical-approach more or less stops.. and like any Rolf De Heer film , you wouldnt guess where it is going, plot-twist or ending wise.. except if you already know him from Bad Boy Bubby. Before I end it, it, I know you people might suggest The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith + Walkabout which I havent seen yeah, but they're on my list.. Will definately see them. Also found 'They're a weird mob' but the lack of subtitles makes me hesitant. Here I should mention that when I first watched Body Melt, in 2002, from a VHS I bought in Berlin, Germany, a Dutch produced release of the film, I had a really hard time to understand what the hill-billies were saying in that hillarious scene. I mean, I got the central point, but hey - subtitles help us who dont speak english as our first. And then again there are so different accents.. There are some scottish films that you cant understand shit without subtitles. So yeah, thats it, if you want , suggest ozzie films for me and non ozzies who are interested in good quality ozzie cinema, Please, if you propose a film or several, say a few words about each and why we should check it out, without spoilers. Or, okey, just give us your list, mate.