Jump to content
The Corroboree

The Dude

Members2
  • Content count

    1,817
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Posts posted by The Dude


  1. Now the tin foil hatter will say that due to the spread of conventional contrails lingering as they do, this is the perfect cover for dumping toxins / metals / whatever it is that they're spraying.

    The idea that a small amount of water vapour could cause a chain reaction of condensation always seemed to make sense, although I would always discount this logic for that dreaded feeling that the powers that be are intent on poisoning me. I still maintain my paranoia that there may well be malicious intent (control trip) behind at least some of the phenomenon.

    I saw the strangest thing on youtube (cbf looking it up now) where there appeared to be a darkened line through the clouds on the same trajectory of a plane apparently spraying chemtrails, like it was following this path. There was discussion on possible holographic projections to explain this weirdness, it didn't seem to make any sense in any case. A while later I saw the same thing with my own eyes, I've got no idea on an explenation. Anyone ever see anything similar?


  2. The thing is I think self sustainable living to be a much more pleasant alternative then slaving away to feed a system that doesn't support you. We accept our rations from nanny state and barely scrape by, where living in harmony with nature we would all have abundance. A wage is a pathetic replacement for real autonomy.

    It is a hypnotic spell, no more. Sure it is a hard spell to break, but if possible we could much better manage the land and use resources more efficiently. It is a lack of purpose or meaning, a lack of self actualisation that we medicate with the capitalist distraction, like it was some kind of great thing worth supporting, we all know we're wasting our lives away feeding the system, but it seems that this is the only way. We distrust the liars and thieves in government yet believe them that this is the only way. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful tool.

    Tripsis, by your own admission it is our over consumption of resources and bad land management that is the issue, not overpopulation. It is not that we are overpopulated per se, only that this wasteful way of living is exacerbated with a larger population. The crazy thing about nature is that it feeds itself, instead of rampant parasitism, a symbiotic relationship would accelerate exponentially into over abundance just as we have accelerated towards scarcity through the habit of over consumption.

    2c


  3. Great to hear things went well!

    Haven't seen you at a few meets was getting a little bit worried, then saw a recent post of yours and figured is allgood!

    See you at the next meet!


  4. If your doctor told you that you had cancer and Lord Christopher Monckton told you to ignore their advice would you listen to him? What if he told you not to immunise your children or drink fluoridated water?[1]

    It's interesting how many people are unlikely to trust him for personal advice but who seem willing to trust him for planetary advice. [It is interesting, has the author got the figures of how many are unlikely? What a totally made up argument!]

    In preparing to debate the world's most vocal climate change sceptic many of his opponents appear to underestimate his communications ability and overestimate his scientific knowledge. In turn they enter the debate keen to set the scientific record straight when the debate format means the cards are stacked against them.

    Let's face it, if the House of Lords can't convince him that he is not a member of that house then what hope does a sincere scientist have of convincing him, or the audience, that the complex science is right and the entertaining guy with some tricky questions is wrong.

    The problem for the scientists is that while it only takes a minute to start a bushfire it can take a week to put one out. Monckton's rapid fire crazy questions and his demand for more and more specific details are a simple, but effective, device to ensure that scientists look anything but relaxed and comfortable.

    And why, from the conspiracy theorists point of view, don't they look relaxed? Because they have something to hide!

    According to NASA, the CSIRO and the international academies of science climate change is already happening, is caused by humans, and is going to get a lot worse. It's possible that they are all wrong and Lord Monckton is right. It is possible that it is all part of some giant conspiracy, but if it is one, it is a far bigger conspiracy than the sceptics usually acknowledge.[2]

    John Howard accepts the science of climate change and while he was adamant that he wouldn't ratify the Kyoto protocol he proposed the introduction of an emissions trading scheme in the lead up to the 2007 election. Warmist.

    Ralph Hillman, the head of the Coal Association, Mitch Hooke, the head of the Minerals Council accept it and Marius Cloppers, the head of BHP not only supports the science of climate change, he supports the introduction of a carbon tax. Warmists.

    The framing of climate change in Australia as a left-wing issue is as unhelpful as it is inexplicable. Around the world conservative governments have accepted both the science of climate change and the need to act. Most of them support the idea that a carbon price is an essential element of an efficient plan to do so. [plan for what?]

    Conservative governments in Australia have been obsessed with the need to repay public debt, ostensibly in order to leave a better future for our children. In order to repay such debts it is inevitable that societies must make some sacrifices today in order to deliver benefits in the future. But somehow, conservatives in Australia manage to argue that it would be unfair to ask today's taxpayers to pick up the tab for protecting tomorrow's environment.

    It gets worse. Conservatives are, as a rule, conservative by nature. They don't like to take big risks. They insure their cars, they insure their homes and they insure their health. When they don't crash their cars or their house doesn't burn down they usually focus on the peace of mind they purchased rather than the money they wasted.[3]

    When it comes to national defence the same applies. We spend more than $20 billion per year on defence. We are currently planning to spend $50 billion to buy 12 new submarines. That is more than the cost of the National Broadband Network that the Coalition is so worried about. But where is the debate about our need for 12 new subs?[4]

    When it comes to national security, or protecting our homes, most people tend towards the 'better safe than sorry' frame of reference.[5] But unfortunately in Australia it seems we are willing to bet our house that Lord Monckton is right.

    Another argument against acting on climate change favoured by Australian conservatives is that we should wait because we can't save the world by ourselves. Lord Monckton, of course, goes so far as to estimate what he says is the tiny impact on the world's temperature associated with Australia reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Such an argument is an obvious nonsense.

    When John Howard committed a small number of Australian troops to the war in Iraq he obviously didn't believe that even if we only provided less than 1 per cent of the troops we couldn't really make a difference. Indeed, rather than wait for the sanction of the UN [or the Australian publics consent] John Howard pursued the course of action that he felt was right. Given the imagined threat of weapons of mass destruction, delay, we were told, was not an option.[6]

    As for Lord Monckton's mathematical modelling of the impact of Australia's emissions on the world's temperature, suffice it to say that it falls at the first hurdle of 'garbage in garbage out'. The underlying premise of Lord Monckton's 'modelling' is that if Australia is the only country to act, how much would our actions achieve. Given that his own country has recently announced their intention to reduce emissions by 50 per cent by 2027 his 'results' are obviously irrelevant.

    The world's leading scientific bodies tell us that the world is warming, that it is caused by our pollution and that unless we reduce those emissions the world will get a lot hotter in the next century. Just as a cancer patient could shop around until they found a doctor who assured them they were well, so too can we trawl the internet to find the conspiratorial claims of Lord Monckton.

    There is of course a chance that Lord Monckton is right. Maybe NASA, CSIRO, BHP and John Howard are wrong. Maybe, as Lord Monckton suggests, scientists are simply motivated by grant funding to find evidence of climate change. Or maybe Lord Monckton is wrong.[7]

    The question for us as citizens is do we accept the diagnosis of climate change and the prescription of emission reductions. Or do we trawl the internet for a conspiracy theory and the global equivalent of a herbal remedy for cancer?[8] Do we bet our houses and our children's future that Lord Monckton is right, or do we take out some carbon price insurance in case he is wrong?

     

    Link

    This article is most definitely geared towards those wanting to distance themselves from conspiracy theory like it was the diagnosis of insanity.

    [1] I'm not too sure about immunisation, mercury injections can't be good though, and don't get me started on fluoride. Colgate ads that market the fact it's still trusted by Australians and their dentists, they market the trust! Since when is toothpaste such a hazard we need to know we can trust it!?! Unless the conspiracy theories are right?! Unless they're compensating for the fact so many distrust "fluoride toothpaste" - It doesn't say "contains fluoride" fluoride is it's market appeal! Trust it, it's good!

    Winfield Nicotine Cigarettes, now with extra flavour!

    [2] Watched Sin City last night, thought this was apt:

    Pulling that trigger make you feel powerful?

    Power don't come from a badge, or a gun

    Power comes from lying

    Lying big and getting the whole damn world to play along with you

    Once you got everybody agreeing with what they know in their hearts ain't true, you get them by the balls

    There's what, maybe 50 people in this hospital

    I could pump you full of bullets right now and I wouldn't be arrested

    Everyone would lie for me, everyone who counts

    Otherwise all their own lies, everything that runs Sin City, it all comes tumbling down like a pack of cards

    The whole facade is a house of cards, everybody (who counts) will do their bit to uphold this illusion. You do not need total collusion by all involved parties, only those who count, the rest will fall in line, I mean if all the data and models say one thing, who are they and their identity as pillars of truth in society to take down the whole illusion? (group mentality seems to go against the inquisitive mind of a scientist, maybe not a career scientist though) I guess we still believe them after doctors market cigarettes and dentists still say fluoride is safe. To trust a scientific authority nowadays is tough to do, they've sold out their credibility far too many times, it is little wonder why scepticism is so prevalent in todays age of hyper-communication and information.

    ...having said that, the sheer volume of information may mean the investigation itself has less depth. I'm undecided on our role in climate change, I dare say stopping the few football fields deforestation per second would have a greater impact on mitigating c02 evils than a new wealth redistribution plan. Balance is and always has been the key.

    [3] Conservatives are as a general rule conservative, They're all about sustaining their grip on control with all our wealth they've conserved. They are afraid of risks, such as investments in green technology and decentralised (read: no control of supply and demand and profit) power. At the core of it it is the necromancy of ideas that have long ago had their flesh rot away that we keep on consuming which is the cause of our illness. Here's some food for thought, grow your own! You might have nutrition, or try the new shit burger at McDonalds!

    [4]...good question, why is there no public debate? Why doesn't the media cover this issue?

    It's better to be safe than sorry, It's a good "insurance" policy to arm yourself to the teeth lest the billions of oppressed people around the world thanks to you try to take the power back. An insurance policy against our own projected mistrust through our own manipulative, coercive and outright violent actions; if we can't trust ourselves to be civil, we cannot trust them. If we have the ability to destroy then by golly so do they, so lets just remain in a high tension stale mate state instead of throwing down our arms and working together.

    Instead of playing country against country and population against population and class against class, so that some players enjoy themselves and we're left up shit creak, INSTEAD of that... I dunno, comradeship? community? anarchy? I don't know, just a few ideas because these dead ideas are making me feel sick. Oh and on that note fuck Communism! In the form of autocratic dictatorship and centralised state control... um no thank you, I mean it's a nice offer but I've got all my friends who want to work together without being forced to... oh shit nope, you've suckered them in too with your fear mongering. It's good to collect nuts for the winter but the kids don't want to share! Why?... Fear of lack of abundance. Fear, it can fuck right off!

    [5] There was a time we didn't lock our doors.

    [6] "rather than wait for the sanction of the UN [or the Australian publics consent] John Howard pursued the course of action that he felt was right. Given the imagined threat of weapons of mass destruction, delay, we were told, was not an option."

    LOL great argument there! Does that mean we should do something against this imagined threat too? They had expert intelligence, even though many a crackpot conspiracy theory website knew the deal before any plane hit any tower, iraq was always part of "the plan".

    The world population was also very aware of the injustice of said war and marched en masse in protest against it, only to have it go ahead anyway ...because of Howards and co's gut feeling? give me a break! So some massive corporations made some money (a killing!) through the suffering of helpless innocent people, based on a hunch. It's good that now we have expert scientists with their expert advice to guide us. Inconclusive as the issue may be, we're told it's settled, there is no question. I recall some newscasters with the same conviction about WMD's.

    I'm a bit baffled that a pro-trust-government article would throw in such an argument that just says "trust them even if history shows us they're full of shit" I'm a bit lost on the logic used there. The most recent public example of data being twisted to suit the needs of the controlling military industrial complex, is used as an argument to trust their conclusions again now?

    [7] To be honest just because they're massive research institutions, a self serving politician and a massive raper of natural resources, I don't feel they have any extra implied trust. I also probably have less trust in anyone that agrees to have the label of Lord, self righteous fucks think they're better than me!? Pisses me off as much as "Honourable" politicians. ...Oh wait that's right, it's not who they are or what they call themselves, it's what they're saying!

    I haven't bothered listening to the lord yet, I just felt compelled to respond to this right wing article about left wing ideas with a middle finger fuck off

    :wave-finger:

    [8]

    I'm a stoner so feel free to dismiss this as I don't have a suit and tie on as I'm typing this...

    I'm serious, If c02 saturation in our atmosphere is such a life and death issue it might be high time to legalise hemp (which would remove the need to remove trees). Maybe a society of stoner growers won't feel the need to jump through the hoops of the system, thereby reducing the carbon footprint of the costly distraction from real life that is capitalism, maybe tending the garden would be more life affirming then being a cog in a machine? These are some real green solutions, good for sustainability and conservation, not good for sustaining the conservatives control, so you won't hear it from them. The most obvious god-given solution is the devil to them, even though they'll admit to smoking it to get your votes.

    I think the biggest deniers are conspiracy deniers, coincidence theorists is the term of derision I tend to use to tell myself I'm right. The dots are everywhere hidden in plain sight, it seems connecting them is the scary part. Ignorance is the result of actively ignoring scary things.

    Buy up the patents to novel technologies so that they're never released. Suppress herbal medicines through restrictive legislation, tire away your populace with economic slavery, dumb them down and weaken their resolve with bad food and television. = Profit for some and slavery for many. The only economic solution is to turn over the tables of the money changers!

    • Like 1

  5. Pop music is a weapon of mass distraction, causing inaction a weapon of mass destruction. Wouldn't be all that bad if it wasn't so popular.

    They call it the Music Industry, its products are the lobotomised minds of the listeners going through it's assembly lines.

    bfi-00m-lte.jpg

     

     

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Bwv7kNj9U

    ^^^This guy is amazing! Some songs I'm sure the conspiracy heads will enjoy


  6. Pop music, as with all pop culture is part of the massive conspiracy to lower standards of art to be all the more mediocre and pathetic, to sell us our bread and circus at a lower cost to the manufacturer. Cookie cutter music is great if you can have people hooked on monotony and sell it as cool and exciting. I guess why the OP was angered is that by pointing out the sameness of two specific songs they imply that the rest of their playlist is brand new unique awesomeness.

    If you can manufacture such a Stockholm syndrome and placebo effect that the people exposed to this "music" start actually believing it's good. They start to enjoy their conformist prison of mediocre unexciting monotony and get back on the treadmill, you see the music is just a symptom of the machine that is systematic, organised and mass produced.

    Give me some lo-fi garage rock with soul any day over a musical masterpiece that follows all the right rules to get them hooks right into your brain and have it stuck there for ever! pop music is only popular because it's catchy and the ego bullshit is what we then go around thinking too, there is a reason why life imitates art. It is one thing to raise awareness and have a catharsis and then there's hiding in the ego games that pop culture promotes.

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv2qLOiioPc

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkA6zugNMQ

    I've got no trouble with sex and drugs and rock and roll, I don't wish to censor music, like all art it's only real art if it's real! It's just that the themes of pop music instead of being any kind of look in the mirror that is art, instead of any kind of re-appraisal and self reflection, it is now merely nodding your head to the beat, marching to indifferent drum, while adopting all the ideals the elite has there planted for you.

    Listen to the words people say in their lyrics, and tell me, if that's some real shit, if that's real to you, you know what I mean. Listen to what they sayin', don't just bob your head to the beat, peep the game, and listen to what I'm saying. Hold us accountable for it.

    -Interview in jail (1995)

    It's not a matter of think of the children, it's think for yourself! Music like all mind control is especially insidious because it's seen as so harmless. Music to me is one of the most magical things in existence; I think it's of supreme influence and significance.

    • Like 2

  7. ...from some random website

    Sun-sign astrology, the stuff in newspapers and magazines, is so incomplete that it is actually inaccurate.

    Actual astrology, done on a birth chart for day-mo-year, hour-minute, and location of birth is as complex as the individual it describes.

    However, even then, astrologers say, "The stars impel. They do not compel". In other words, the chart and other astrological influences are only that -- influences. You have the ultimate say and ultimate choice, if you choose to live your life in open awareness and to choose to make your own choices. Astrology is only a tool, to help guide you in examining yourself, your relationships, your situations, and your timing.

    Source(s):

    Professionally-certified astrologer, 40 years.


  8. Different perspectives of the same thing. I guess that any mythology or ontological framework is valid, they validate themselves; seek and ye shall find.

    For the record I do not see a "scientific" world and a "spiritual" world, I know they are one and the same, yet both perspectives give a different view of the world. I've always maintained that it's best to have both eyes open.

    The scientific world view is limited by data and pattern recognition, and it's own self-consistent formulas. It is the linear rational world we habitually remind ourselves of (for orders sake) during our waking consciousness. When we slip into dream we allow the world to breathe without constriction, from this perspective what is seen as "fake" is the limiting filter of reality, which ironically is the only proof of anything real within said filtered view. Beyond rationality and logical consistency is not beyond truth.

    The spiritual is always a matter of personal interpretation, hence it needs not be retarded by the need for proof, or logical consistency. Demanding said validation is shouting down the mystery that you yourself are whispering to yourself and may have you believing that such a reality does not really exist if it cannot survive the onslaught of questioning.

    Like any relationship, if an idea/entity must defend their existence chances are they'll disappear from your view. You can only receive insights if you are receptive to them. As far as ego control trip goes, you remain correct and a novel potential of being remains false.

    We're all pretty defensive of what is, for all intents and purposes our whole reality, a pre-written reality is abhorrent to our ideas of free-will, and therefore ignored, yet a lack of personal responsibility is also attractive to some and a reason for embracing the idea, which is also off the mark. As always for me the answer is the mystery and the paradoxical entanglement of free-will and determinism is a satisfactory unanswered answer for me.

    It is nice to be out of your mind; you are free to interpret as you wish, to listen to all possibilities without the unconscious defense mechanism need to censor, filter and sanitise reality.


  9. For one, most of the "constellations" only appear the way they do from our perspective, when in reality, members of the constellation are 3-4 times further away than other members. So there's no animals in the sky. They don't even resemble animals, about every civilization has their own unique interpretation and they're almost all different.

     

    Well, that's the whole idea right? To interperet it through OUR perspective. The relationship of heavenly bodies to us, the time/place our spirit was birthed within the context of the rest of the material world (all from the same spirit origin), like all of existence it is only a matter of perspective.

    It's not important that the real shape of these constellations is not how we see it, it's all about HOW WE SEE IT. Astrology is not a technical science, it is a spiritual endeavor at understanding, it's mechanisms are that of spiritual interpretation not to be recorded as physical measurements.

    For two, the "astrologers" seem to forget that we happen to live in a constellation, with the Sun as the centrepiece. Astrologers do not even care about the sun. Wtf? Why? So then they come up with some hocus about "undetectable force, doesn't get weaker with distance". Well then, astrologers are useless, because there are a million billion trillion quadrillions more stars than there are visible ones.

     

    Without awareness of these million billion trillion quadrillion stars their spiritual significance is nil. Astrology is an imaginative and interpretative investigation of the unknown, through its visibly cyclic manifestations, it is an attempt to divine or imagine the psychic processes that are reflected in the known cycles of the universe that we are aware of; their physical manifestation as cycles in relation to our terra firma is attempted to be understood as a reflection of psychic or spiritual movements. It is NOT a science. No spirituality can be seen as that, however the modalities of investigation get just as technical and there are known techniques that may as well prove this as an empirical reality, a valid perspective.

    For three, the actual horoscopes are vague and apply to everyone. A nice little experiment by Randi showed this. He asked for a class to give him, in a sealed envelope, their star sign. He then placed in a horoscope, and handed them back out. Almost all of the class agreed they were quite accurate. Then he asked them to pass their individual horoscope to their classmate opposite them... Where they found everyone had received identical horoscopes.

     

    The experiment found what it was looking for. Self validation is not proof of anything to those with an open mind and a wider perspective of the possible. You can only see what you can see. You see what you want. A spiritual mystery that transcends logical and known rules is something that some shy away from.

    For four, twins (not identical ones) often have completely different personalities. This removes almost 100% of the deterministic predictability that star signs claim to have. How could 10 seconds have so much variation? The stars were the exact same alignment pretty much.

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

    Gravity and light have infinite range, so of course those stars have an effect on Earth. But the effect is not something a bozo can estimate, nor an astronomer with a supercomputer can calculate.

    Astrology is FAKE.

     

    Astrology is not something one calculates as forces of gravity from star systems light years away, nor is it guess work, it is intuition; a holistic perspective using mythological motifs to paint our collective existence. It is a perspective of non-linear causation, that the universe suggests its own existence. "The stars impel. They do not compel", there is room for spontaneity within the clockwork, chaos always remains, it is determined to :) - The twin example: Each twin has their own free will, their own volition, their own interpretation of the clockwork within which they abide. IMHO we are all totally enmeshed in an ineffable synchronous machine, that we can personally interpret in infinitely creative ways, Astrology doesn't interpret the story for you, it just reminds you what page you're on in a book that writes itself, yet was always already written.

    There is no objective ground of being, everything is relative - so the constellations aren't about their real shape, it is only their perceived shape that is important to us; in an infinite universe knowing all possibilities is impossible, you focus on your own connections. The interpretation is not a physical calculation, it would be more in line with tea leaf images or looking through entrails for a message. The conclusions are far from rational or logical, so don't look at it that way.

    [edit] relative reality, true and false are absolutes that don't interest me much, dependent on context and perspective everything is relatively true or false.


  10. =OFF TOPIC=

    Mutant, next time try a couple grams in a tea with some kind of vitamin c, like a generous squeeze of fresh lemon juice. Both tea and vitamin c are anti-oxidants which protect the actives and the acid seems to extract it or pre-process it for digestion so it comes on quick.

    Tea starts a lot quicker and is usually much more intense and of a shorter duration (although it might not feel like it). The method seems to be the closest thing to dmt I reckon, direct experience of communion with the logos.

    Low doses are perfectly fine for getting used to the space, it's just quite interesting the sort of perspective one can get by ingesting only a few more grams, tea seems to be the most effective and least nauseous method. (especially with vit c).


  11. Undergrounder posted the link on page 1 [and I clearly referred to his post in my original comment] so why does it need to be posted again? :scratchhead:

     

    Yeah, my bad, I didn't know about "the aukiman link" until you mentioned it, nor did i see you clearly refer to his post in your original comment.


  12. Thank god for rationality. I still think that this whole reality is a projection of sorts and that there may well be a possibility of witnessing another dimension intersecting with our own, or that sort of thing (whilst not on drugs). Who knows, I guess it's best to keep the reductive operating system loaded up lest others think you're gullible, or because you don't want an alternate reality (another dimension) to influence your own, I entertained the idea, I entertain a lot of ideas though. :wacko:


  13. If your government will Carbon Tax your asses,.... then you better make sure that the governments ass is using that tax money for development of ''greener'' solutions!!

     

    heh.. that won't happen. Trusting the government = Stockholm syndrome. They are our captors, not servants, but it's for our own good remember. The science is settled, now it's a matter of deciding how best to sell this idea of wealth redistribution.

    Whoever said something about reducing our military spending and using that to fund green energy was on the money. R&D into green transportation and the whole idea of war for oil won't exist anymore and there'd be no need for the military spending and no more neo-colonial fascist control trip... oh wait, what do governments do again?


  14. After reading this tripe on yahoo the other day it took me 10 seconds to find the aukiman link and the obvious explanation to this issue.

     

    How many more seconds would it take to post said link?

    It would make sense to post it IF you're keen on helping educate the fools instead of just ridiculing them.

    Took me a few more seconds to find the the aukiman link

    As an experiment in human gullibility it makes more sense in the news section, and the way the thread has carried out it's a good education on the power of suggestion and the need for critical thinking.


  15. I forget where I found this definition (McKenna maybe?), that a drug is an unchecked habit that one unconsciously and compulsively indulges in. For every activity and experience has a greater or lesser effect on ones own brain chemistry. Brain chemistry affects experience, experience affects brain chemistry.

    TV is a drug, habitually smoking cannabis is a drug, planning and preparing to take a trip to the carnival with all your own rituals is a special occasion and not exactly a habitual action, the quality of mystery is by definition beyond the experience of your every day habits. A drug is autopilot; a sacrament is planned intention. Unless you have a dmt habit or something, a dmt junkie is hard to imagine though.

    This is getting really off-topic. Santiago should start a new topic on why druggies have got it all wrong, that their experiences are hallucinatory and of no meaningful value or healing potential, even though that's the general consensus if santiago feels it necessary to discuss this perspective...

    • Like 1
×