Topic: WE'RE STUFFED!!!

[nichi]

Why?  I presented an equally valid and opposite belief held by respected scientists.  My point in this thread is that both positions are expressions of belief systems and their resulting perceptions, and both are acceptable as such.

Then I emphasized my point in this, that both are limitations on our reality creation.

I can imagine a chart with more room to accomodate the rest of the bell curve.

This is what I see ....

Action] Re: Destiny, Fate, and Accidents by nichi Today at 04:08:45 PM
[Action] These are both beliefs: WE"RE STUFFED!!! & GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE by Gunslinger Today at 04:02:47 PM
[Action] GLOBAL WARMING IS A BALDFACED LIE by Gunslinger

You're in fierce disagreement with the points of view held by most of the folks here, and you demonstrated that in large caps. That's what's off the charts. Plus, everything you've been posting is an attempt to persuade, nay, evangelize.  It isn't simply expressing your point of view -- you're arguing, and wish to see others "get it".

Me, I don't particularly care if someone is in agreement with me. You care ....

I'm not even addressing the veracity of what you're saying about "global warming". It's inconceivable to me, walking outdoors and feeling the difference on my skin, and seeing the difference in the sky with my own eyes, that anyone would question it. I don't even need to look at graphs and such: I know, in every fibre of my being, that there are extreme changes afoot.

[erik]

I presented an equally valid and opposite belief held by respected scientists.

There is a difference.
You talk out of your mental.
Many here feel and see the ongoing changes.
That's what Toltec thing is about - the aim of all the hard work is to percieve directly without the need to make mental/rational assumptions.

[Gunslinger]

Actually, I don't really care who's right or wrong in the climate debate.  I don't care whether people argree with me, either.  I am concerned with making a point, and that's acceptable, as it is true of everyone else who posts in this thread.

To step back and realize that I responded in a thread with an all caps subject line, with an all caps subject line would be advisable.  I intended to have the effect that it did.  People react automatically to beliefs opposite to their own strongly held beliefs.  That's one way they create their own reality.  The provocation was intentional.  The reaction was automatic and without intent.  It also illustrates the power of beliefs, which was also my intent.

It would be nice if someone would "get it", but it's acceptable if no one does.

The vehicle for all of this was a link to an article in which perfectly rational and educated scientists hold the viewpoint inoppposite to the predominant viewpoint in this thread, and by most people in POLITICAL POWER. 

Behind this brazen provocation is another little nugget.  Our beliefs are subject to the beliefs held by the mass consciousness.  And as always, our beliefs influence our perception, especially the more so if they are strongly held.

Even deeper is a vein of gold, that we are creating climate change and other huge changes not in what we physically manifest, but in what we spiritually are creating and provoking, and that is a greater awareness of our power to create and a greater awareness of who and what we are.  Climate change, whether it's caused by man, natural earth processes or cosmic rays, scientifically speaking, or not, is OUR creation to be showing ourselves our own nature and abilities.

Thank you for your attention.

[nichi]

Actually, I don't really care who's right or wrong in the climate debate.  I don't care whether people argree with me, either.  I am concerned with making a point, and that's acceptable, as it is true of everyone else who posts in this thread.

To step back and realize that I responded in a thread with an all caps subject line, with an all caps subject line would be advisable.  I intended to have the effect that it did.  People react automatically to beliefs opposite to their own strongly held beliefs.  That's one way they create their own reality.  The provocation was intentional.  The reaction was automatic and without intent.  It also illustrates the power of beliefs, which was also my intent.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, if what you are saying is true. This is amorality and irresponsible communication, if you're doing it for any effect other than the expression of your own heart. This place is above flowering with people's heads.

When I sign on as your student, feel free to flower with my head -- it will be implicit in the contract.

Otherwise, if you are indeed playing games as you're saying, please don't waste my time.

As for your stance on global warming, you aren't alone -- spin doctors such as Rush Limbaugh are applauding you.

[Gunslinger]

When anyone, even such as you, signs up to be my student, shoot me.  How is it irresponsible to make a point by illustratrion?  Since when did you or any one else in here become a defender of morality.  Who's morality?  I repeat--I did not do this to you.  I only provoked you to do it to yourself.  If you didn't want to be, you didn't have to be.

I cannot flower with anyone's head unless they let me, even if that was my intent.  And, if anyone in here feels that their head was flowered with, then perhaps they should be looking at self, and not me, for the fornicator.

I would be wasting your time if I was arguing about whether global warming is true or a lie.  That notwithstanding, if you don't want to be wasting your time, ignore the thread.

Rush Limbaugh and Al Gore can both get stuffed, or not.  It doesn't matter.  They are both purveyors of beliefs I do not hold.  That being said, it matters not.

[nichi]

Todd, when you state, as you have, that you were intending to be provocative, and were looking for a certain effect,  rather than just stating your viewpoint, you're flowering with people's heads.  That doesn't mean anyone was really "flowered with" -- it's more about you than about anyone else.

It's my impression that something more is afoot there, with the large caps, which has nothing at all to do with "global warming".

You have an agenda, and it permeates everything you write. That is not hard to see. It's clear especially when you have gone into "coaching" mode, be it with whomever.  On some level, I know you are trying out the application and expression of your "belief" stance. Seeing how it works out in real-time, with others.   

Many of us here are endeavoring to transcend the analytical and the rational and the mental plane, though, and your position puts us right back into it. So, it will likely be met with opposition of one sort or another, here.





We need to take a break here --- I'm closing this for now, for Michael's perusal and reopening, if he sees fit.

[Michael]

Thanks Vicky, sometimes a break is needed to let everyone sit back and calm down.

I'm unlocking this now, so just keep your comments thoughtful, and balanced.

'A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.'

m

[nichi]

Cool beans, boss. 

[daphne]

You have an agenda, and it permeates everything you write. That is not hard to see. It's clear especially when you have gone into "coaching" mode, be it with Rubina, Ian, Tommy, or Daphne.  On some level, I know you are trying out the application and expression of your "belief" stance. Seeing how it works out in real-time, with others.   

Speaking for myself.. since I was mentioned... I do not have any issue with Todd/Gunslinger. I rather enjoy our exchanges. I find them stimulating. What I do with them "after" is part of my own growth. One could say I have an "agenda" in that respect too!!   

[Taimi]

Speaking for myself.. since I was mentioned... I do not have any issue with Todd/Gunslinger.

Same here 

[Gunslinger]

Gosh!  Y'all are gonna embarass me.   

 

[nichi]

Speaking for myself.. since I was mentioned... I do not have any issue with Todd/Gunslinger. I rather enjoy our exchanges. I find them stimulating. What I do with them "after" is part of my own growth. One could say I have an "agenda" in that respect too!!   

Actually, sorry your name was mentioned: I corrected that. It wasn't about you. The rest, I've pursued with Todd off the board, good friends that we are, for several years now.

[Jahn]

is this still an open thread?

if so I would like to say that Vicky is right that there is little values in debates. We are much beyond that. However one should be aware of that to bring in the large issues of today, wounding, beliefs and the dream of the Planet, global warming etc one really put in a heavy weight here. All these things are very dense and require some strength to deal with. It is already clear that a few have issues to deal with regarding these matters and perhaps this should be addressed in the first place but not in terms of opinions but in terms of the energy behind.

NOW, it is settled that the increase of human produced CO2 HAS an effect on the climate - it is not much to debate. We, or some of us, "feel" the change, Mother Earth is talking to us, that is complementary info to the facts that CO2 emissions is quadrupled above any previous known "natural" period. So there is even less to debate, our knowingness. And I can tell you that the bell after the Tsunami was what got me on the toes. Time is short to do something of value for the rest. Cut out the crap and get to work!

What is the problem?


 . .




 

[Gunslinger]

Eric:

Me: I presented an equally valid and opposite belief held by respected scientists.

Eric:  There is a difference.  Me:  Between what and what?  Two camps of opposing views within the same belief system?  Or being aware that they are two sides of the same coin?  And it's the belief system that I'm emphasizing that is coloring people's SEEING here.

Eric: You talk out of your mental.  ME: In a manner of speaking.  I interpret what I do as talking THROUGH my mental.  My mental faculties translate really well what my subjective awareness experiences.  I have a different style and intent than some people.  My style and their's are both perfectly acceptable, if not well tolerated.

Eric:  Many here feel and see the ongoing changes.   ME: I do too.  I recognize, also, the beliefs that color that feeling and seeing, and that's what I'm pointing out.  Also, I have a different set of premises than some others in here about the nature of essence and our part of it.  My SEEING there is acceptable, as is that of others.  My interpretation is thus different, because I see Consciousness in Essence as the source of creation.  There are no other gods before me, so to speak.

Eric:  That's what Toltec thing is about - the aim of all the hard work is to percieve directly without the need to make mental/rational assumptions.

ME:  That is your intent, which is perfectly acceptable and I appreciate the value of that.  For me, the aim of my hard work, (even though it's a challenge, I find it fun, must of the time) is to make as many connections as I can between the parts of myself, to remove the veil of separation between the ME that is this focus and all my other focuses, counterparts, and alternate selves.  I acknowledge that this physical focus requires perception, and is built out of beliefs that color or filter that perception.  It is also relevant that perception is not the only way we have to obtain information--I'm speaking of our inner senses.  It is not necessary to filter those through my beliefs in order to be aware of that knowledge.  It is necessary to filter those through my beliefs, and the beliefs of others in order to objectivvely transmit that information to others.

In summation,

There are SEERS here.  Some are not SEEing the filters before their metaphorical eyes.  They put their posts in this forum to express their interpretation of what they see.  I suppose it is for comment in response, and not necessarily in agreement with them, either.  I could be wrong.

We each have different styles of SEEING and interpretation.  All are valid.  Some toleration of each of those is efficient and impeccable, for some purposes of this forum, and our reasons for posting, whatever those are.

I think we all are seeing and feeling the changes in our environment.  I hope there are some people open to different points of view.

We each have our individual reasons and intent for our self discovery, different models and beliefs that we find efficient for each of us. We each are blind to a certain extent to how those models and beliefs limit our creativity, and our interpretations of what we see,  perceive, and create, and how we interpret to others that seeing and percieving, and the creation of our realities.  We also start from different premises and conceptualizations of existence.  Those too also affect our seeing and percieving, and the creation of our realities.

The whole purpose of this excercize and reason for being here is to point this out.  And that also includes my self understanding of this.  Thank you for giving me the opportunity.

[erik]

You should add for the purposes of objectivity that those who do not see will never fully understand what seers talk about. For them it will always be only a mental concept.