At this precarious time, with hardships ahead that will be serious if not cataclysmic, I want to make a case for opening our minds to what's beyond our ideation about who we are, wherein the problems arose. Given there is no quick fix we can employ to end the global financial crisis, I ask for some consideration of what indeed might blast away the dualistic thinking that led to this morass, where we are pitted against one another, struggling for everything from survival to prosperity. You know I have a familiarity with the crop circle oddity on Earth. Now I want to urge everyone to take an interest in it. What is occurring in crop fields all over the world could get us beyond where we are now. Radical change would come instantly with the recognition that there is a non-human intelligence that's at least on a par with ours. In relation to that otherness, we would be one people, a humanity that could no longer hold sway as the aggressive dominator of the universe. This new perception of ourselves as but one part of a far greater whole would sweep through the civilized world. Try as hard as the entrenched forces might, to cling to what's in place, everyone would be drawn into a new basis for relating to everything. Here's John Mack, speaking with clarity about the worldview that needs to give way: I want to talk about the matter of a worldview and how it works. It has always been referred to as a paradigm and that has more of a scientific flavor. But I prefer to call it “worldview” because it refers to something bigger. A worldview is the way we organize reality. It is the way we believe things work. In a way it is like an instrument of navigation. Our worldview is what holds the human psyche together. What I came to realize with that Harvard Committee was that I was threatening the scientific medical worldview by which they were living. What has been the dominant worldview in our society could be called Newtonian/Cartesianism or anthropocentric humanism. It is a worldview that puts the human being at the top of the cosmic hierarchy of intelligence. The simplest term for this is scientific materialism. In this worldview, matter and energy form the primary reality and there is no larger intelligence in the cosmos. The principle method of study is objective reality, which separates the investigator from the matter that is being investigated. I just stumbled across something related to our worldview that I'd written after the tsunami, in 2005, that killed almost 300,000 people: That paragraph somehow had made its way onto a website with which I was unfamiliar. Intrigued by the site's URL, Could this shake be big enough to wake us up to the need to set ourselves on another course? An examination of the fundamentals of how we think, based on who we perceive we are and what we think we are doing here, is a much needed conversation for the world to engage in. People eloquently express their outrage about what isn't working, but there isn't a common conversation about how else to run the world. The tsunami could be our spur to rethink everything. Its message is that it's one world — we need to engage with each other in one system. This would be more important than giving our attention to everything else that needs attending, because, without such an over-arching consideration, we will continue to generate problems that devastate us and be victimized by a lack of preparedness for what nature can impose.
This wonderful piece, from that Great New Story site, is a history lesson that describes major shifts in humanity's behavior thanks to Copernicus, Darwin and Hubble changing our ideas of how the universe works. That absolutely fits my line of thinking about how we make ideational leaps, where the next change of worldview could come from paying attention to the crop circles.
THE DEMOLITION OF RELIGIOUS MYTHOLOGY
John B. Brinsmead
September 2, 2008
Since the 16th century three great paradigm shifts have seriously called into question the religious traditions of the Christian West.
Whilst the scientific disciplines have been able to adapt to these paradigm shifts, the religious establishments have been thrown into disarray and insecurity, and especially because they have been shackled by their own claims to either ecclesiastical or Biblical infallibility.
THE FIRST GREAT PARADIGM SHIFT WAS THE COPERNICAN REVOLUTION
The heliocentric cosmology of Copernicus freed humanity from the mythic heavens of supernatural beings, be they gods or demons, and gave us the secular heavens governed by the laws of physics. No longer was the earth to be seen as Dante’s centre of the universe with heaven above and hell beneath. In the new cosmology, the sun did not rotate around the earth as the Church and the Bible implied, but the earth actually moved (contrary to what the Church and the Bible emphatically stated) around the sun.
The religious authorities of the 16th century clearly perceived that the heliocentric theory of the universe was a dire threat to their grand narrative of the world. The integrity of the Christian message was tied to a worldview that was part and parcel of that narrative. As one great churchman had put it, “There are four principle winds, four pillars that hold up the sky, and four corners of the universe; therefore it is only right there be four Gospels.”
Of all of the great ideas in history, this notion, set forth by Nicholas Copernicus in his book, De Revolutionibus Orbium Caelestium, in 1543, was probably the most important, for its consequences were so far reaching. It set off a huge wave of controversy. At first it was just a ripple. But this ripple soon grew into a huge tidal wave of opposition to this heretical idea.
In order to appreciate why this idea was so vehemently opposed, one needs to understand the official cosmology of the church and its reasons for promoting this cosmology. This cosmology was largely derived from Dante's Divine Comedy, which itself was, ironically, derived partly from Muslim teachings…
Dante paints a vivid picture of the universe, with the Earth at its center, hell being located in the very center of the Earth, and heaven, above… This view of the universe was so congruent with Christian doctrine that it would not easily yield to a new view of the universe no matter how much evidence there may be in support of a new view. Ever since its publication, the cosmology of Dante's book had been an important part of the theology of the Church, both Catholic and Protestant. With mankind's position balanced precariously between heaven and hell, it painted a vivid picture and reinforced the basic belief system of the church. Morality, cosmology, and theology were completely intertwined.
At first the opposition came only from Protestant circles. one of the first to speak out against this new heresy was Martin Luther. He called Copernicus a fool, pointing out that the biblical story of Joshua clearly states that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, not the Earth. Other Protestants soon joined in. Calvin cited the opening verse of psalm 93-“The Earth is stabilized that it cannot be moved.” Church officials began to search the Bible with a fine tooth comb, looking for passages that “prove” Copernicus is wrong. Eventually the Catholic Church joined in the battle, banning Copernicus's book in the year 1610.
Copernicus's heliocentric theory was so violently opposed, not so much because it contradicted the Bible, which it does, but because it made nonsense out of the official theology of Christianity…
Here are the main objections to the heliocentric theory, as pointed out by the Pope himself. If Earth is just another planet, circling the sun with the other planets, how can the Earth be a place of iniquity and sin, with devils below and angels above? He said that Copernicus's theory makes a mockery of the ascension of Christ, because if the Earth is orbiting the sun, how could Christ have ascended up to heaven? If the stars are not the lights of heaven, but actually other suns, as the theory suggests, then God, in His infinite goodness, would have created inhabitants on them too. How could Christ have died for the sins of all of the inhabitants of these other planets? Many Copernicans believed that the universe was infinite. This was one of the worst heresies of all. If the universe is infinite, then where can the throne of God be located? No wonder the Pope said that the Copernican heresy is the greatest threat there has ever been to Christianity and should be wiped out at all costs.
The Church’s position was totally wrong, back to front, upside down and contrary to reality.
It took the Church a very long time to sense that it had lost its battle with the Copernican worldview. Yet even whilst finally admitting that Copernicus was right, it still tried to carry on with its mythic narrative of the universe as if nothing had happened to render it so much meaningless mumbo jumbo.
The Copernican Revolution was only the beginning of a far greater over-turning of the Church’s grand narrative of the world.
THE SECOND GREAT PARADIGM SHIFT WAS DARWIN'S 19TH CENTURY BIOLOGICAL REVOLUTION
Wallace and Darwin clearly demonstrated that life forms such as plants, animals and humans did not suddenly appear on the earth in response to some creation fiat. Creation was not something that happened as recently as 4004 B.C. according to the grand narrative of the Christian religion. Creation was now to be seen as a process that has been going on for billions of years and as something that will continue into the future.
The priestly author of Genesis 1 dreamt that creation was finished by the seventh day. This writer, of course, was totally oblivious of the space/time realities of a modern scientific cosmology. We now know that if the expanding activity of our universe were to cease, the universe would collapse into the Big Crunch.
The Darwinian Revolution calls into question the age-old dogmas of the Fall of man from an original perfection, original sin, a literal Garden of Eden, the origin of death in the sin of Adam and the grand narrative of Fall and Redemption that Milton outlined so well in his Paradise Lost.
According to this very old religious narrative, death originated in the sin of man at the dawn of history. It is a monstrous dogma because it makes man ultimately responsible for death and everything else that goes wrong on the planet. The Biological Revolution presents an entirely different worldview wherein great carnivores like saber tooth tigers and dinosaurs roamed the earth long before humans were around. The complimentary science of geology found evidence of catastrophic upheavals and mass extinctions of life forms taking place long before humans had arrived on the scene.
The old narrative about the origin of death in the Fall of man has been exposed as a nonsense myth that is no better than the myth of the little three-story universe of the pre-Copernican age. Just think for a moment what the 16th century divines were alleging. The earth is more than a million times smaller than the sun, yet it was supposed to generate sufficient gravity to cause the sun to orbit the earth.
The old creation myth is up-side-down, back-to-front and nothing like reality.
“Perhaps the greatest gift Darwin gave to humanity was the opportunity to see in all of life an ongoing, intelligent, creative drama. Rather than thinking of a form of life as having been put on Earth in a fixed form at the beginning of time, we now see each form of life arising out of the Great Adventure.” Brian Swimme and Thomas Berry, The Universe Story,
p. 138
THE THIRD GREAT PARADIGM SHIFT WAS THE UNIVERSE OF THE BIG BANG
Prior to Einstein and Hubble, our Milky Way Galaxy was thought to comprise the entire “steady state” universe. We now know that our Milky Way Galaxy is just one of billions of other galaxies all containing billions of stars like our own sun. So far from being an enormous entity at the centre of the universe, planet Earth has receded into being an almost infinitely small speck of star dust in one tiny little solar system within the Milky Way Galaxy. Further, there is no longer a “steady state” universe as formerly supposed, but one that is still rapidly expanding as the galaxies are driven apart by dark energy by at least the speed of light. These time/space realities indicate that our universe began with the Big Bang around 15 billion years ago.
The implications of these three paradigm shifts for theology are breathtaking. What a mind-blowing view of creation is now revealed compared to that little three-storied universe of the divines who relied upon the worldview of the Bible! What do the time/space realities of a post-Hubble universe do to the old theology that is based on a primitive worldview?
Gone forever is this puny three-tiered universe of heaven above, hell below and humans in the middle, and wondering which way they will go.
Gone forever is the power of the old myths peddled by the Church and derived from a primitive worldview.
Copernicus and Galileo banished the mythical heavens of gods and demons and gave us secular heavens governed by the laws of physics. We now know that there are no laws operating out there/up there that are not operating down here, and there is no God up there that is not down here.
Gone forever are the ideas of a literal Fall of man, original sin and mankind being the originators of death. The Biological Revolution sweeps away the mythic nonsense of pre-Enlightenment humans. Called into question are such doctrines as a bodily resurrection and ascension to heaven, eschatology and ideas of a Second Advent. This is the time to let the fresh breeze of reality sweep away the mythic cobwebs from modern minds.
What is the wisdom of basing an entire theological edifice on an Adam who never existed and a literal Fall into original sin that didn’t happen? Trotting out these old theological premises now is like bringing out the old mumbo jumbo used to fob off the challenge of Copernicus.
As we stand astonished before these three paradigm shifts that have swept away the myths of centuries, what remains of value is the life and teachings of the real historical Jesus. None of his teachings, however, appear in any of the Creeds of the Church. Those Creeds are concerned only with a mythical world and the mythical dogma about a mythical person.
Clearly, what can’t survive are the following mythical ideas:
1. The mythical Second Adam. If the first Adam is mythic, so is the second one.
2. The pre-existence of Jesus. Jesus was not a space man. He didn’t live eternally in a heavenly world, nor was he born supernaturally on this planet in a way that defies the laws of genetics and DNA. The virgin birth stories (whether from Greek mythology or Christian mythology) are as mythical as the old cosmological order of gods in the sky and demons below us.
3. Jesus’s physical body did not rise from the grave and ascend into heaven. Physical objects don’t fly off into outer space. Even if his ascending physical body moved with the speed of light, he would not have moved far in two thousand years within a universe where some of nearest stars are millions of light years away.
4. His death was not required to undo Adam’s Fall and to open some mythical Pearly Gates in the sky.
5. Gone are all eschatological speculations about Millenniums, Raptures and a Second Coming. This latter is a doctrine of horrendous genocidal brutality. It teaches that at the Second Advent, all those living on the earth except for the elect believers will be delivered to destruction and everlasting punishment. No Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot inaugurated a mass extermination on this scale of all creatures living upon the earth. Billions of men, women and little children are all supposed to perish together at this glorious Second Advent. Such views rise out of incorrect ideas of the Earth’s beginnings. If the notions of the beginnings are so obviously wrong, the notions about the conclusions to history will also be wrong.
6. Claims that Jesus is God or the second person of the Divine Trinity are also mythic imaginations that have more to do with old pagan myths than the Church has been prepared to admit. In any case, these are myths that belong to an outmoded cosmology.
Surviving the three great paradigm shifts associated with the breakthroughs of Copernicus, Darwin and Hubble is the real Jesus of history. Here is a flesh and blood Jesus with human parents, 46 chromosomes, normal cellular DNA and real brothers and sisters. This real Jesus of Nazareth, like the great prophets of the Old Testament before him, dared to teach the scandalous idea that being truly human (concerned about compassion and justice for all) was all-important whilst being religious had no importance at all. He brought to his very religious and myth-dominated culture a new vision of unconditional love, forgiveness and justice that would embrace the whole human family without discrimination on account of creed, social standing or race. Unlike the Church that followed on after him, he freed rather than enslaved people to religious dogma and myths.
From: Rodney Vance [rodvance@gmail.com]
Interesting article, Suzanne, and thanks. It's fascinating that Brinsmead still feels a need to point out the reality of Jesus in his world view. The dominant culture in the U.S. today is primarily materialistic. Yet most Americans still describe themselves as believers in God, or some reality/intelligence that is greater than themselves. Unlike Brinsmead, who focuses on the historical Jesus as a replacement for a traditional view of God, most Americans describe God as supernatural, outside of nature. Since we can only comprehend, with our senses, what is within nature, God is ultimately a mystery that must be revealed, according to the believers, by Messengers such as Jesus, Moses, Buddha, etc. Given the vagueness of our understanding of this mysterious, outside of nature, God, it is remarkable that we are willing to kill each other, or merely get very angry with each other over, differing interpretations of God. When our society comprehends God as a mystery, or as a supernatural intelligence, then, as you point out, the potential exists for us to stop squabbling over unknowns and face the mystery together, united, human. The awe that has resulted simply from facing the meltdown of global financial institutions is sufficient to inspire talk of coming together to face our problems. The impact of truly comprehending the existence of a non-human intelligence greater than our own, whether called aliens or God, will resonate throughout human culture with far greater depth.
From Suzanne to Rodney
Really. We have strangely contradictory intelligence, where we make so little distinction between what's mythic and what's for real. All the protestations about Obama being a Christian, as if that's the goods we can love him for — and that even in the face of another level where there are other religions with equal claims to having the true story — always jars me. For all the loveliness Obama exudes, it makes me wonder about how evolved he actually is. Last thing to note is that these is no public dialogue about this — except that yesterday I heard Bill Maher talking about his new film that minces no words about the mythic nature of religions that we hold dear as truth. It actually was somewhat shocking to hear such bubble bursting pronouncements from the heart of American pop culture.
From: Walter Starck [wstarck@goldendolphin.com]
There is also a fourth great paradigm shift which reopens the door to magic and even into the ultimate mystery of all, our own consciousness. This is where time, space, energy, matter and mind meet in Quantum Theory and its derivatives, the grand unified theories or GUTs that we are now exploring at the frontiers of physics.
From Suzanne to Walter
Have you read Graham Hancock's Supernatural? He makes a cogent case for the landscape of another reality being internal to us. He develops the case from parallel imagery in 50,000 year old cave paintings and visions on Ayahuasca.
From: Rex Weyler [weyler@telus.net]
…wonderful material on paradigms ..
regarding the important historical paradigm shifts ..
Copernicus, Darwin, and deep space cosmology .. I would add:
4. Quantum observations, that introduced non-determinacy, uncertainty, entanglement, information beyond physical restraints, probability in knowledge, quanta of matter-energy.. and so forth
and
5. Ecology
As we know, this final one, ecology, has yet to take hold, even with all the “green” talk ..
If you have not read it or seen it, the classic text on paradigms is: Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1962.
He really introduced this idea of scientific, culturally conditioned paradigms that influence perceptions of reality and therefore the conclusions of researchers ..
He discusses how the rules of scientific games, puzzle solving, evolve from these unspoken, and even undefined paradigms .. and how presumed rules “occasionally equate with 'established viewpoint' or with 'preconception' – then the problems accessible within a given research tradition display something much like this set of puzzle characteristics.”
For measurements and data to become information, they must “relate to a theory” that predicts the behaviour and “correlate unequivocally with theory” .. so the results are conditioned by the prevailing theory .. thus, extremely difficult to overturn theory with research based on those theories ..
So, we must “.. change the paradigm, to define a new puzzle ..” i.e. ask new questions or critique the assumptions (p. 39 in Kuhn, 1970 edition)
For example Descartes described a universe composed of microscopic corpuscles, bits of matter, a theory Kuhn describes as a “nest of commitments proved to be both metaphysical and methodological.” (p. 41). Metaphysical definition of what the world contained, i.e. only matter in motion .. and methodological, determined “what ultimate laws and fundamental explanations must be like .. laws must specify corpuscular motion and interactions.” .. the Cartesian worldview .. now crumbling ..
It is very interesting that we learn: Shared paradigms do not imply shared rules. Rather the paradigm is a “strong network of commitments .. conceptual, theoretical, instrumental, and methodological ..”
“Rules .. derive from paradigms.”
Wittgenstein .. there exists no full set of rules to describe the “things” or “concepts” that we discuss, much less the paradigms .. rather our concepts, even simple things like “a house” or more complex things such as “justice” are not defined, but rather involve a “family resemblance.”
The effect of specialization in science and education is that different researchers or analysts apply different aspects of the same paradigm .. thus different rules, whether they work in nuclear physics or economics ..
These interpretations based on training, research purpose, experience, and definition may yield mutually exclusive, contradictory answers to the same questions .. with “consequential” impact, as Kuhn notes.
So .. paradigms might determine science, perception, conclusions, even without a set of definable rules .. thus a sort of loosely organized anarchy .. and when this is treated with disdain, as we see constantly in our modern world of spin and hype and political machinations .. the lack of clear rules allows paradigm adherents to change rules, or apply contradictory rules to various theoretical pillars of the paradigm .. So yes, if pressed, modern economists will admit that we live in an ecology, and will admit physics, biology, energy transfer and so forth .. but then ignore these rules or fail to account for them .. so modern economic theory, for example, may disregard biophysical limits, the laws of thermodynamics, entropy, and the interdependence of ecological systems .. even though, if pressed, the economist will acknowledge that these are real characteristics of our universe or world.
Thus, denial of obvious data. “Scientists” can deny global warming by preying on the inherent uncertainty and probability of all science, research, information, and data .. in other worlds, the prevailing paradigm is protected by exploiting the natural uncertainty of all information .. rather than the opposite, accepting uncertainty and therefore asking new questions and questioning assumptions ..
And this, of course, as we know, has drastic consequences.
From Suzanne to Rex
Am hopeful that I don't have Christians on my list who will consider me blasphemous. So far so good.
Although Kuhn is the paradigm idea originator, I confess to not having read him. Thanks for filling me in with some background.
What you've said brings a few thing I think about to mind — Rupert Sheldrake saying that the laws of the universe “appear not to be laws at all, but rather deeply ingrained habits of action, built up over the eons,” and Einstein talking about problems not being able to be solved at the level of consciousness that created them. More recently, there's Graham Hancock's Supernatural, where I like his take on the reality of a world outside of this 3-D one, where hallucinogens for 50,000 years have afforded perceptions of other real dimensions
Thanks so much for the input. It's the kind of conversation that should be out there in the world. Society mostly is moving the deck chairs on the Titanic instead of looking for how to go anther direction. I can't stop thinking about what to do about that. Clue me into any ideas you may have. For years, I poked around at setting up a small retreat center just for this sort of conversation, with such features as philosophers' walks, a hot tub for people to get naked together, and a round table with cameras to capture what smarts would come out of it all. If I had a Hollyhock, I'd get the likes of you and Brian Swimme and Graham Hancock and Russell Targ, to name a few of my more well known thinker friends, chewing on reality together.
http://www.via-visioninaction.org/via-li/news_20080901.php as was Hypatia of Alexandria's, the great woman philosopher and mathematician of Alexandria killed by early Christians for being a Gnostic. I was told after the symposium that there were many many spirits of scientists who lived through history from present and that they were most pleased with our progress. Am now embarking on the first global survey ever of scientists' fundamental beliefs. We are all doing what we can toward this Big Shift….Don't forget Giordano Bruno, who was ahead of Copernicus before the latter's time. His spirit was present at my Hokkaido Symposium on the foundations of science
I agree there can be no quick fixes to current inevitable crisis. You quote John Mack, whom I counted a friend and for whose book (finally out) Mind Before Matter I wrote a chapter. Here is a British review of the book I received not long ago. I have put in bold the section where he refers to my chapter. I thought many of the other chapters were excellent and enjoyed reading the whole book!
Towards the Primacy of Consciousness
David Lorimer
MIND BEFORE MATTER
Edited by Trish Pfeiffer, John. E. Mack (late SMN) and Paul Devereux (SMN), foreword by Larry Dossey (SMN)
A central concern of the SMN [Scientific and Medical Network] Science and Esoteric Knowledge group was the contention that consciousness is fundamental rather than secondary and dependent on matter. This volume invites contributors to consider the implications of the primacy of consciousness and its implication that everything is one and interconnected. As John Mack observes, world-views matter because they structure our perceptions and define how we experience ourselves in relation to the universe. This will be a familiar position to readers of this journal. The book is divided into four sections: science, philosophy, psi and communion. Each section contains a useful summary of the twenty-plus papers contained within it, which together build up the powerful vision of the book.
There are many well-known contributors such as Ervin Laszlo, Richard Tarnas, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Anne Baring, Dean Radin and Elisabet Sahtouris. For me, two of the most important essays are those by Elisabet Sahtouris and Anne Baring. Elisabet makes the arresting point that it is utterly illogical to eliminate the notion of God as an inventor engineer while keeping the concept of nature as mechanism. The mechanistic metaphor is so pervasive and familiar that this anomaly has gone largely unnoticed. Ironically, mechanism is defined as ‘the purposive assembly of parts’ while mechanistic scientists repudiate the notion of purpose in nature, where strictly speaking the notion of a purposeless mechanism is self-contradictory. Elisabet’s exposition of the axioms of Western science is as clear and comprehensive as any I have seen, as is her explanation of the new assumptions for an integral science. This is all set out with logical precision. The new model is based on a living universe that is ‘not a collection of accidental biological entities evolving on rare planets of a non-living universe through the mechanics of natural selection, but a holarchic, evolving, intelligent process intrinsic to the cosmos itself, in short, as the natural process of the cosmos itself, as self-organising expressions of a cosmic field of consciousness.’
Anne Baring gives voice to the strong emergence of the feminine principle as a response to our cultural imbalance. A vision of interconnectedness and interdependence entails a new sense of responsibility, especially in relation to Nature. Anne argues, rightly in my view, that ‘if the sacredness, oneness and interconnectedness of life were truly perceived, we would have a new ethical and moral framework within which to assess our actions.’ This would also give us a criterion to apply to the development of technology in terms of benefit or harm, although this would not put a stop to the arguments, since different people have varying ideas about what is beneficial or harmful, and financial return is currently the key criterion. Nor are these ideas simply abstractions, since many people have now experienced a sense of light and love pervading the ground of consciousness from which they are not intrinsically separated.
The essays in this important volume provide a convergent series of arguments and perspectives that help the reader build up the implications of a world-view based on the primacy of consciousness. The elements of this rising culture are all in place but we have yet to reach a tipping point in society where the key propositions in this book are regarded as self-evident. Books like this, and indeed many reviewed in these pages, contribute to a more general raising of awareness and corresponding realisation of the necessity of a shift in worldview. These ideas now need to be more widely expressed in the media as they articulate what many people are sensing at a deeper level…
From Suzanne to Elisabet
http://theconversation.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=186We are so aligned. I wish we got to hang out.
David Lorimar is aces — I am a member of the Scientific and Medical Network and I stay in touch with him. And Anne Baring is an ally. If you don't know her wonderful work, see this post I made:
In my almost finished crop circle film, we cite Giordano Bruno — in speaking of how dangerous it is to contradict the prevailing worldview.
What a juicy event you pulled together, although I would have had a hard time with Yasuhiko Kimura who was there. It's the first time I've seen his name in awhile, but back when he was doing his gig in homage to Walter Russell I was intrigued by his material and got engaged some. Part of my engagement was to encourage him to come into partnership with other leaders to create the Twilight Club, where he did not like my suggestion that despite his good mind he was using Japanese sort of languaging that didn't serve the situation, not to mention such a thing not being appropriate as being proprietary to anyone. It should have come from some group of luminaries — and I still poke around with that idea as what could serve us now:
http://twilightclub.org/history1.html.This is an encyclopedia listing: “The Twilight Club is an organization founded in the late 19th century, with the intention to counter the moral decline by bolstering up the spiritual and ethical awareness of the society. Illustrious members were Ralph Waldo Emerson, Herbert Spencer, Walt Whitman, Andrew Carnegie, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and Mark Twain. The name of the club refers to their meetings at the twilight of the day, but also to the evening twilight of the 19th century and the dawn of the 20th century. From this club, service clubs such as the Rotary Club and the Lions evolved at a later stage.”
There were other impressive things that the Twilight Club gave rise to:
From Elisabet to Suzanne
http://www.deyamallorca.com and see town website at http://deia.info with English version on the left side.Well, I am moving to Mallorca (just before Christmas) and you may want to visit. And if I get to L.A. again I will reciprocate… Mallorca is energy/water/food self-sufficient, airport is as good as in Barcelona (where I have loved being for a year!) and I just found a rental house in the “crown jewel” village of Deia, with an English community founded by such as Robert Graves, whose children and grandchildren live there among other ex-pat Brits. Also my friends Robin and Cody (conference organizers you may have met, who moved there two years ago.) See pics by hitting “About Deya” at
David Lorimar is coming to a meeting I'm organizing in London Nov. 17th. He sent Prince Charles the tape of a talk I gave and then introduced me to his sec't for a private meeting, from which came an invite I couldn't do this year but may take up next.
Yes, Anne Baring does beautiful work
Re Giordano Bruno and “speaking of how dangerous it is to contradict the prevailing worldview,” now the flames engulf that worldview's manifestations…
Very interesting Kimura story… I've known him about ten years now…had some very good meetings that he organized and did invite him to my symposium because he so gets the primacy of consciousness and because I needed such a philosopher who bridged to my wonderful Japanese sponsor. The latter loved his philosophy but found his language difficult!!! I let him put me on his advisory board in turn and will go to a meeting in England, where he won Lady Fiona, whom I've been wanting to meet, as his sponsor there.
Hope you will send me a copy of the movie when it's done! You know I have a longstanding interest in the circles, but kinda dropped out when all the sites went commercial. on principle I don't pay to see websites. Also I have so many other commitments… So I need people such as you to keep me informed.
From Suzanne to Elisabet
It seems so daring to be out of the States, but I see how attractive it is. Wow. Put together a round table and I'll film it!!! I don't know Robin and Cody and hope to get myself plugged into their doings with my film. I'll get you a DVD that I'd appreciate your sharing with them — nothing like a personal connection. The film is so much about consciousness that it would fit into what they do with the Prophets Conferences. I have long wanted to be at the table where our worldview is in play, and hope my film will be the entree.
From Joyce Kovelman [ASOUL1@aol.com]
Very grateful for this. It places all into perspective and hope for a more knowledgeable and sustainable future and for a reunion with our Galactic Brothers and Sisters.
From: Sharon Sherrard [sharonsherrard@aol.com]
Am loving the article! Thank you for sending it. I will definitely forward it.
From: Daphne Rose Kingma [daphne@daphnekingma.com]
This is so powerful and beautiful (and fits and inspires with a book I'm up here writing). Thank you! Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for all these long, long, long and beautiful years bringing this depth and this intelligence to us!
From: Ian Campbell [iandcamp@swbell.net]
The article in your e-mail was very thought provoking and I get new insight to what I believed or did not believe every time I read it. THANKS.
From: Chris Black [bar@idirect.com]
The Big Bang Theory is totally discredited and has been for a long time.
But the media keep on it as it supports the concept of a god existing somewhere. Most scientists believe as did Dr. Hans Alven the great Swedish astrophysicist, that the universe has always existed, will always exist and is constantly changing. The better theory (that is the one that fits the facts as we know them is the theory of plasma cosmology and it has been supported by the discovery that large chains of galaxy clusters exist which would have taken hundreds of billions of years to form. The idea of a Big Bang rests on outdated ideas and is not supported by any facts and is contradicted by most.
I recommend to you Marc Lerner's excellent book on the subject, The Big Bang Never Happened, in which he discusses not only the science of both theories but also the capitalist ideology that the Big Bang theory supports.
From Suzanne to Chris
Thanks for jumping into the big story.
Saying that it's been totally discredited, and for a long time at that, isn't the fact, and that it's a ploy of the media or that it supports the concept of god I don't think holds up. And the idea that the universe always has existed isn't an alternative explanation. But, indeed, everyone's mind may change about the big bang being the right explanation.
Here's what another listmember, a scientist, wrote to me:
I attended the CCC2 conference near Seattle this September, and it was terrific !!!
Met lots of folks from around the country and other countries.
They presented evidence that conclusively proves the BBT is incorrect !
But we don't have something better to replace it with at this time, and that's why we can only criticize and not suggest something better. Part of this conference was to decide on how to proceed forward in developing a replacement theory. Now it will take some time to identify the correct small pieces of the puzzle of the cosmos that the new dozen data gathering satellites of the last 15 years are giving us, and then step back and see what the big picture they are painting looks like, and develop a BBT replacement theory.
From Chris to Suzanne
Well, I am afraid I do not have the time to go into the reasons why it has been discredited for a long time but if you can get hold of Lerner's book you will see them all set out there (no discovery of dark matter, background radiation explained by easier and more rational facts, the simple timing of the formation of galaxy clusters, the continuous extension of the how far back in time one can detect galaxies which have existed for longer than the big bang theory can explain).
It is simply incorrect to state there is no alternative theory. There is.
The fact that certain readers are ignorant of plasma cosmology theory is not my fault but theirs. Hans Alven who first developed it many decades ago and received a Nobel Prize for his work cannot be dismissed nor the dozens and hundreds of others who state the big bang theory a bankrupt theory.
There are only two possibilities-either the universe was created out of nothingness or it has always existed. I agree that either concept is mind boggling. However the idea that it did not exist then suddenly popped into existence is more bizarre than the idea it has always existed. The popular press could print many stories on plasma cosmology if they wanted to. The scientific papers are there. But the Big Bang theory was quickly adopted by the mass media as it clearly supports the idea of a first cause, a creator. It is for this reason only that it continues to have any hold in the public mind.
From Suzanne to Chris
I was just reacting to “totally” in the discredited department, since the big bang idea still is in play. Better said, I would think, is that it has been shown not to account for the universe. Although you are more knowledgeable about the work that's been done than I am, I venture to say that having always been here doesn't account for it either. Like the origin of life, there are some mysteries that the human mind never figures to be able to unravel. I can't imagine we'll get beyond accepting the universe and life as givens, aware that we haven't accounted for how they began. one thing you can count on is how mind-bending it all is!
From Chris to Suzanne
There are three theories-the big bang, steady state, and plasma cosmology which depicts an eternal but constantly evolving universe. But whichever is correct or some other, you are right-any of them are unfathomable to the human mind.
From: Kovil [kovilhelm@yahoo.com]
Thank you for this email. It's good to see people are speaking their minds these days and on lots of subjects. Me too!
What this email makes me realize is I need to write up a paper too. In particular, this writer has some mistakes in his words about Hubble. And in what the Big Bang Theory is about and the fact that it is incorrect, and I need to get my facts better in mind and my words better in order, to state it all the 'way I see it'! LOL
So many things to do! I attended the CCC2 conference near Seattle this September, and it was terrific!!! Met lots of folks from around the country and other countries. They presented evidence that conclusively proves the BBT is incorrect! But we don't have something better to replace it with at this time, and that's why we can only criticize and not suggest something better. Part of this conference was to decide on how to proceed forward in developing a replacement theory. Now it will take some time to identify the correct small pieces of the puzzle of the cosmos that the new dozen data gathering satellites of the last 15 years are giving us, and then step back and see what the big picture they are painting looks like, and develop a BBT replacement theory.
Until then?
Non only do I have to do the dishes, laundry, cook and fix the house, I have to watch the stock market, make op/ed political and economic postings on the Yahoo boards, and write science papers and sci-fi stories too !
Well, I suppose it beats sitting in a cave and contemplating my receding hairline !
From Suzanne to Kovil
Fools rush in. I should have turned this listmember over to you. Have a look at what we've been exchanging — from the bottom [I sent him what Chris, above, sent, me…ST]:
From Kovil to Suzanne
www.thesurfaceofthesun.com. http://www.omatumr.com/papers.html. Oliver's papers are very good, and quite revolutionary, but exceedingly well documented and supported!!You're in good company. Electric Theory is what's happening and BBT/Mainstream is ignoring it adamantly! The Church is supporting BBT as it fits hand-in-glove with Catholic Theology, and their influence 'trickles down' from on high, thru the sciences and to how the money is spent on research and who gets to publish and who is denied publication. Science his highly politicized these days, and it's behaving more like a religion than a science!
Eric J. Lerner was who did most of the logistical work to put on the CCC2, and he's co-authored some dynamite papers with Anthony Perratt on electric theory and galaxy formation and behaviour, and the math behind it all.
Yes, get some books by Kristian Birkeland, Hannes Alfven, Ralph Jurgens, Earl Milton, Oliver Manuel, Michael Mozina, or Google them and download their PDF papers, or visit their website,
Chris Black might know of him, but if not, please tell him. Oliver is a real mind opener!!!
Here's some links to Electric Theory's website, Thunderbolts.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/081006magnets.htmOct 06, 2008
Bubble Magnets
Astronomers say that exploding bubbles of magnetic energy might have helped form galaxy clusters.
Oct 07, 2008
Bringing in the May
The Maypole epitomizes the spirit of the religions that prevailed in northern Europe before Christianity was adopted and provides an ideal test case for the methodology employed in a comparative study of myth and ritual.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/081007may.htmOct 08, 2008
Gooches Crater, Australia
Northwest of Sydney, Australia are straight-cut sandstone canyons and circular formations. Could they be evidence for electrical discharge?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/081008gooches.htmOct 09, 2008
A Sea of Holes
“The black holes of nature are the most perfect macroscopic objects there are in the universe: the only elements in their construction are our concepts of space and time.” Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Oct 10, 2008
Kuiper Crater's Rays
The latest images from the MESSENGER mission reveal a planetary surface similar to Earth's Moon. Are both bodies the progeny of one electrical parent?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/081010kuiper.htmTHUNDERBOLTS FORUM HIGHLIGHTS
“Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures”
Could a Mesozoic Era pterosaur fly in today's sky?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1065“New Twist on Birkeland Currents”
A mainstream study of the Sun uses phrases like “twisted magnetic fields” and “jets of gas in a helical pattern,” but fails to identify them as Birkeland currents.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1057“Earthquakes – Electrical Precursors in Ionosphere”
Nasa researchers claim a link between earthquakes and electrical disturbances in the upper atmosphere
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=714“Exotic Object Stirs Exoplanet Classification Rethink”
The distinguishing characteristics between large planets and small stars becomes increasingly blurred with new discoveries
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1075“Electric Meteorites paper? Cool!”
A paper regarding the electrical interaction of an approaching meteor with the Earth has implications for the Electric Universe theory
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1069“Recent earth magnetic anomalies”
The Electric Universe offers an alternative to the internal dynamo theory as the source of the Earth's magnetic field
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1042“Free MIT Electricity Lectures, Free Science Lectures”
A discussion, with links, about a lecture series on electromagnetism, what is included and what is not?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?=5&t=1064“Causes for shifted H-alpha spectrum”
Some questions concerning the Red Shift and the work of Halton Arp
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1062MULTIMEDIA PAGE
COSMOLOGY IN CRISIS, Parts 1 and 2
http://www.thunderbolts.info/online_videos.htmBy Soupdragon42
One might say, “The gloves are off” now. This is a 'no more Mr. nice guy' criticism of much of what's wrong with modern cosmology.
Archives/Permalinks:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/mmarchives/081011_sd42_eis1.htmhttp://www.thunderbolts.info/mmarchives/081011_sd42_eis2.htmI sent Kovil what we've been exchanging and this is his response. Am appreciative that I have such savvy listmembers!!!
From Chris to Suzanne
Please tell Kovil I appreciate his headsup re Oliver Manuel. I was not up to speed on his work. Thanks.
By the way, in a Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy type of whimsy, since none of the theories can account for the existence of the universe in a satisfying way to pedestrian minds like mine I came up with the fantasy notion that scientists in the future, deciding the universe cannot logically exist, sent back in time a team in order to create it sort of ex post facto. 🙂
From Suzanne to Chris
Kinda parallel to my surmise that Earth is a canvas for off-planet artists to make crop circles. The students do them all over the world, but the pros work in England.
Follow
