Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Politics and the rest of world's madness all in here!
User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:59 pm

The New York Times
Sunday, January 30, 1983
Clues Get Warm in the Search for Planet X
John Noble Wilford


Something out there beyond the farthest reaches of the known solar system seems to be tugging at Uranus :lol: and Neptune. Some gravitational force keeps perturbing the two giant planets, causing irregularities in their orbits. The force suggests a presence far away and unseen, a large object that may be the long-sought Planet X.

Evidence assembled in recent years has led several groups of astronomers to renew the search for the 10th planet. They are devoting more time to visual observations with the 200-inch telescope at Mount Palomar in California. They are tracking two Pioneer spacecraft, now approaching the orbit of distant Pluto, to see if variations in their trajectories provide clues to the source of the mysterious force. And they are hoping that a satellite-borne telescope launched last week will detect heat “signatures” from the planet, or whatever it is out there.

The Infrared Astronomical Satellite was boosted into a 560-mile-high polar orbit Tuesday night from Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA. It represents an $80-million venture by the United States, Britain and the Netherlands. In the next six or seven months, the telescope is expected to conduct a wide-ranging survey of nearly all the sky, detecting sources not of ordinary light, but of infrared radiation, which is invisible to the human eye and largely absorbed by the atmosphere. Scientists thus hope that the new telescope will chart thousands or infrared-emitting objects that have gone undetected – stars, interstellar clouds, asteroids and, with any luck, the object that pulls at Uranus and Neptune.

The last time a serious search of the skies was made, it led to the discovery in 1930 of Pluto, the ninth planet. But the story begins more than a century before that, after the discovery of Uranus in 1781 by the English astronomer and musician William Herschel. Until then, the planetary system seemed to end with Saturn.

As astronomers observed Uranus, noting irregularities in its orbital path, many speculated that they were witnessing the gravitational pull of an unknown planet. So began the first planetary search based on astronomers’ predictions, which ended in the 1840’s with the discovery of Neptune almost simultaneously by English, French and German astronomers.

But Neptune was not massive enough to account entirely for the orbital behavior of Uranus. Indeed, Neptune itself seemed to be affected by a still more remote planet. In the late 19th century, two American astronomers, William H. Pickering and Percival Lowell, predicted the size and approximate location of the trans-Neptunian body, which Lowell called Planet X.

Years later, Pluto was detected by Clyde W. Tombaugh working at Lowell Observatory in Arizona. Several astronomers, however, suspected it might not be the Planet X of prediction. Subsequent observations proved them right. Pluto was too small to change the orbits of Uranus and Neptune; the combined mass of Pluto and its recently discovered satellite, Charon, is only one-fifth that of Earth’s moon.

Recent calculations by the United States Naval Observatory have confirmed the orbital perturbation exhibited by Uranus and Neptune, which Dr. Thomas C. Van Flandern, an astronomer at the observatory, says could be explained by “a single undiscovered planet.” He and a colleague, Dr. Robert Harrington, calculate that the 10th planet should be two to five times more massive than Earth and have a highly elliptical orbit that takes it some 5 billion miles beyond that of Pluto – hardly next-door but still within the gravitational influence of the Sun.

Some astronomers have reacted cautiously to the 10th-planet predictions. They remember the long, futile quest for the planet Vulcan inside the orbit of Mercury; Vulcan, it turned out, did not exist. They wonder why such a large object as a 10th planet escaped the exhaustive survey by Mr. Tombaugh, who is sure it is not in the two-thirds of the sky he examined. But according to Dr. Ray T. Reynolds of the Ames Research Center in Mountain View, CA, other astronomers “are so sure of the 10th planet, they think there’s nothing left but to name it.”

At a scientific meeting last summer, 10th-planet partisans tended to prevail. Alternative explanations for the outer-planet perturbations were offered. The something out there, some scientists said, might be an unseen black hole or neutron star passing through the Sun’s vicinity. Defenders of the 10th planet parried the suggestions. Material falling into the gravitational field of a black hole, the remains of a very massive star after its complete gravitational collapse, should give off detectable x-rays, they noted; no X-rays have been detected. A neutron star, a less massive star that has collapsed to a highly dense state, should affect the courses of comets, they said, yet no such changes have been observed.

More credence was given to the hypothesis that a “brown dwarf” star accounts for the mysterious force. This is the informal name astronomers give to celestial bodies that were not massive enough for their thermonuclear furnaces to ignite; perhaps like the huge planet Jupiter, they just missed being self-illuminating stars.

Most stars are paired, so it is not unreasonable to suggest that the Sun has a dim companion. Moreover, a brown dwarf in the neighborhood might not reflect enough light to be seen far away, said Dr. John Anderson of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. Its gravitational forces, however, should produce energy detectable by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite.

Whatever the mysterious force, be it a brown dwarf or a large planet, Dr. Anderson said he was “quite optimistic” that the infrared telescope might fine it and that the Pioneer spacecraft could supply an estimate of the object’s mass. Of course, no one can be sure that even this discovery would define the outermost boundary of the solar system.


U.S. News and World Report, September 10, 1984
Planet X — Is It Really Out There?

Shrouded from the sun's light, mysteriously tugging at the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, is an unseen force that astronomers suspect may be PLanet X — a 10th resident of the Earth's celestial neighborhood.

Last year, the infrared astronomical satellite (IRAS), circling in a polar orbit 560 miles from the Earth, detected heat from an object about 50 billion miles away that is now the subject of intense speculation.

"All I can say is that we don't know what it is yet," says Gerry Neugenbaur, director of the Palomar Observatory for the California Instititute of Technology. Scientists are hopeful that the one-way journeys of the Pioneer 10 and 11 space probes may help to locate the nameless body.

Some astronomers say the heat-emitting object is an unseen collapsed star or possibly a "brown dwarf" — a protostar that never got hot enough to become a star. However, a growing number of astronomers insist that the object is a dar, gaseous mass that is slowly evolving into a planet.

For decades, astromers have noted that the orbits of two huge, distant planets — Neptune and Uranus —deviate slightly from what they should be according to the laws of physics. Gravitational pull from Planet X would explain that deviation.

Morever, says Neugebaur, "if we can show that our own solar system is still creating planets, we'll know that it's happening around other stars, too."


NASA Press Release 1992

"Unexplained deviations in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune point to a large outer solar system body of 4 to 8 Earth masses, on a highly tilted orbit, beyond 7 billion miles from the sun."
http://yowusa.com/planetx/2007/planetx-2007-08b/1.shtml

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Fri Aug 22, 2008 6:03 pm

why are you bringing up "planet x" articles from the 80's?

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Fri Aug 22, 2008 6:42 pm

we like the '80's...and planet x :)

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:52 pm

actually, there are those that are tying planet x in with the sumerian 'nibiru', the 10th planet, which is believed to be in an highly elliptical orbit and goes around the sun roughly every 3600 years. the egyptians referred to it as the 'destroyer' due to the devastation it caused when coming near the inner planets. who knows...a good excuse for a massive party either way. :wink:

Ancient Sumerian texts indicate that the Earth (" Tiamat ") was struck by a large planet, which moved it into its present orbit, and created the Moon and the Asteroid Belt. In his books, The Twelfth Planet and The Cosmic Code, Zecharia Sitchin outlines this "celestial battle" as described in the Babylonian text called Enuma elish. The planet "Marduk" (the Sumerian " Nibiru "), as it came into the solar system on its clockwise elliptical course, struck Tiamat, which was moving in its ordained counterclockwise orbit. One of Marduk's satellites struck Tiamat first, followed by two more of Marduk's moons. Then Marduk itself, an enormous planetary body, struck Tiamat, smashing one half of the planet into pieces, which became the Earth's Moon and the "Great Band" (Asteroid Belt). The other half of the planet, which was struck by a smaller moon of Marduk, was moved into a new orbit, along with a chunk of material which became its moon. The new planet was then called "KI," meaning "cleaved one." The Earth's original moons were dispersed, many changing the direction of their orbits.


In February, 1999, J.B. Murray presented a paper to the Royal Astronomical Society entitled "Arguments for the Presence of a Distant Large Undiscovered Solar System Planet." (http://www.blackwell-synergy.com). Murray's paper explored various explanations for what he called a "non-random clustering of long-period comets," which his research concluded are "aligned along a great circle inclined to both the elliptic and the Galactic plane." His paper examined the possibility that this non-random clustering was due to "orbital perturbations by an undiscovered object orbiting within the distances of 30,000 to 50,000 au from the Sun." Murray's mathematical modeling predicted that the object would have a retrograde orbit inclined at 120 degrees.

In an October 16, 1999 Economist article entitled "X Marks the Spot," Drs. Murray and Matese, after looking at the orbits of approximately 300 long-period comets, have separately concluded that too many of them are coming from the same regions of space. They suggest that the galaxy's "tidal wobble" is "being modulated by the gravity of something big within the Oort Cloud itself."

The new object must be very faint, these astronomers suggest, or it would have been spotted. This means it's not a star. They predict that the object is three times the size of Jupiter. They also suggest that the object is not a "proper planet," because, take note: "its orbit appears to run in the opposite direction from those of the nine known planets." This is another factoid we can add to the above "anomalous" findings regarding the existence of Marduk/Nibiru. As the Enuma elish tells us, the planet Marduk entered the solar system on its "clockwise, elliptical orbit," and struck the Earth, which was moving in its "ordained counterclockwise orbit." So the planet we are looking for will have an orbit which runs in the opposite direction from those of the nine known planets in our solar system. (Chalk another one up for Sitchin.)



The Daily Mail report of May 15, 1998 entitled "Delayed Impact, or the Secrets of Asteroid Peril," stated the following:
"If a giant asteroid is hurtling in the general direction of our planet, we will be the last to know about it. For astronomers have decided that the news would be too earth shattering for ordinary mortals to handle, and would likely cause widespread panic. In a week that sees the release of the film Deep Impact, a fictional account of just such a catastrophe, astronomers funded by the American space agency NASA have now agreed to keep asteroid and comet discoveries to themselves for 48 hours while more detailed calculations are made. The findings would then go to NASA, which would wait another 24 hours before going public."

http://www.subversiveelement.com/Planet_X.html

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:42 pm

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/index.html

You may as well have a link that uses relies on actual science, not that it matters to you in the slightest.

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:47 pm

that uses relies? isn't that some sort of adult diaper? :lol:
but anyway, 'bad astronomy' and quackwatch....think i'll stick with my non-industry, non smear websites for now. thanks though yule. :wink:

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:02 pm

bad astronomy is an industry site?
The dude was a professor, and is now head of a educational foundation that promotes critical thinking and scepticism...

It's about as far from "industry" as anything...

feet arse
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:14 pm

Re: Here I am.

Postby feet arse » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:34 pm

YULE wrote:Pretty sure that 2012 is just the start/end of a calander cycle for the mayans, it's like a new week or year but it is for the long calander that they had. Someone just saw it and realised they could make money, like most things really.

Fuck that website is ridiculous.
It means that everyone must only focus on Spiritual evolution, turning your back on material things, the cravings of the Ego - one factor that literally "sunk" the Atlanteans - and towards service to others before service to self, and above all Unconditional Love for all creation.


+10 for using Atlantis to illustrate a point.

And I'm pretty sure unconditional love for all creations is illegal in most places... :P


Right you are on the start/end of a calendar cycle. Hindu cosmology (check out Sri Yukteswars "Holy Science") also has a transition point for this date, and it is similarly linked to a shift in human consciousness.

It is unfortunate (re: atlantean references etc) that due to finding a few items on that site that are questionable to your intellect, the possibility of understanding or finding the more useful messages is diminished...

You seem OK though, pretty solid. Making our own decisions as to what is "real" is (generally?:D) healthier than being influenced by prophecies, sensationalism, purveyors of doomsday conspiracies and media fear-mongering.

My point was, and it's hard to fully explain in the time I have, is what the effect is of having millions of people holding a laserbeam focus of fear on this event. If you are cvurious, a good place to start reading from is thought-forms (individual and group (morphogenetic fields)), perhaps some understanding of Huna/Kahuna concepts, as well as the physical/astral/causal planes of reality. There's also a quaint book, much simpler than understanding and utilising the previous concepts, called "The astonishing power of emotions". Incredibly succinct at portraying the potentials of changing the way we interact/interface with reality to create a different experience.

snuff wrote:
feet arse wrote:The universe allows us to interact with it and consciously shape that which we will experience. How we experience 2012, and what will be held in that experience, will primarily be defined by what we hold in our own minds and emotions.


Taking shrooms doesn't make you a shaman, hippy.


You are correct, taking shrooms does not make one a shaman, nor a hippy. Shaman being a title bestowed, not claimed. A "title" however, is no prerequisite to forging oneself into a psychic superconductor on the super natural grid.

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:33 am

damn you yule for playing the 'my astronomy guy is better than yours' card. you are ruthless! :wink:
actually, plait is a debunker. i don't really consider debunkers scientists, inspite of their credentials. gotta retain an open mind to discover the truth...whatever it is or may be in this case.
and whatever happens or doesn't happen in 2012, real or contrived, it pays to keep scraping the clues together from wherever just to figure out what the 'real' story is. unfortunately knowledge and information have become a commodity and isn't so easily shared in its pure state to the common joe blow anymore.

check out these 'astronomy guys': Tom Van Flandern @ http://www.metaresearch.org/ (you like flashy credentials...this guy has 'em). http://www.metaresearch.org/home/about% ... resume.asp
and James McCanney http://www.jmccanneyscience.com/ (alot of great info but abit painful to read as the website is shite)

weather manipulation from james mccanneys website:
the following link shows the storm system i directly measured being manipulated via satellite laser ... the same technique that the russian scientists and myself offered to the U S air force in the mid 90's to prevent hurricanes from making land fall ... now the US mil satellites are using it to attack our own country for the new world order bunch ... by the way the new world order crew is very fragile and would easily be taken out ... i recommend the angry crown technique as this is what they deserve ... in measuring this storm manipulation i was located about 200 miles west of san francisco (the large visible bay in the video in western california) at around 45,000 foot altitude ... you can see where i was relative to the storm as it was dragged down the california coast line from oregon where it started ... jim mcanney

for future reference i am reposting my january 03, 2005 posting ...

january 03, 2005 posting ... the sun remains extremely active and erratic ... however the real story is the following ... in addition to the extreme solar conditions i have now clear evidence of manipulation of weather by what appears to be a military satellite that is either geo stationed over the pacific ocean or is on an orbit that allows regular pulsing of the atmosphere or can be moved into non-geo semi-stationary orbits by a station keeping propulsion system ... the following information i personally gathered at an altitude of 45,000 feet from a location approximately 200 miles west of San Francisco over the Pacific Ocean ... a clear signature of a laser was observed and triangulated that was inducing the cyclonic storm approximately 200 miles off the west coast of Oregon and has since forced that storm center to move in a southerly direction and is now off the coast of northern California ... the purpose of this man made storm is to draw moisture off of what at first seemed a naturally occurring central Pacific tropical depression but i am now becoming more convinced that this second storm center also is being manipulated and maintained in location as it has been stationary over the exact same location in the Pacific ... NOAA computer predictions are totally incorrect and have been incorrect over that past weeks for not only this area but also for the affected areas which includes much of the south west USA ... the storms that were predicted to bring water to arizona for example were supposed to be drawing water from a jet stream coming down from alaska according to NOAA weather models (the water in fact is coming from the west and the south pacific) ... this is because the normal flow of the storm cells would have them moving in a totally different manner ... this all started to become obvious some time ago when the storm cells off of Oregon were forming and just setting there ... many times this same storm cell would form and dissipate in a matter of hours ... weather manipulation was clearly occurring... not following the normal seasonal progressions ... i made arrangements to place myself in a position where i could directly measure what i had since become convinced was weather manipulation of these pacific storm centers ... especially after the Florida Hurricane season ... when hurricane Jeanne did the loop de loop in the Atlantic and then headed for the same land fall location as hurricane Frances (i have been watching closely for signs of weather manipulation that i could measure and verify ... i was also confounded by the complete inability of NOAA computer models to predict the hurricane paths and weather in general ... those computer models are pretty bad to begin with but statistically for short range predictions they should have had a fairly good prediction record for the four major hurricanes of last fall and also for immediate weather of the pacific region ... all of this has been clear signs that the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing and is so typical of American Black Ops ... when i began noticing this weather "strangeness" i made arrangements to move into position to make direct measurements of what i now had become convinced were satellites sending laser beams to earth to ignite and move storms ... this was also confirmed when the strange Brazilian Hurricane of last March showed definite signs of manipulation ... on JANUARY 01, 2005 I MADE THE DIRECT MEASUREMENT AND CONFIRMED THROUGH MULTIPLE READINGS BY TRIANGULATION THE LASER SIGNATURE THAT WAS DRIVING THE STORM OFF THE WEST COAST OF OREGON as i said from an altitude of 45,000 feet approximately 200 miles west of San Francisco ... as you will see from the attached video clip the central pacific storm is stationary and is fueling the moisture for the second small storm center that has now moved south to be just west of northern California ... this storm is drawing large amounts of moisture and is flooding the west coast area ... this is a clear cut case of weather manipulation to devastate a populated area in the USA ... i have always been suspicious of the extremely large mil satellites that were put in orbit over recent years "to listen to the cell phones of terrorists" ... you do not need these large satellites for that purpose ... but you do need a large satellite for a high energy laser !!!!! ... i am not giving out at this time any more details ... but i captured the pacific satellite loop for your inspection of the two storm systems ... note that pacific system has been setting in the same location for almost 2 weeks ... the storm system over the pacific and just west of Oregon has been forming and dissipating a number of times over the past weeks as they got their calibration down i suspect ... watch the Oregon storm move southward in the video clip and watch how it drags the moisture from the central pacific storm into california's west coast and also is affecting the weather as far south as mexico ... it seems our boys in blue are doing more than fighting terrorists ... the solar conditions as noted above are extremely severe and erratic and the mil boys are apparently getting their jolly's by making a bad situation worse...
http://www.jmccanneyscience.com/Satelli ... ion101.HTM

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:16 pm

You have to retain an open mind, but that doesn't mean removing filters that you should have, like actually having evidence for what you are claiming.
He "debunks" stuff that has not enough support, giving actual reasoning for why whatever is being claimed just isn't that way. He backs up his arguments as opposed to just postulating points and leaving gaping holes in the evidence and logic behind it.

normotheclown
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 1:15 pm
Location: in the heart of Takaro Hardcore

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby normotheclown » Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:20 pm

... So the worlds gonna end on the 21st dec 2012 eh?

How convienient.

That also happens to be my 39th birthday.

It'll be a "smoke 'em if you've got 'em" kinda party....
SRI SYADASTI SYADAVAKTAVYA SYADASTI SYANNASTI SYADASTI CAVAKTAVYASCA SYADASTI SYANNASTI SYADAVATAVYASCA SYADASTI SYANNASTI SYADAVAKTAVYASCA

All affirmations are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense.

User avatar
Lummoxgrinder
Posts: 1966
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: North Dunedin
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby Lummoxgrinder » Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:37 pm

The thing is if the world ends in 2012 it'll tkae 4 or 5 years to hit New Zealand so we'll have plenty of time to prepare

Huey
fairy gymnast
Posts: 6537
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 2:45 pm
Location: Huey Christ Superstar: the second coming
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby Huey » Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:41 pm

feet arse wrote:A "title" however, is no prerequisite to forging oneself into a psychic superconductor on the super natural grid.


rofl.

what a moran.
Because he's the hero Punkas deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight

Mi amore
Don't you know
My love I want you so
Sugar
You make my soul complete
Rapture tastes so sweet

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:22 pm

yeh... i was having a hard time letting that slide too...

feet arse
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:14 pm

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby feet arse » Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:54 pm

Was my point unclear? How do you think it is that the shaman can stand with one foot in this world and the other foot in another world? What forces are at play when the yogi gains siddhi? I am not going to quarrel with you, or take issue with you. Clearly you are an expert on the matters at hand!

I try to convey concepts in a way that people will understand. I'm not inclined to stick around if abused, try asking a question if you are curious about something, you might be pleased at the answer you get.
Last edited by feet arse on Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:01 pm

OH NOES GAIS!
IF WE PIXZ ON HIM HEZ GUNNA LEEVE

User avatar
MuscleMan
smut peddler
Posts: 11533
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby MuscleMan » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:09 pm

feet arse wrote:Was my point unclear? How do you think it is that the shaman can stand with one foot in this world and the other foot in another world? What forces are at play when the yogi gains siddhi? I am not going to quarrel with you, or take issue with you. Clearly you are an expert on the matters at hand!

I try to convey concepts in a way that people will understand. I'm not inclined to stick around if abused, try asking a question if you are curious about something, you might be pleased at the answer you get.


where do you get your weed?

User avatar
MuscleMan
smut peddler
Posts: 11533
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby MuscleMan » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:11 pm

Image

feet arse
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:14 pm

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby feet arse » Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:19 pm

steve f wrote:
feet arse wrote:Was my point unclear? How do you think it is that the shaman can stand with one foot in this world and the other foot in another world? What forces are at play when the yogi gains siddhi? I am not going to quarrel with you, or take issue with you. Clearly you are an expert on the matters at hand!

I try to convey concepts in a way that people will understand. I'm not inclined to stick around if abused, try asking a question if you are curious about something, you might be pleased at the answer you get.


where do you get your weed?


I have dandelions, chickweed and nightshade all growing in the back yard.

Image

User avatar
Rizzo
Posts: 3209
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 9:23 pm
Location: The City

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby Rizzo » Mon Aug 25, 2008 2:41 am

I like the way they've covered up his penix, can't be opening your mind if genitalia are involved, no siree!

So I've been reading Neil Gaiman's "Books of magic" over the last few nights.
The characters in that subscribe to the theory that if you don't believe in magic then it'll never happen to you.
Seems a logical enough theory. The cunning debunker never experiences magic because he "knows" that it doesn't exist. And for him, it doesn't. For those that do believe it does.
Whether of course you can transpose that over to conspiracy theories or not I don't know.
Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

By December 2012 I should be finishing a Masters degree or possibly halfway through a doctoral program depending on how fate takes me. That'd be a shame to waste all that education by dying. Not buying it myself, I intend to still be here come Christmas 2012.
General Mutante wrote:Turning the other cheek is for christians and other assorted boring cunts. Bring on the hate. SACRIFICE THE GOLDEN CHILD!

akaxo wrote:if metal isn't elitist it is false

User avatar
YULE
Posts: 4892
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:38 pm
Location: The Swamp (im one of the cool kids now)
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby YULE » Mon Aug 25, 2008 2:49 am

It would be logical if belief = reality
sadly, it doesn't. otherwise 5 year old me could have really controlled the weather with his emotions.

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:58 am

The Holographic Universe
Does Objective Reality Exist?
By Michael Talbot

3-12-6

In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram.

To understand why Bohm makes this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms. A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser.

To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film.

When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears.

The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half will still be found to contain the entire image of the rose.

Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film will always be found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole.


The "whole in every part" nature of a hologram provides us with an entirely new way of understanding organization and order. For most of its history, Western science has labored under the bias that the best way to understand a physical phenomenon, whether a frog or an atom, is to dissect it and study its respective parts.

A hologram teaches us that some things in the universe may not lend themselves to this approach. If we try to take apart something constructed holographically, we will not get the pieces of which it is made, we will only get smaller wholes.

This insight suggested to Bohm another way of understanding Aspect's discovery. Bohm believes the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion. He argues that at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something.

To enable people to better visualize what he means, Bohm offers the following illustration.

Imagine an aquarium containing a fish. Imagine also that you are unable to see the aquarium directly and your knowledge about it and what it contains comes from two television cameras, one directed at the aquarium's front and the other directed at its side.

As you stare at the two television monitors, you might assume that the fish on each of the screens are separate entities. After all, because the cameras are set at different angles, each of the images will be slightly different. But as you continue to watch the two fish, you will eventually become aware that there is a certain relationship between them.

When one turns, the other also makes a slightly different but corresponding turn; when one faces the front, the other always faces toward the side. If you remain unaware of the full scope of the situation, you might even conclude that the fish must be instantaneously communicating with one another, but this is clearly not the case.

This, says Bohm, is precisely what is going on between the subatomic particles in Aspect's experiment.

According to Bohm, the apparent faster-than-light connection between subatomic particles is really telling us that there is a deeper level of reality we are not privy to, a more complex dimension beyond our own that is analogous to the aquarium. And, he adds, we view objects such as subatomic particles as separate from one another because we are seeing only a portion of their reality.

Such particles are not separate "parts", but facets of a deeper and more underlying unity that is ultimately as holographic and indivisible as the previously mentioned rose. And since everything in physical reality is comprised of these "eidolons", the universe is itself a projection, a hologram.

In addition to its phantomlike nature, such a universe would possess other rather startling features. If the apparent separateness of subatomic particles is illusory, it means that at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected.

The electrons in a carbon atom in the human brain are connected to the subatomic particles that comprise every salmon that swims, every heart that beats, and every star that shimmers in the sky.

Everything interpenetrates everything, and although human nature may seek to categorize and pigeonhole and subdivide, the various phenomena of the universe, all apportionments are of necessity artificial and all of nature is ultimately a seamless web.

In a holographic universe, even time and space could no longer be viewed as fundamentals. Because concepts such as location break down in a universe in which nothing is truly separate from anything else, time and three-dimensional space, like the images of the fish on the TV monitors, would also have to be viewed as projections of this deeper order.

At its deeper level reality is a sort of superhologram in which the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This suggests that given the proper tools it might even be possible to someday reach into the superholographic level of reality and pluck out scenes from the long-forgotten past.

What else the superhologram contains is an open-ended question. Allowing, for the sake of argument, that the superhologram is the matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be -- every configuration of matter and energy that is possible, from snowflakes to quasars, from blue whales to gamma rays. It must be seen as a sort of cosmic storehouse of "All That Is."

Although Bohm concedes that we have no way of knowing what else might lie hidden in the superhologram, he does venture to say that we have no reason to assume it does not contain more. Or as he puts it, perhaps the superholographic level of reality is a "mere stage" beyond which lies "an infinity of further development".

Bohm is not the only researcher who has found evidence that the universe is a hologram. Working independently in the field of brain research, Standford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram has also become persuaded of the holographic nature of reality.

Pribram was drawn to the holographic model by the puzzle of how and where memories are stored in the brain. For decades numerous studies have shown that rather than being confined to a specific location, memories are dispersed throughout the brain.

In a series of landmark experiments in the 1920s, brain scientist Karl Lashley found that no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery. The only problem was that no one was able to come up with a mechanism that might explain this curious "whole in every part" nature of memory storage.

Then in the 1960s Pribram encountered the concept of holography and realized he had found the explanation brain scientists had been looking for. Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image. In other words, Pribram believes the brain is itself a hologram.

Pribram's theory also explains how the human brain can store so many memories in so little space. It has been estimated that the human brain has the capacity to memorize something on the order of 10 billion bits of information during the average human lifetime (or roughly the same amount of information contained in five sets of the Encyclopaedia Britannica).

Similarly, it has been discovered that in addition to their other capabilities, holograms possess an astounding capacity for information storage--simply by changing the angle at which the two lasers strike a piece of photographic film, it is possible to record many different images on the same surface. It has been demonstrated that one cubic centimeter of film can hold as many as 10 billion bits of information.

Our uncanny ability to quickly retrieve whatever information we need from the enormous store of our memories becomes more understandable if the brain functions according to holographic principles. If a friend asks you to tell him what comes to mind when he says the word "zebra", you do not have to clumsily sort back through some gigantic and cerebral alphabetic file to arrive at an answer. Instead, associations like "striped", "horselike", and "animal native to Africa" all pop into your head instantly.

Indeed, one of the most amazing things about the human thinking process is that every piece of information seems instantly cross- correlated with every other piece of information--another feature intrinsic to the hologram. Because every portion of a hologram is infinitely interconnected with ever other portion, it is perhaps nature's supreme example of a cross-correlated system.

The storage of memory is not the only neurophysiological puzzle that becomes more tractable in light of Pribram's holographic model of the brain. Another is how the brain is able to translate the avalanche of frequencies it receives via the senses (light frequencies, sound frequencies, and so on) into the concrete world of our perceptions. Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through the senses into the inner world of our perceptions.

An impressive body of evidence suggests that the brain uses holographic principles to perform its operations. Pribram's theory, in fact, has gained increasing support among neurophysiologists.

Argentinian-Italian researcher Hugo Zucarelli recently extended the holographic model into the world of acoustic phenomena. Puzzled by the fact that humans can locate the source of sounds without moving their heads, even if they only possess hearing in one ear, Zucarelli discovered that holographic principles can explain this ability.

Zucarelli has also developed the technology of holophonic sound, a recording technique able to reproduce acoustic situations with an almost uncanny realism.

Pribram's belief that our brains mathematically construct "hard" reality by relying on input from a frequency domain has also received a good deal of experimental support.

It has been found that each of our senses is sensitive to a much broader range of frequencies than was previously suspected.

Researchers have discovered, for instance, that our visual systems are sensitive to sound frequencies, that our sense of smell is in part dependent on what are now called "cosmic frequencies", and that even the cells in our bodies are sensitive to a broad range of frequencies. Such findings suggest that it is only in the holographic domain of consciousness that such frequencies are sorted out and divided up into conventional perceptions.

But the most mind-boggling aspect of Pribram's holographic model of the brain is what happens when it is put together with Bohm's theory. For if the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality and what is "there" is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only selects some of the frequencies out of this blur and mathematically transforms them into sensory perceptions, what becomes of objective reality?

Put quite simply, it ceases to exist. As the religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion, and although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this too is an illusion.

We are really "receivers" floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency, and what we extract from this sea and transmogrify into physical reality is but one channel from many extracted out of the superhologram.

This striking new picture of reality, the synthesis of Bohm and Pribram's views, has come to be called the holographic paradigm, and although many scientists have greeted it with skepticism, it has galvanized others. A small but growing group of researchers believe it may be the most accurate model of reality science has arrived at thus far. More than that, some believe it may solve some mysteries that have never before been explainable by science and even establish the paranormal as a part of nature.

Numerous researchers, including Bohm and Pribram, have noted that many para-psychological phenomena become much more understandable in terms of the holographic paradigm.

In a universe in which individual brains are actually indivisible portions of the greater hologram and everything is infinitely interconnected, telepathy may merely be the accessing of the holographic level.

It is obviously much easier to understand how information can travel from the mind of individual 'A' to that of individual 'B' at a far distance point and helps to understand a number of unsolved puzzles in psychology. In particular, Grof feels the holographic paradigm offers a model for understanding many of the baffling phenomena experienced by individuals during altered states of consciousness.
http://www.rense.com/general69/holoff.htm

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:12 am

David Joseph Bohm (b. December 20, 1917, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania - d. October 27, 1992, London) was an American-born quantum physicist who made significant contributions in the fields of theoretical physics, philosophy and neuropsychology, and to the Manhattan Project.

Thought as a System
Bohm was alarmed by what he considered an increasing imbalance of not only 'man' and nature, but among peoples, as well as people, themselves. Bohm: "So one begins to wonder what is going to happen to the human race. Technology keeps on advancing with greater and greater power, either for good or for destruction." He goes on to ask:

What is the source of all this trouble? I'm saying that the source is basically in thought. Many people would think that such a statement is crazy, because thought is the one thing we have with which to solve our problems. That's part of our tradition. Yet it looks as if the thing we use to solve our problems with is the source of our problems. It's like going to the doctor and having him make you ill. In fact, in 20% of medical cases we do apparently have that going on. But in the case of thought, it's far over 20%.

In Bohm's view:

...the general tacit assumption in thought is that it's just telling you the way things are and that it's not doing anything - that 'you' are inside there, deciding what to do with the info. But you don't decide what to do with the info. Thought runs you. Thought, however, gives false info that you are running it, that you are the one who controls thought. Whereas actually thought is the one which controls each one of us. Thought is creating divisions out of itself and then saying that they are there naturally. This is another major feature of thought: Thought doesn't know it is doing something and then it struggles against what it is doing. It doesn't want to know that it is doing it. And thought struggles against the results, trying to avoid those unpleasant results while keeping on with that way of thinking. That is what I call "sustained incoherence".


Bohm thus proposes in his book, Thought as a System, a pervasive, systematic nature of thought:

What I mean by "thought" is the whole thing - thought, felt, the body, the whole society sharing thoughts - it's all one process. It is essential for me not to break that up, because it's all one process; somebody else's thoughts becomes my thoughts, and vice versa. Therefore it would be wrong and misleading to break it up into my thoughts, your thoughts, my feelings, these feelings, those feelings... I would say that thought makes what is often called in modern language a system. A system means a set of connected things or parts. But the way people commonly use the word nowadays it means something all of whose parts are mutually interdependent - not only for their mutual action, but for their meaning and for their existence. A corporation is organized as a system - it has this department, that department, that department. They don't have any meaning separately; they only can function together. And also the body is a system. Society is a system in some sense. And so on. Similarly, thought is a system. That system not only includes thoughts, "felts" and feelings, but it includes the state of the body; it includes the whole of society - as thought is passing back and forth between people in a process by which thought evolved from ancient times. A system is constantly engaged in a process of development, change, evolution and structure changes...although there are certain features of the system which become relatively fixed. We call this the structure.... Thought has been constantly evolving and we can't say when that structure began. But with the growth of civilization it has developed a great deal. It was probably very simple thought before civilization, and now it has become very complex and ramified and has much more incoherence than before. Now, I say that this system has a fault in it - a "systematic fault". It is not a fault here, there or here, but it is a fault that is all throughout the system. Can you picture that? It is everywhere and nowhere. You may say "I see a problem here, so I will bring my thoughts to bear on this problem". But "my" thought is part of the system. It has the same fault as the fault I'm trying to look at, or a similar fault. Thought is constantly creating problems that way and then trying to solve them. But as it tries to solve them it makes it worse because it doesn’t notice that it's creating them, and the more it thinks, the more problems it creates. (P. 18-19)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm


In autumn of 1992, one of the world's greatest contemporary physicists passed away. David Bohm, whose work inspired many people all over the world, died in London. David Bohm's contributions to science and philosophy are profound, and they have yet to be fully recognized and integrated on the grand scale.
David Bohm was born on December 20, 1917, in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Bohm was fascinated by the dazzling concepts of cosmic forces and vast expanses of space that lie beyond our understanding. Bohm began his theory with the troubling concern that the two pillars of modern physics, quantum mechanics and relativity theory, actually contradict each other.
This contradiction is not just in minor details but is very fundamental, because quantum mechanics requires reality to be discontinuous, non-causal, and non-local, whereas relativity theory requires reality to be continuous, causal, and local. This discrepancy can be patched up in a few cases using mathematical re-normalization techniques, but this approach introduces an infinite number of arbitrary features into the theory that, Bohm points out, are reminiscent of the epicycles used to patch up the crumbling theory of Ptolmaic astronomy.
Hence, contrary to widespread understanding even among scientists, the new physics is self-contradictory at its foundation and is far from being a finished new model of reality. Bohm was further troubled by the fact that many leading physicists did not pay sufficient attention to this discrepancy.

Seeking a resolution of this dilemma, Bohm inquired into what the two contradictory theories of modern physics have in common. What he found was undivided wholeness. Bohm was therefore led to take wholeness very seriously, and, indeed, wholeness became the foundation of his major contributions to physics.
According to quantum physics no matter how far apart two quanta's of light (photons) travel, when they are measured they will always be found to have identical angles of polarization. This suggests that somehow the two photons must be instantaneously communicating with each other so they know which angle of polarization to agree upon. Eventually, technology became available to actually perform the two particle experiment, but no one was able to produce conclusive results.
Then in 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. There are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science. Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing.

GH - This is correct because matter is actually large, as a Spherical Standing Wave in Space (rather than a 'particle') thus is always continuously connected to all other matter in the Universe by its In and Out Waves.

This meant that either Einstein's long-held theory that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light or the two particles are non-locally connected. Because most physicists are opposed to admitting faster-than-light processes into physics, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

David Bohm believes the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion. Bohm postulates that the ultimate nature of physical reality is not a collection of separate objects (as it appears to us), but rather it is an undivided whole that is in perpetual dynamic flux. For Bohm, the insights of quantum mechanics and relativity theory point to a universe that is undivided and in which all parts merge and unite in one totality.
This undivided whole is not static but rather in a constant state of flow and change, a kind of invisible ether from which all things arise and into which all things eventually dissolve. Indeed, even mind and matter are united. Bohm refers to his theory as the holomovement. The terms holo and movement refer to two fundamental features of reality. The movement portion refers to the fact that reality is in a constant state of change and flux as mentioned above. The holo portion signifies that reality is structured in a manner that is very similar to holography. Bohm says that the universe is like a hologram.

GH - This is correct, this dynamic flux is caused by the Wave Structure of Matter in Space (One Continuously Connected Wave Medium).

So, in order to understand what that means, we need to have some idea of the components and structure of a hologram. There are several explanations, but here is something of the idea. To construct a hologram you need two beams of light (lasers). One beam will bounce off the object that you want as a hologram, and the other beam will shine directly onto the special photographic plate or film. The interference patterns of those two light sources will interact on the plate. They swirl around and do not look like anything in particular if you are looking at the plate. If, however, you shine a laser beam through the plate of film, the object will be reproduced in the 3-dimensional form of a hologram. And further more, if you tear the plate apart and shine the beam of light through any of the pieces, the whole object can be reproduced. So, in essence, each part contains the patterns for the whole picture.
One of Bohm's most startling assertions is that the tangible reality of our everyday lives is really a kind of illusion, like a holographic image. Underlying it is a deeper order of existence, a vast and more primary level of reality that gives birth to all the objects and appearances of our physical world in much the same way that a piece of holographic film gives birth to a hologram.
Bohm calls this deeper level of reality the implicate (which means enfolded or hidden) order, and he refers to our own level or existence as the explicate, or unfolded order. Put another way, electrons and all other particles are no more substantive or permanent then the form a geyser of water takes as it gushes out of a fountain. They are sustained by a constant influx from the implicate order, and when a particle appears to be destroyed, it is not lost. It has merely enfolded back into the deeper order from which it sprang.

GH - The central point here is that our mind represents our senses (due to our evolution based on survival) rather than providing a true picture of reality. However, reason tells us that matter is clearly interconnected (e.g. the earth orbits the sun) and that there must be knowledge flowing into matter to explain how we can see things around us. This is correct, and explained by the Spherical In-Waves which form the 'particle' effect of matter at their Wave-Center.

A piece of holographic film and the image it generates are also an example of an implicate and explicate order. The film is an implicate order because the image encoded it its interference patterns is a hidden totality enfolded throughout the whole. The hologram projected from the film is an explicate order because it represents the unfolded and perceptible version of the image.
Bohm is not the only researcher who has found evidence that the universe is a hologram. Working independently in the field of brain research, Stanford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram has also become persuaded by the holographic nature of reality. He says that the human brain can be modeled as a hologram. Pribram was drawn to the holographic model by the puzzle of how and where memories are stored in the brain.
For decades numerous studies have shown that rather than being confined to a specific location, memories are dispersed throughout the brain. In a series of landmark experiments in the 1920's, brain scientist Karl Lashley found that no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery. The only problem was that no one was able to come up with a mechanism that might explain this curious whole in every part nature of memory storage.
Then in the 1960's Pribram encountered the concept of holography and realized he had found the explanation brain scientists had been looking for. Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image.

GH - This is important, as again it is founded on the principle that matter is large and subtly interconnected to other matter in the space around us, as the Wave Structure of Matter explains / confirms.

Capitalizing on Pribram's findings, Bohm states that our brains are smaller pieces of the larger hologram. That our brains contain the whole knowledge of the universe. So, you can see how each mind has a limited perspective of the universal hologram. Our brains are our windows of perception. Each mind always contains the whole picture, but with a limited and unclear perspective. We each have different experience in our lives, but each perspective is valid. Our brains mathematically construct objective reality by interpreting frequencies that are ultimately projections form another dimension, a deeper order of existence that is beyond both space and time.

GH - Time, along with particles, is a human representation, both being caused by the wave Motion of Space (thus the name of this website SpaceandMotion). So the Wave Structure of Matter is founded on the Metaphysics of Space and (wave) Motion rather than Space and Time. But Space itself does physically exist (as a Wave-Medium).

The brain is a hologram enfolded in a holographic universe. We can view ourselves as physical bodies moving through space. Or we can view ourselves as a blur of interference patterns enfolded throughout the cosmic hologram.
This could be also expressed with the analogy that the brain is like the laser beam that shines through the holographic film to interpret the patterns. As it turns out, you can preserve the interference patterns of more than one hologram on the same film by using various different angles of projection of the laser beams.
Therefore, depending on the direction and frequency of the beam that you send through the film, a different hologram will appear. So, if applied to the brain, consciousness literally becomes the co-creator of the reality portrayed depending upon its angle of perception. This does not mean that if I am looking at a tree, it is not really there. The tree is there on multidimensional levels, which means that I am seeing a cross-section of the tree depending on the level of consciousness that I am tuned into. If the brain is a decoder of sorts, then it can be tuned to different states or frequencies of consciousness, and I will see different levels of tree reality depending upon which one I'm on.
Therefore, mind contributes to the phenomenon of reality itself, not just to the knowledge of it. In a brain that operates holographically, the remembered image of a thing can have as much impact on the senses as the thing itself.

Bohm uses his idea of the implicate order, the deeper and non-local level of existence from which our entire universe springs, to echo this sentiment: Every action starts from an intention in the implicate order. The imagination is already the creation of the form; it already has the intention and the germs of all the movements needed to carry it out. And it affects the body and so on, so that as creation takes place in that way, from the subtler levels of the implicate order, it goes through them until it manifests in the explicate.
In other words, in the implicate order, as in the brain itself, imagination and reality are ultimately indistinguishable, and it should therefore come as no surprise to us that images in the mind can ultimately manifest as realities in the physical body. So it appears that through the use of images, the brain can tell the body what to do, including telling to make more images. Such is the nature of the mind/body relationship in a holographic universe. According to the holographic model, the mind/body ultimately cannot distinguish the difference between the neural holograms the brain uses to experience reality and the ones it conjures up while imagining reality. This effect is so powerful that each of us possesses the ability, at least at some level, to influence our health and control our physical form.

Contemporary scientists may ignore Bohm's work (as many have done), but they cannot escape its implications. His hypothesis is rigorously grounded in the experimental evidence of physics, and such it is not just a new way of thinking about physics, it is a new physics, that is, it is a entirely new way of understanding the fundamental nature of the physical universe, as glimpsed through the data and laws of physics.
It isn't that the world of appearances is wrong; it isn't there aren't objects out there, at one level of reality. It's that if you penetrate through and look at the universe with a holographic system, you arrive at a different reality. And that other reality can explain things that have hitherto remained inexplicable scientifically: paranormal phenomena, and synchronicities, the apparently meaningful coincidence of events. (Karl Pribram) Bohm's holographic theory has found fruitful application in brain physiology and human consciousness. This theory opens new lines of research, it predicts hitherto unknown phenomena, and makes some novel predictions.

Bohm points out that there is no scientific evidence that argues for the dominant fragmented scientific world view over Bohm's hypothesis of undivided wholeness. However, while scientific evidence offers no help in this regard, other forms of evidence may, indeed, shed some light on the matter. For example, mystical and spiritual teachings down through the ages have also spoken about the fundamental interconnectedness of all things. If Bohm's physics, or one similar to it, Gary Zukav writes in his popular New Age book The Dancing Wu Li Masters (1979), should become the main thrust of physics in the future, the dances of East and West could blend in exquisite harmony. Do not be surprised if physics curricula of the twenty-first century include classes in meditation. With the model of the holographic brain, the holographic universe, and Quantum Physics, we could speculate that all that we hold as real is nothing more than the playful dance of light, light that has no dimension and limitless dimension. The radical implications of Bohm's implicate order take some time to fully grasp, especially for Western minds, but whether Bohm's holographic paradigm becomes accepted in science or not remains to be seen.

http://www.essays.cc/free_essays/e4/dkt106.shtml
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-D ... iverse.htm

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:36 am

Quantum Unpredictability

The physicist Richard Feynman (1988) stated that quantum theory can be used to explain all of our physical world except gravity. It has been proved over and over to be a successful theory. However, when it comes to understanding what quantum theory says about our world, he acknowledged that “my physics students don’t understand it ... I don’t understand it. No-body does” (p. 9).

There is no agreement in the scientific community as to what is really going on in the microscopic world of quantum mechanics (Herbert, 1985). There is agreement with the results of quantum experiments and observations. The problem comes when those results are interpreted. Herbert (1985) lists eight different interpretations of our world, all based on the same experimental results:

1. The Copenhagen Interpretation #1. There is no deep reality. Our physical world is real enough, but its quantum foundations are not real (Segrè, 1980). This interpretation was favored by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg.

2. The Copenhagen Interpretation #2. Reality is created by observation. The world has a phenomenal reality, but we each create our own reality through our observations (Wolf, 1984). John Wheeler’s famous maxim states that “no elementary phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon” (Herbert, 1985, p. 18).

3. The Undefined Wholeness Interpretation. Quantum wholeness suggests that everything is inherently interconnected. This connection is unaffected by time or space. Adherents include David Bohm, Fritjof Capra, and Walter Heitler.

4. The Many-Worlds Interpretation. Reality in an increasing number of parallel worlds. Every possible outcome of every decision actually occurs, but it does so by splitting off into new, parallel universes (Wolf, 1988). Formulated in 1957, by Hugh Evertt, one of its chief adherents today is Paul Davies (1980).

5. The Quantum Logic Interpretation. The world obeys a reasoning which is non-human. In the same way that Einstein’s relativity requires a new way of logic from the old Newtonian universe, so the quantum world requires a new logic in order for us to understand it. Its chief adherent today is quantum theorist David Finkelstein.

6. The Neorealism Interpretation. The world is composed of ordinary objects and is ruled by logic and reason and order. The champions of this view were several pioneers in quantum mechanics including Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Erwin Schrödinger, and Prince Louis de Broglie.

7. The Consciousness Creates Reality Interpretation. In this view, it is not enough to observe phenomena, such as a camera or recording device, but the observer must be conscious. Adherents include Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner and the famous mathematician John von Neumann.

8. The World as Duality Interpretation. The world consists of potentials and actualities. Our everyday world is real, but atoms and subatomic particles only exist in the form of possibilities. This interpretation was described by Werner Heisenberg.

Each of these explanations or interpretations of the quantum facts has adherents, but only the first two (two versions of the Copenhagen Interpretation) are generally accepted by physicists. Whichever view we accept, our deterministic world no longer seems so predictable:

Not only does quantum theory deny the standard idea of objectivity but it also has destroyed the deterministic world view. According to the quantum theory, some events such as electrons jumping around atoms occur at random. There just isn’t any physical law that will ever tell us when an electron is going to jump; the best we can do is to give the probability of a jump. The smallest wheels of the great clockwork, the atoms, do not obey deterministic laws.” (Pagels, 1982, p. 64).

At the quantum level, our world is indeterministic. Our comfortable world of causality disappears when we make observations into the atom. Wolf (1984) writes:

My study of quantum physics made me realize that it is a psychological science as well as a physical one. This realization followed from the fact that the observer had a dramatic effect, as a result of choosing what to look for (the principle of complementarity), on the results of his or her observations.” (p. 6)

Bohr’s principle of complementarity says that “two magnitudes are complementary when the measurement of one of them prevents the accurate simultaneous measurement of the other. Similarly, two concepts are complementary when one imposes limitations on the other” (Sergrè, 1980, p. 167). This principle, and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, which says that we cannot measure both the position and momentum of a subatomic particle simultaneously, are two major limitations placed on reality by quantum theory. Bohr used this principle to explain the dualistic wave-particle nature of light (Sergrè, 1980).

The Greek letter psi (Q) is used in quantum theory to represent the wave function of a particle, a complex function of the particle’s position, momentum, energy, spin, and angular momentum. In short, everything that we can possibly know about a particle is inherent in its wave function - each of these qualities is called an observable. This is mathematically expressed for position as Q(x) where x is position. For each position x, the wave function has a specific value Q(x), which defines the amplitude of the particle at position x. The wave function Q, is called the quantum state and it is a collection of all possible positions for the particle (Penrose, 1989). Of course, when we measure any particle’s position, we will only get one value - this is the famous quantum measurement problem. The same is true for all other observables of a particle.

At the quantum level, particles behave as waves with amplitudes that can be accurately described by their wave functions. When physicists try to determine what is going on at the quantum level, they must convert from amplitudes (certainties) to probabilities (uncertainties). The physicist Max Born showed that the quantity Q2 is a measure of the probability that the particle will be near any position x.

According to Penrose (1989), “the rule is that we must take the squared modulus of the quantum complex amplitude to get the classical probabilities” (p. 239). This conversion is called the collapse of the wave function. Basically, it implies that all of the existing quantum possibilities suddenly collapse down to a single actual event--the result of our observation. Mathematics can easily account for the wave function, and for the converted probabilities, but not for the collapse itself, which remains a mystery. If we perform enough identical measurements, we will get an array of results that correspond to the quantum probabilities of the wave function, but for any one observation, only one measurement will be found and there is no way to predict which of the possibilities it will be. In this way, observation reduces probabilities to certainties.

Wolf (1984) shows that the wave function (which he poetically calls a qwiff) violates causality and suggests the possibility that space-time is not fundamental. In the quantum world, instantaneous events can, and do, occur. Such events cannot be causally related. John Bell’s famous inequality was a death blow to causality as we seem to experience it. Bell’s inequality demonstrated that local causality (causality within any specific reference frame) can be violated. Physicists have concluded from Bell’s inequality that our world is not locally causal, although it seems to be in our daily experience (Pagels, 1982). Physical objects are real, but the reality that they represent (i.e, quantum reality) has to be nonlocal. In other words, if we look at quantum reality as containing ordinary objects, then we also must accept speeds that are faster than light despite the basic assumption of Einstein’s relativity is that no object with mass can move faster than light.

According to Mansfield (1995), “The role of the archetype in synchronicity parallels the role of the wave function, Q, in quantum mechanics” (p. 82). This suggests that the quantum wave function may serve as a bridge between science and psychology. Indeed, this is not surprising when we note that Jung developed his theory of synchronicity with the assistance of Professor Wolfgang Pauli, one of the pioneers of quantum mechanics
http://www.schuelers.com/ChaosPsyche/part_1_30.htm

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:49 am

THE QUANTUM ERA

The media of our culture today is very different from that of 1900 and even from that of just twenty years ago. Our ability to easily accept films like Groundhog Day , Memento , T2 and The Matrix grows out of the way our experiences navigating the Net and moving through the space-times of computer games has completely rewired our minds. It is easy to forget how rapidly our world has changed. While India has been long comfortable with infinities, our little world surrounding the Mediterranean has until very recently lived in a bounded universe. Newton saw our solar system as surrounded by the fixed stars. It was not until 1924 that Hubble discovered that ours is only one of countless galaxies, and 1927 that he discovered that our universe is expanding. The big-bang model was developed by George Gamow in the 1940s. All of this is within the memories of many living today. Our comfort with sliding on the surfaces of membranes in infinite seas of universes filled with strings and virtual particles popping in and out of existence is very recent.

Just the way we can regard Newton's physics and cosmology along with perspective painting as a diagram of the mind that produced it (to use the term developed for chip pirating, we can "reverse engineer" Newton's laws to reveal the structures of consciousness that produced them), so we can map the structures of consciousness that will be producing the architecture of our immediate future by looking at quantum theory along with M-brane cosmology, string theory, and cyberpunk novels and films, as well as and the work on the boards of architecture students.

WHAT IS QUANTUM THEORY?

Quantum theory, dealing with the strange behavior of subatomic particles and the role of the observer, came into focus by the late 1920s in what is called the Copenhagen Interpretation. Until recently, it remained in the domain of subatomic particles, and impacted broader fields of thought in only limited ways--fascination with the fact that photons are both particles and waves, the notion that the act of observation disrupted the thing being observed, and the paradox of Schrödinger's cat (it is neither dead nor alive until we open the box and observe it).

Then in the late 1960s and early 1970s interest in Bell's Theorem of 1964 (a recasting of the EPR Paradox) began to spread in New Age circles, and in 1982 Alan Aspect produced experimental confirmation of Bell's Theorem which states that observation of a particle here can instantaneously influence a particle across the universe. Worse, we can photograph a particle here today, put the photo in a drawer, look at it six months from now, and influence a particle across the universe back at the time of the taking of the photograph. On a quantum level, neither space nor time exists as we have understood them.

Quantum theory began with the riddle of black body radiation--the observation that the radiation emitted by a hot glowing material is red, while the calculations show that it should be blue. The resolution of the riddle lay in the realization that energy states are not continuous, but exist in discrete units we now call quanta that are defined by Plank's constant. It was soon realized that all phenomena--energy, charge, spin, and even units of space and time are not infinitely sub-dividable, but exist as quanta.

At first scientists were able to keep the full implications of quantum theory contained. Quantum theory only applied to the subatomic realm. In our larger world, classical theory held. And the paradox of Schrödinger's cat was just that--a paradox. Heisenberg's uncertainly principle was interpreted as a disturbance problem of observation--a particle, for example an electron, actually has a position and momentum, but we cannot know it until we measure it, for example by hitting it with photons (a beam of light), at which point we disturb it. This description is not correct. It is not the measurement that disturbs the particle. A particle truly does not have a definite position or momentum before we measure it. An unmeasured object, such as an electron, posses all of its possible attributes. It is everywhere and in every state it can be and have until we measure it, at which point it takes on one set of attributes.

But by the 1980s, with Bell's Theorem sinking in things began to become unraveled. The interested public and then scientists began to confront what was really in front of them. Uncertainty was not a consequence of observation. Black holes could dissolve as pairs of virtual particles that spring in and out of existence in the vacuum become separated at the event horizon. And most disturbingly, parallel universes were not only a mathematical speculation, but the bases for the prodigious power of quantum computers. (A quantum computer can theoretically be more powerful than would be the entire universe if every particle in it were a computer. David Deutsch contends that the only possible explanation for this is that quantum computers harness the power of their infinite siblings in infinite parallel universes.)

Many lay people and scientists attached to classical thinking still simply refuse to confront these now well established realities. For example, Stephen Weinberg, Nobel laureate for his work in establishing the quantum theory of the weak atomic force and participant in the Sokal Hoax debate, remains classical in his epistemology. And Matthias Scheutz in Computationalism: New Directions , a 2002 book read by architects interested in computationalism, does not even show the word quantum in the index despite David Deutsch's observation that, "We've got the quantum theory of computation--which, by the way, is THE theory of computation." (Edge)

QUANTUM REALITY

Before we explore the implications of quantum theory for architecture, let's first look at the implications of quantum theory for reality.

Newton's physics as it developed over two hundred and fifty years not only described how things behaved, but also what they were, and what the space and time in which they were behaving were. But with the development of quantum theory with its implications for extreme weirdness, physicists began to insist that quantum theory (and physics in general) says nothing about the nature of reality, it only makes mathematical predictions. In part, they adopted this position in reaction to claims that particle physics supports Eastern mysticism. However, that position is not ultimately tenable, so, following Nick Herbert in Quantum Reality , we will describe the eight possible realities compatible with quantum theory. They are as follows:

1. There is no deep reality. This is Niels Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation. Bohr contends that our phenomenal world is real, but it rests on a non-real world. This is the position of establishment physics.

2. Reality is created by observation. This is part of the Copenhagen interpretation. The world we see is real, but it exists only when we are looking at it. This position is familiar to philosophical idealists who hold that the world is a creation of mind, but it is discomforting to most physicists, even those who hold it.

3. Reality is an undivided wholeness. This position arises from the fact that particles once entwined (having a common origin) can influence each other instantly even at great distances. It was hypothecated by the EPR Paradox, established by David Bohm and deepened by Bell's Theorem.

4. Reality consists of ever increasing parallel universes. This notion holds that when there is a situation in which either of two outcomes is possible, they both happen and the universe (or "multiverse") splits into two universes, one for each of the outcomes. And since there are countless such events every moment, there are countless additions to the multiverse every moment. First proposed by in 1957 by Hugh Everett, this is the position taken by Deutsch.

5. The world operates according to quantum logic. The classical worldview uses the syllogistic logic described by Aristotle and codified by Boole in the mid-nineteenth century. Just as Einstein overthrew Euclid's geometry with relativity, so quantum theory replaces Boolean logic with a disturbing quantum logic. Quantum logic is typically seen on the sub atomic level where a particle can be in two places at the same time, but you can also see it by setting up two polarized lenses with their polarization at right angles. Together, they block out all light and you see black. Now insert a third lens between them with its polarization at a 45-degree angle. Light reappears. Thus zero light minus an additional amount of light yields a positive amount of light.

6. Neorealism, holding that the world is made of ordinary objects. This point of view, that things actually exist in the classical sense, is very difficult to maintain, as quantum facts seems to continually refute it, but David Bohm was able to devise an interpretation that saves it. However, Bohm sacrifices locality--all things are instantaneously interconnected. Perhaps the universe is one point--there is no distance.

7. Consciousness creates reality. This is a subset of number two, Reality is created by observation. In this version, the observer must have consciousness. This position is very interesting for those in the arts, and was held by John von Neumann, among others.

8. The world consists of potentials and actualities. This interpretation, maintained by Werner Heisenberg, is called the duplex world. It answers the question: If observation creates the world, what does it create the world out of? In this interpretation our world of actualities is created out of a previous world of potentials. Heisenberg says that underlying our world is one made of probability waves.

All eight of these models of reality are fully supported by quantum facts and quantum theory. As architects steeped in the arts we should be comfortable with this multiplicity of interpretations. Since we know that the world is metaphor, why can't there be more than one metaphor and more than one interpretation. We can move among the metaphors to weave powerful understandings of the reality of our era and the architectures that will come to exist in that reality.

EVERYDAY REALITY

We might try to adopt the notion that if any of these models of reality are indeed the case, they apply only at the atomic scale. At the macro scale in which we live our everyday lives, classical reality applies.

But this kind of thinking is based on the misconception that the same "common sense experience" is held in all cultures. By common sense, we mean Newtonian reality, but Newtonian reality is not universal and hardly commonsensical. Aristotle says that if we push an object it moves as long as we push it, and stops when we stop pushing it. Galileo's and Newton's laws hold that an object in motion or at rest will remain in motion or at rest unless acted on by an outside force. Of course friction is an outside force, and it will eventually stop a book that we shove across the table. So we have to imagine setting an object in motion in the vacuum of deep space. Since there are now people in orbit most of the time, we can actually picture this highly abstract notion, but we can hardly call it commonsensical everyday experience. And of course there is now no vacuum of deep space--all of space is pervaded by the Higgs particle, and virtual particles spring in and out of existence out of the vacuum everywhere. Many artists (McLuhan's "early warning systems") abandoned a Newtonian/Maxwellain reality by the early 20 th Century. In his autobiography Dali describes being able to viscerally feel the twisting distortions of relativistic space-time.

In other words what we call commonsensical everyday experience is actually our acculturated notions of reality, and is constantly undergoing change.

This paper is focused on space and time, but at the beginning we listed four imperatives: space and time, material and methods of construction, structures of consciousness, and socio-cultural context. Let's look briefly at the implications of quantum theory for the remaining three.

QUANTUM CONSTRUCTOR THEORY

As our building materials and architectural forms become more informationally intense, we will eventually need a quantum constructor theory. David Deutsch, in his Edge interview, says:

We already know of a few issues in theoretical physics (like the Maxwell Demon question, and the relationship of thermodynamics with statistics) which it is useful to regard as computational questions--questions about how information can or cannot be processed. What I am aiming for now is a new kind of theory, quantum constructor theory, which is the theory of what can be built, or more generally, the theory of what can be done, physically. We build computers and skyscrapers and space ships, and we clone animals, and so on. At root you can regard all of these too as computations, because when you build a space ship and fly it to a different place, you get new information, or rather a different perspective on the same information, which is just what happens when you input information into a computer and look at the output.

QUANTUM CONSCIOUSNESS

To this day we play out two conflicting notions of the self inherited from the Enlightenment. One, described by the philosopher Charles Taylor sees "the senses of inwardness, freedom, individuality, and being embedded in nature which are at home in the modern West," and is favored in popular culture. The other sees the self as socially determined, and individuality and freedom as illusions, and is favored in academia. Our emerging models of quantum consciousness have the potential to resolve these two notions into a continuously flickering whole.

The anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff and the physicist Roger Penrose have developed a quantum theory of consciousness which Penrose describes in his books, The Emperor's New Mind and Shadows of the Mind , and Hameroff describes on his web site, quantum-mind.org:

... Most approaches to the problem of consciousness see the brain as a computer, with neurons and synapses acting as basic switches, or "bits". In this approach, consciousness is thought to "emerge" as a novel property of complex computation. However this approach fails to adequately deal with enigmatic features of consciousness and more radical approaches may be necessary. Quantum mechanics describes the seemingly bizarre behavior of matter and energy at microscopic scales, e.g. that of atoms and sub-atomic particles. At that level particles may be in two or more places at the same time (quantum superposition), and particles widely separated in distance may nonetheless be intimately connected (quantum entanglement). These properties are used in quantum computation which offers potential solutions to the enigmatic features of consciousness. But neurons may be far more complicated than mere switches. If we look inside neurons ... we see ... microtubules ... cylindrical polymers of the protein tubulin arranged in hexagonal lattices comprising the cylinder wall. Cooperative interactions among tubulin subunits within microtubules have been suggested to process information, as in molecular scale "cellular automata". As the states of tubulin are controlled by quantum mechanical internal forces (van der Waals London forces), they may exist in quantum superposition of multiple states ("quantum bits", or "qubits"), and microtubules may be seen as quantum computers involved in cellular organization.

The quantum nature of these cellular activities not only forms the basis of consciousness, but also provides a model for the connection between mind and body, and mind and the material world. We can now see that both are comprised of the same form of quantum information.

The quantum theory of consciousness also addresses the question of memory. The Empiricists held that we are born a blank slate and build a self through the accumulation of all memories, which are retained as though recorded on a hard disk (a position still held by advocates of hard AI). Rousseau predicted the Romantic vision and even Freud's theories by showing that this notion was not adequate to construct a self, which he held could be done only by positing that selected memories are linked by a self-created narrative. But all of these approaches fail to describe what we actually experience when we closely watch our minds, as we do for example in structured Buddhist meditation. We now see that the flickering and layering of experience can be well described with the notion of flickering in and out of parallel universes. (See Deutsch in Fabric. )

QUANTUM SOCIAL SCIENCE

The social sciences today remain for the most part mired in the Newtonian linear-logical paradigm and hardly cognizant of the Maxwellian and relativistic flux in which most people actually experience their lives, much less the implications of quantum theory. As a result academic social sciences have become distanced from actual experiences and stay within circumscribed theoretical realms.

Alexander Wendt, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has posted online an outline for a book he is working on, Quantum Mind and Social Science . In it he writes:

This book project explores the implications for social science of thinking about human beings and society as quantum mechanical phenomena. ... My suggestion is that man (sic) and society really are quantum phenomena. The bridge between the microscopic world of quantum physics and the macroscopic world of society is provided by "the quantum consciousness hypothesis," an argument now being advanced by growing numbers of physicists, neuroscientists, and philosophers of mind that human consciousness is a macroscopic quantum process.... Social science in both its positivist and interpretive forms has reflected the metaphysical assumptions of classical physics since the 19th century, when many prominent political philosophers, economists, and sociologists tried self-consciously to ground their nascent disciplines on physics. ... If consciousness is a quantum rather than classical mechanical phenomenon, then these fundamental parameters of contemporary social scientific discourse will be undermined. Man will not be a machine, nor will his behavior be explainable in purely deterministic and objective terms. On the other hand, neither will this entail a Cartesian dualism or the impossibility of social "science." Contrary to both orthodoxies, the "ultimate" science, quantum physics, would establish the importance of consciousness for the scientific study of social life, and point toward a radical rethinking of man and society.
http://johnlobell.com/publications/QuantumArch.htm

User avatar
FC
Orange Ska Dork
Posts: 20816
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby FC » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:01 am

The problem here is, noone has time to read your articles. It would be much easier if you summed them up, and provided a link for us.



Aidan
PertHJ wrote:I disagree with Aidans divergence from ska music, but agree with his correct use of scientific terms


Ois II Men|Hatewanx|XfrankgrimesX

Akuma
TOHLG™
Posts: 6141
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Lorne Street Original

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby Akuma » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:04 am

a whoooooooooole lotta bullshit going on in this thread.
Image

User avatar
vampire lezbos
Posts: 971
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Auckland Region

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby vampire lezbos » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:05 am

c'mon man, don't pretend to have a life. just sit back, pop open a cold one and enjoy! :wink:

User avatar
Fried Mayonnaise
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:24 pm
Location: Dunedin
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby Fried Mayonnaise » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:07 am

... nup.

User avatar
ted the bastard
Posts: 7358
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 9:18 pm
Location: between revelations
Contact:

Re: Are we going to die in four and a half years?

Postby ted the bastard » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:08 am

vampire lezbos wrote:c'mon man, don't pretend to have a life. just sit back, pop open a cold one and enjoy! :wink:


buy me a couple of dozen and i'll give it a go


Return to “Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests