Francine,
I'd try to answer your questions.
Got any information on electromagnetism in solubility or on hydroalcohol polymerization?
I'm still looking for lost information that has surely been filed away somewhere since these are such readily produced findings, and I figure somebody must know about them.
When people ask you for evidence, you keep going on about these Laws (your capital letter),
You do capitalize them when you specify them as either the 10 Laws of Medicine, the four Laws of Therapeutics, the four Laws of Cure or the Law of Chronic Diseases (courtesy of the Spagyric physicians), but natural laws is not a capitalized expression.
And natural laws are ABOLUTES that never vary, which is PRECISELY why the homeopathic data base is so stable and cumulative.
So, yeah, and why shouldn't we "go on about them" when they are the very core of anything scientific?
Who keeps anybody else ignorant of natural laws except those who are ignorant of them?
Not me, not us, they do!
Why? Hell if I know; ask those ignorant fools.
but never any evidence for where they some [come] from.
This is the second time I have been asked this silly question here.
They come from the fabric of space, like all natural laws, because they precipitate off of the Etheric Plane or out of the Ether just as the four (really five) fundamental forces of nature do, which is how the physical universe works.
The explanations of electromagnetism and gravity by physicists are really nothing more than convenient conclusions arrived at from observed effects, so they assigned the origins of electromagnetism where they last observe their effects, but these things are a bit deeper into the universe than mere electrons or any other physical particle.
Do you think it is really so far fetched to account that gravity and electromagnetism are aspects of the same force?
If so, why? That is the same force applied and the same effects, only one is observable at the atomic level and one with large bodies.
Who told academics to dismiss such conclusions? and why did they do that?
Hell if I know.
If you care to accept their explanations, does me no harm, but remember that they are the very ones who sustain allopathic medicine and cause it to go through its eternal gyrations with eternally changing findings, and those are the guys who will kill you and your children and parents good and dead real fast with either an accident, which is ever so frequent with allopathic medicine, or slowly through suppression and iatrogenic disordering of the manifestations of disease we call symptoms.
If that is the destiny you want for yourself and those you love, what can I do to cause you to avoid it if it is a heart-felt desire to end and see those you love end their lives so agonally, horribly and prematurely?
Is it smart to do that, though, and why are you even putting forward arguments suggesting it could be when it obviously isn't?
That means you had better not accept anything they say without serious analysis, doesn't it?
That's what I do, and they do not come out looking very pretty at the end.
You write stuff about the land of Mu and Lemuria and go on about how arcane sources have revealed these to you. That's not science, that's believing stories you've been told.
MU was the continent encompassed by the Ring of Fire when the North Pole was in the Greenland Sea north of Finland 78k to 26k years ago, which continental arch was created (the so-called "missing mechanism for continents sinking" that academics simply ignore out of simpleminded thinking) by that reorientation of the Lithosphere such that the Equatorial Bulge pushed it out 13 miles farther at the Equator on both sides.
The locations of the poles at various times are conclusions from very simple and everywhere-present data contained in magnetized rocks at various levels of strata, for those rocks oriented to the then-existent poles.
This is easily confirmed data if one simply looks into it.
The so-called Ice Age of the Pleistocene was, for instance, simply a matter of the North Pole having been in Hudson Bay at the time.
Did I tell academics to ignore this obvious and clear information?
Hell no, nor did I tell them to come to conclusions contrary to the data, so why have you accepted it?
Nobody keeps another person ignorant but themselves.
Ice accumulates in lopsided deposits at a continent situated on a pole and increases the tilt of the axis of rotation until the Crust slips as a whole and slides across two pivot points near the Equator in cataclysms, and this is the repeated history of our earth.
This is, moreover, the mechanism Einstein acquiesced to sufficient for him to have written the Forward to Charles Hapgood's PATH OF THE POLE more than 40 years ago.
Don't know this book, do you?
Why not?
Academics have never examined its information.
Why not?
Who knows.
I think they're just stupid and brainwashed, but Ivar Zapp has pointed out their heavy intellectual investment in preceeding information that they accepted, which thus causes them to reject radical changes of paradigm like Hapgood and Einstein offered to geology, paleotectonics and the dozen-odd other major subjects they threw into kilter with their discoveries.
This is common, however, when you look at academic subjects, for they almost all nothing more than a series of half-truths and lies as a consequence of being a series of basic assumptions that are slightly wrong but distort conclusions beyond what the evidence supports, so it takes several generations for such correct information to come to acceptance.
One of the main problems with scientists in positions of power within the power structures of academia, industry, medicine, business, etc., is that they allow only small portions of these paradigm shifts into their paradigm or basic worldview and model at times when they should act responsibly and throw out all of their wrong conclusions based upon really stupid basic erroneous assumptions.
Did I tell them to remain stupid and ignorant and bottomless karmic pits from misleading whole generations?
Hell no! they do that very well all on their own.
Do you want to wait for academic fools, who cannot defend their views, to tell you it's okay to believe something before you do, or do you want to test information logically and then experientially as much as you can?
I'll take the latter, thank you very much.
----------
As for arcane sources "revealing" things to me, I said no such thing.
What's keeping you from reading these sources and evaluating their information anyway?
They tell us that humanity has a very long history, and that information is confirmed by the data.
Who's keeping anybody else from evaluating that information?
Nobody, and this is the very same thing as with homeopathy.
Nobody is keeping anybody from evaluating the findings of Hahnemannian homeopaths, which is stable and cumulative data that has allowed us to cure all diseases so long as they are not allopathically complicated and distorted to incomprehensibility.
Compare this with allopathic findings where there is no stability nor any cumulative data and most certainly no cures!
What mindless fools accept the latter over the former and why?
Academic fools, and probably because they are intellectually invested in the natural sciences that underlie allopathic medicine.
But none of the information of the natural sciences other than supports homeopathy.
Like all such things, it is the way allopathic Minds interpret data that determines their conclusions; but change those basic assumptions just a bit and you get stable and cumulative conclusions like homeopathy.
Did we tell them to accept erroneous basic assumptions about health, disease, therapeutics, the nature of existence and the nature of the universe?
No, so who's to blaim but them?
----------
As for arcane sources discussing cosmology, their cosmology is confirmed (as with their history and prehistory) and is very elegant understanding precisely because it all fits without any major self-conflicts with data.
That does not exist with academic or so-called "scientific" findings because they always proceed from lesser Minds who begin from basic erroneous assumptions and thus end up through specious logic or sophistries and their presumptions with erroneous conclusions.
Want to believe those?
Fine with me; hurts me none, but it does you no good.
Go get the information and then tell me it was "revealed" to you and laugh.
Is there some reason for this derision without having examined the information?
And how is that a scientific analysis of it?
It most certainly isn't, not any more than the nonsense engaged in by the people dominating this site and saying they refuse to examine the homeopathic information.
But I cannot care if people choose to remain misinformed simply because they are uninformed.
It is not that difficult to do, but you have to want the information and then put out the effort to read it till you understand it.
Gee, guess there is an explanation there for why it doesn't happen?
Seems like laziness to me when the people involved constantly admit to such laziness.
Fine with me; let them be lazy and call that science.
Rather funny and tragic at the same time, but they have singular destinies that do not adversely affect anyone but themselves.
----------
As for me "believing stories I've been told," you believe lots of stuff you have been told, and I have NOT accepted anything without logical and experiential confirmation; have you?
Want me to rip your belief structure to shreds right in front of you and expose how you have just believed stuff you've been told but never really examined?
It's very easy to do given things you've said.
But that will happen when you get to that information, just as it will for you when you examine homeopathy in relation to allopathy.
Nothing is keeping any of you from doing this, is it?
And, you are very wrong when you say that information arising from natural laws is not science, for there is nothing more scientific than that information.
Want to give that one another look see, Francine?
----------
And this man Keininger [Kieninger] where you get this Aether stuff from was a crook and even his own people threw him out.
R.K. is not where I get information about the Ether.
Newton called it the AEtherial Medium.
The ancient Greeks and Egyptians had their names for it.
This is not new stuff.
Nikola Tesla, the Father of Electricity, held with the AEther and yet was an extremely practical man.
Modern physics is constantly demonstrating that the AEther is the only view that holds any water.
People who say otherwise are misinformed and have never examined the information.
They have instead, as you said, simply believed stories they've been told.
Where are all of the neutrinos, Francine?
How do you explain cosmic microwave background radiation when cosmic rays are already particles and waves?
Why do photons produce the wave phenomenon of the propigation of light, and how can that be explained without tachyons?
Why do you suppose that the more forward-thinking Minds in physics have finally proposed virtual particles and the vacuum energy of empty space unless they have all but thereby formally admitted to the AEther since that's exactly what they've done?
You have a problem with AEther Theory?
Let's hear it.
If you hold otherwise, fine with me.
We use ultramolecular drugs, though, and I defy somebody to provide a logical explanation for homeopathic pharmacology without it, for it CANNOT BE DONE.
That is precisely why it is one of the seven groups of natural phenomena proving higher planes of existence.
If you choose to hold/believe otherwise, it does me no harm, and it will not change reality for you to believe that you turn into smoke at death.
Lots of brilliant fools here believe such ignorant foolishness.
Makes no difference what they believe, though, and they will eventually learn otherwise.
If you believe that scientists have such a superb grasp of reality, why doesn't allopathic medicine cure, why does GYTTON'S PHYSIOLOGY say they're liars, why did Einstein call them liars, and why 1001 examples of such ignorant foolishness?
Believe what you want.
----------
Richard Kieninger was not a crook.
As a matter of fact, RK was a victim of low-potency pseudo-homeopathy through a clinical ecologist named Larene Ludwig, M.D.
She was throwing homeopathic medicines into the people of The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organization like they're candy because she believes "they can't do any harm because there aren't any atoms in them."
I told all of them she was dangerous, but they didn't listen to me.
About three years later, the shite hit the fan with those people when it came out that RK had been having sex with married women who pleaded with him to do so.
The man was prescribed Lycopodium, Nux vomica, Tuberculinum, Hyocyamus, Nitric acid, Phosphorus and dozens of other homeopathic medcines on a DAILY basis IN COMBINATIONS and AT HIGH POTENCY FOR YEARS!
Is it any wonder such things happened?
The French homeopaths do this all of the time.
Does anyone object to these practices besides Hahnemannians and HPHs given that they deviate from all four Laws of Therapeutics and do nothing but engraft onto people totally incurable iatrogenic diseases in the dynamic forms of the symptoms those drugs produce in the healthy and cure in the sick?
Hell no!
That form of homeopathy should be outlawed!
But guess what, low-potency pseudo-homeopathy is the ONLY form that ignorant fools in allopathic medicine either quote from or wish to validate.
The people who do that, both here and everywhere, should be summarily executed.
The results of such aggressive deviations from Hahnemannian homeopathy produce tragedies like Richard Kieninger.
Did I do that?
Hell no; I tried to stop it.
So don't be telling me history that you clearly know nothing about, nor about RK's writings, not one piece of which is adversely hindered by the iatrogenic tragedies of his personal life.
Richard Kieninger is the most important author I have ever found.
With the exception of Hahnemann, everybody else's writings contain errors throughout their works, but I have only found six in the whole of RK's volumous writings on a VAST array of very deep subjects.
The closest next author is way beyond that.
Even Hahnemann made mistakes, but nobody talked about the subjects that RK did.
And I suppose you're going to tell me that you're familiar with his writings when you just demonstrated that you're not, right?
----------
And then you go wishing horrible deaths on people. If I had children who were ill I don't think I'd want them treated by someone who has all this hatred burning up their insides.
Francine,
People who advocate allopathic medicine not only advocate horrible deaths on people, they ENGAGE in it to the tune of two million people just in the United States of America EVERY YEAR!
Where is your sense of social justice to make such a statement?
If somebody murdered your children, would you just accept it?
Of course not, but that's what everybody does to these iatrogenic deaths in allopathic hands.
Why?
They don't perceive them as such.
Why?
Because they're ignorant of homeopathy and our proofs of what ALL allopathic medicines do.
Do I keep people ignorant of the Truths of medicine?
Hell no!
I tell them what I know, in fact.
Do I keep anybody from examining the evidence?
Hell no! they do that to themselves.
So what is your excuse?
And do you see hatred burning inside of me?
I despise murder; I am not hateful.
They are going to murder everyone you love.
If you doubt it, let it happen.
How can anybody prevent others from engaging in ultimately deadly activities if they so desire?
The world is full of very ignorant people who do this all of the time.
All of the greatest men and women of history have been persecuted by the masses and their leaders for precisely this reason of abject ignorance.
You want to defend such injustices?
Go ahead.
Karmic justice does not care what you believe.
Cause and effect most certainly extends to human thoughts and actions, and it will ultimately make no difference if you presently hold to indefensible and horribly ignorant views.
The human Ego is permanent.
Even if lots of human Egos do not make it to their intended destiny in this Cycle of Time, there will be endless subsequent ones for them to try again and again till they finally make it.
Do I care if so many people choose to remain ignorant?
How can I care about the personal affairs of others and the consequences that befall them from wrong thinking and wrong action?
Francine, do you want to try that one again too?
----------
As for the Royals largely favoring homeotherapeutics, you're ignoring an element of history that is very important to remember.
The most informed people are always those with the means of it.
One of the means of it for hundreds of years was wealth and privlege, for that permitted them time to study and the books to study.
For the first hundred years of homeopathy, John Amos Comenius' advocacy of mass education was still nonexistent.
It was, in fact, only in my generation after World War II that we finally saw such a thing in America and Europe.
Before that, the intelligencia of Western Civilization was largely the Royals.
That did not make them bad people, but their patronage and advocacy of us also did not mean we favored such politics.
Far from it.
The very fact that America was the almost singular place in the whole world that homeopathy flouished is a DIRECT consequence of the political liberties here.
Hering and Lippe split over such issues as well as over emphasis upon tissue pathology.
Both were right and both were wrong, and both eventually realized that late in life and thus go back together.
Hering was a staunch democrate.
Lippe was a count.
Both of them had abandoned Europe, though.
This is America!
So what is so bad about the Royals when we realize that our government (lawyers, shysters all) permited the wealthy of America and Europe to destroy American homeopathy through the FLEXNOR REPORT of 1910?
The Royals never did anything so evil to the common man?
Francine, do you want to try that one again too?
----------
Sorry, I don't think I want to know any more about homeopathy, Im very disapoointed in all of you. Bye. Francine.
Okay, bye.
