Science is not a perfect institution
- Thread starter Buddha1
- Start date
and it is commensruate with mine Buddha1.Buddha1 said:
YES YES YES.......of course they are going to distrust the church and its spirituality. because it is totally bogus. They have crushed all the pagans, heathens, heretics, etc-----they have prohibited the REAL sacrament which IS psychedelic, and replaced it wit mean slithers of wafer bread and sips wine. Asking the people to trust thei faith that that is te 'Body and Blood of Christ'.....is it fuk as hell. it is chaep bread and wine. long long wars have been fought over that nonesense.....arguments of whether 'Transubstantiation' was actual or not.....can you IMAGINE?????? yet this is true. this is part of history!
So te Christian church made vast amounts ofpeople deeply miserable. and like ay abuse makes the abused victim DIS trust. OUTof tis confusion pops up science. and we can all experience the awaful sme materiliast scientists now show wit THEIR distrust against ANY thing pointing to the spiritual. HOW IRONIC is this??...on scale of 1-10?
"When I get logical and I don't trust my instincts --- that's when I get in trouble
ANGELINA JOLIE "
Trust a stupid woman to say that, especially a child stealing woman like Angelina Jolie.
"""Natural heterosexual male has a tendency to be short-sighted, selfish (interested only in the safety and security of the immediate family) and pragmatic. """
Is it that you don't like them Buddha1 because they don't want to play with your wee-wee?
ANGELINA JOLIE "
Trust a stupid woman to say that, especially a child stealing woman like Angelina Jolie.
"""Natural heterosexual male has a tendency to be short-sighted, selfish (interested only in the safety and security of the immediate family) and pragmatic. """
Is it that you don't like them Buddha1 because they don't want to play with your wee-wee?
Science started as a 'protest' to religion --- but certain ideologies/ institutions (like heterosexuality) that had been vastly empowered by religion promptly took control of science, organised it on the pattern of 'religion' --- you know where the few 'elected'/ selected people who undergo 'training' by the 'authorities' (to ensure that they conform) got to control the science institution.duendy said:
Non-Christian (and possibly non-Islamic) societies had not gone through the extremities of Christianity and maintained their 'wholesome' view of the world. But this situation is fast changing today by the globalisation of the world. Globalisation is actually synonymous with 'westernisation' because it is one way --- from west to the east. The west is flushing the east with its material success accumulated through science (people get blinded by all the glitter, and they are losing touch with nature --- after all they have been living under pseudo-heterosexualism too!).
Bringing of Science into non-Christian societies kills out their superior, natural and wholesome worldview. Not surprisingly it also instills a hatred against male-male bonds automatically (for science carries with it those things --- just like English and western education!). Just like when a particular kind of fish was introuduced in Australia by the Europeans the fish proved to be a disaster for the local flora and fauna. It killed off several local species and spread like wildfire causing irrversible damage to several other species of fish and other flora/ fauna.
Last edited:
These days I'm having a hard time getting the sexual attention of two 'heterosexual' men (both are married) off me. All because I happen to profess that men should not be forced to be heterosexuals.Huwy said:
I would not be here saying all that I say, if only 'heterosexuals' could remain true to their 'profession'.
I don't know Duendy. The forces are too strong, and I don't know what will happen eventually.duendy said:
I don't see a reversal of this trend in my lifetime. All I know is as long as I live, whether I'm (we are) going to win or lose, I have to put up a fight. And I know there are several others in this world fighting in isolation (as I am, and you are!)
And there are aspects of life which make things hopeful. So let's hope for the best for mother earth!
What do you think?
G
genep
Guest
duendy said:
ECHO --
"And the truth is, that the further you look behind the façade of healthcare, that has nothing to do with “health,” the more insane and absurd this healthcare gets to be not even "death-care" because it is all just an industry that is so sick and decadent that it makes the drugs and whores and gambling of organized-crime look even more respectable than a religion."
=-=
It is so insane that I/you? cannot even take it seriously. It is not just funny because far, far beyond our wildest dreams,
and from every imaginable angle and direction,
it is the Supreme Comedy; not so much science but its "life."
G
genep
Guest
Buddha1 said:
The instant you throw the towel in
that instant you will be the Laughter and JOY (Kundalini) that can leave absolutely no doubt that far beyond your wildest dreams
you have always been Untouchable, Complete and Content.
Some call this "Untouchable, Complete and Content" Krishna and others Buddha and others Christ but it is I/YOU/ALL and only thoughts, the mind, can think that it thinks otherwise.
-- UV-gap
i look at it this way. IF people can trash belong to a mindlss, mechanical, and souless mindset which willy nilly trashes planet and expolits all other species including our own, and JUSTIFIES it, then so do i have the right to COMPLAIN aboutsuch abuse. for this is my home like theirs and i have sayBuddha1 said:
like u i will fight to the death. not bloddy figt/war as that is prt of THEIR trip. 'perpetual war' they love. ie., the power elite and those who seak up for them.
I do not in anyway underesitmate my, your, and others passion and energy to help shift things from tis mechanical mindset. even tho admittedly it does seem overwhelming. ting is not t get suked into it. notice one poster i recently had dealings with admit s/he USED to be 'counterculture' but 'grew out of it'....and presto i can read that in teir views now.mainly agreeing with the authority. so the's a danger of people starting out to see the shit but then getting overwhelmed and joining the 'big' gang
I am looking atthekey maintainers of tis mindset........i am including very much their war against [some] drugs, and their insistance of the need for 'physical evidence' for any insight one might have. i am sure you get me--see Oph's latest offering
Again and again isever forum i see this pattern. it is the impasse of the 'scientific method' fascism
This is why it is important to keep drumming it ias the ORIGINS OF this method. It's criteria, whihc is to leave quality OUT!...i your whole thing is that thn when someone wants to EXPLORE QUALITY we get tis clash. usuallypeppered with the most viscious and petty insults etc. as to one is criminal for not presenting 'peer reviewd papers' for every utterance.....Surprisngly this sameattitide is t sites like the Lycaeum.org supposedly devoted to psychedelic issues. a 'sceintific-cum-moderator' in-house cabal there push that agenda, whcih creates a tension in te forum, as it does in society. after all tese forums are like micro-societies wouldn't you say?....so really looking AT dead on this 'SCIENTIFIC METHOD' thingy. let's exploe it anywhich way. tis is of course not to denounce this important tool, but rthe to show its LIMITATIONS
as for the war on [some] drugs. tis is fascism. this includes war against psychedelic inspiration, and this war goews way back. it is MIND-CONTROL, nd we need to very much explore about that too.
G
genep
Guest
duendy said:
Just like Arjuna had no choice but to fight in the Bhagavad Gita, and just like the Narrator (Edward Norton) had no choice but to fight in the movie Fight Club.
But if a miracle allows YOU to sit back and enjoy the SHOW (life)
then the Laughter and JOY (Kundalini) might just kill you
because YOU are eternally EXACTLY like Krishna, and Norton's hallucination, Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt ) -- this reckless indifference of Laughter and JOY that is Untouchable Complete and Content.
genep said:
there is an old Chinese saying i love:
'the right means works the wrong way for the wrong man'
now what that says to me, when understanding your point of view is this----that ok, YOU may have had som kind of 'release' etc where you feel now in a laughing state. good for you. BUT tthe same means that has brought you that wont necessarily have same outcome for another.
also let me teel you bout a very insightful psychede;ic trip i hd two summers ago. we were on holiday and took some shrooms in the dunes.....soon we returned to te shck and on TV was a documentary bout the Palestinian Israeli conflict. the docu. was as of a camera moving round Israel. so it feels you are the eyes of camera. get me?...in a trippy state it ws like really experiencing Israel for first time
ok, we see people paying. REALLY praying. we follow thislittle girl about aged 9, 10 walk thru the battle scarred barricaded war zone of much of JERUSALEM< and find tis derelect spot and sit down and pray and pray>>>>>>>>we see jEWS PRAYING IN FRONT OF FRIDGE DOOR LIKE WOULD BE SEEN AGAINST WALL OF THE TEMPLE (ooops sorry bout caps)...praying is everywhere.
We see Plaestinians praying, but docu. is more focussed on Israelies
ALL the way thru watching this i am dying giggling, laughing...!>>>>PARTLY CAUSE THE FACES OF TH PEOPLE ARE SO REVEALING< AND VERY Picasso-esq....i am seeing deeply deeply into the sitution there. anyone looking frm outside would see me as a quivering, hysterical frivolous idiot wit no seriousness. but i KNEW tat it was complte humour togther with complete insight....
I SAW that what is keeping both 'sides' aprt is belief and tradition. just that
now. my lughing didn't laugh all that away did it? no. for there to ne an end to conflict there has to be morethan laughing. therehas to be deep emotionl acceptance of ALL emotions. noy just sense of humour. but emotions of sadness...of despair of ho far we have let ourselves become alienated from EARTH
Buddha1 said:
There were numerous names for science in the ancient world that I know of, like teknos and majik. "Science" comes from the latin word "scientia" or "knowledge" and Latin is a fairly ancient language, actually considered a dead language a thousand years ago. They had it. The Greeks had some kind of chemistry, a study of electricity, primitive atomic theory, and lenses. Some of them back then had working electric batteries. It was relatively non-technological people who overran the Greeks and eventually the Romans. Remember the Pythagorean theory and Euclidean geometry? And it was not a non-technological people who built the pyramids all over the world.
Science really is just a way to know things, and to know how to do things. Technology is applied science. We have some kind of science and technology if we live in any kind of housing, use any kind of heat in the winter, and cut up animals to use their parts for food, clothing, and shelter.
I know that what we think of as technology is often irritating, but for all too long we have allowed the same kind of people to do us in with it who did it to people thousands of years ago.
We can separate science from the institutions. Those who succeed advance science. Some of them even get credit for it.
As far as I know the original model of what we think of as heterosexuality started with the establishment of patriarchal society by the law that Moses gave us from his fever dreams. Such horribly destructive rules as the Mosaic law took hold largely because it is easier to destroy than to build and people have a horrid fascination with the causes of death. The emotional maturity that it takes to overcome that fascination can be wiped away with just a few disasters. The population that Moses ruled over were refugees from some kind of global natural disaster that came from or appeared to come from the skies. Unfortunately we never got over that. This could be thought of as an emergency powers situation that has been ongoing since that time.
It's ironic that those who can get the bug out of their ass about it can deal with the realities better. The phrase "God is angry" meant something different back then, but all too soon developed the idea that he was angry because people were having sex and enjoying it. Maybe it was sarcasm that became the majority's perception of reality. The mind searches for a reason why, and it looks for a way to gain some kind of control over it. It eventually accepts an illusion of control. Can't stop the rocks from falling from the sky, can't clear the clouds that obscure the heavens and make the crops grow poorly, can't stop the ground from shaking, and can't stop the red liquid fire from crawling across the ground, and can't let go of it. So we start beating each other. "Social order" comes from attempts to limit the number of people being beaten to death, and that has to be done because we have to survive as a race, but the neurosis is locked in and it can't be gotten rid of any more easily than we can stop the volcanoes from pouring out more black ash. Unfortunately we have also discovered that a useful level of neurosis can be maintained in a given population for eternity. We can even make criminals of those who would heal it.
It's ironic that those who can get the bug out of their ass about it can deal with the realities better. The phrase "God is angry" meant something different back then, but all too soon developed the idea that he was angry because people were having sex and enjoying it. Maybe it was sarcasm that became the majority's perception of reality. The mind searches for a reason why, and it looks for a way to gain some kind of control over it. It eventually accepts an illusion of control. Can't stop the rocks from falling from the sky, can't clear the clouds that obscure the heavens and make the crops grow poorly, can't stop the ground from shaking, and can't stop the red liquid fire from crawling across the ground, and can't let go of it. So we start beating each other. "Social order" comes from attempts to limit the number of people being beaten to death, and that has to be done because we have to survive as a race, but the neurosis is locked in and it can't be gotten rid of any more easily than we can stop the volcanoes from pouring out more black ash. Unfortunately we have also discovered that a useful level of neurosis can be maintained in a given population for eternity. We can even make criminals of those who would heal it.
The screwing by science comes when science becomes an "ism", as in catechism, Catholicism, cataclysm (joke?), and now, scientism. Those who use it to screw us create a set of beliefs that are, by what they want us to believe, incontrovertible, inalterable, leading to inevitable conclusions about life, the universe, and everything.
They lead us to the conclusion that people who want to live in harmony with nature are dirty savages who prefer to live in the dirt and fester disease germs. Sexual "promiscuity" is inevitably seen as a way to spread disease because scientism does not recognize spiritual and emotional harmony, although for some reason it recognizes spiritual and emotional strife. Scientism also fails to recognize that sharing microbes regularly within a population ensures an ongoing immunization against those that evolve naturally, even though this information is part of their books. It also fails to recognize that a lot of disease is created by civilized living, where pathogens are generated by rot within living bodies, anaerobic conditions, exposure to chemicals, heaps of garbage, and so on, and the normal microbes pick up these altered genomes and become pathogenic themselves, like anthrax passing its poisonous genomes on to other soil bacteria.
Scientism fails to recognize that scent cues trigger responses that are embedded in an animal's or human's nervous system, and that those same responses can be triggered by other stimuli including visual and tactile. The gentle stroking against your forearm or the warmth of a breast pressed against your back could be at least as stimulating as the smell of a mare in heat is to a stallion, and how would we know for sure? Smells go on for hours at a time, and if a man is stroked long enough, he's going to respond. The stallion could ignore a whiff of a mare if the scent disappears after a minute or so. He would respond if a mare who does not smell like she is in heat if she presses against him enough. Some of them go after anything that will hold still, too. And I've seen someone attempt to collect an AI sample from a stallion by letting him smell mare-in-heat scent. He got a look that said "do you think I'm stupid?" from the stallion. He didn't get his sample. That was one stallion who might push you into the water tank and then casually drink from it while you're splashing around.
Our wiring is much more complex in that it works with many different kinds of stimulation to produce a sexual response. It is much simpler than some think in that it looks for a likely mate to have sex with, not necessarily just the right species, gender, age, height, weight, or so on. Poor human males are even more confused because human females have this "hidden heat" and are able, like the bonobo chimpanzee, to have intercourse at almost any time in their cycle. Men respond most to what seems to them to be the availability of the right sensations. Women have to put up with the results of sex (that's the way it works, so don't call it a sexist remark) almost always, with or without help, so they must be more picky and they have to be with someone who they can trust, or whatever comes closest. I'm an oddball because I'm a man and I go with being able to trust and with being able to live with the aftermath. It's usually easier for me to not have sex and live with the aftermath of that. I have a rich fantasy life that doesn't require me to call the next day. To me casual sex isn't worth the strain, but that doesn't mean that I hold it against anyone else. I admire those who can handle it.
They lead us to the conclusion that people who want to live in harmony with nature are dirty savages who prefer to live in the dirt and fester disease germs. Sexual "promiscuity" is inevitably seen as a way to spread disease because scientism does not recognize spiritual and emotional harmony, although for some reason it recognizes spiritual and emotional strife. Scientism also fails to recognize that sharing microbes regularly within a population ensures an ongoing immunization against those that evolve naturally, even though this information is part of their books. It also fails to recognize that a lot of disease is created by civilized living, where pathogens are generated by rot within living bodies, anaerobic conditions, exposure to chemicals, heaps of garbage, and so on, and the normal microbes pick up these altered genomes and become pathogenic themselves, like anthrax passing its poisonous genomes on to other soil bacteria.
Scientism fails to recognize that scent cues trigger responses that are embedded in an animal's or human's nervous system, and that those same responses can be triggered by other stimuli including visual and tactile. The gentle stroking against your forearm or the warmth of a breast pressed against your back could be at least as stimulating as the smell of a mare in heat is to a stallion, and how would we know for sure? Smells go on for hours at a time, and if a man is stroked long enough, he's going to respond. The stallion could ignore a whiff of a mare if the scent disappears after a minute or so. He would respond if a mare who does not smell like she is in heat if she presses against him enough. Some of them go after anything that will hold still, too. And I've seen someone attempt to collect an AI sample from a stallion by letting him smell mare-in-heat scent. He got a look that said "do you think I'm stupid?" from the stallion. He didn't get his sample. That was one stallion who might push you into the water tank and then casually drink from it while you're splashing around.
Our wiring is much more complex in that it works with many different kinds of stimulation to produce a sexual response. It is much simpler than some think in that it looks for a likely mate to have sex with, not necessarily just the right species, gender, age, height, weight, or so on. Poor human males are even more confused because human females have this "hidden heat" and are able, like the bonobo chimpanzee, to have intercourse at almost any time in their cycle. Men respond most to what seems to them to be the availability of the right sensations. Women have to put up with the results of sex (that's the way it works, so don't call it a sexist remark) almost always, with or without help, so they must be more picky and they have to be with someone who they can trust, or whatever comes closest. I'm an oddball because I'm a man and I go with being able to trust and with being able to live with the aftermath. It's usually easier for me to not have sex and live with the aftermath of that. I have a rich fantasy life that doesn't require me to call the next day. To me casual sex isn't worth the strain, but that doesn't mean that I hold it against anyone else. I admire those who can handle it.