Notes from an "alternate universe": The Revelation of the Real World

Slowly transformed. Outright replacement would be highly impractical.


We are in a reversal now, though it probably does not seem like it because the process is slow and rational.

We must be careful, however, that what seems to be a general assumption of the masses that "things will get worse" or "the world is coming to an end" is not a DESIRE for such conditions.

We think we are 'fighting' against a small, powerful segment of the population when the larger segment is far more powerful and its virtue-signals on the surface (e.g., peace) are at odds with its deepest intentions (e.g., conflict).

The masses want something that they do not even choose on a daily basis when they have plenty of opportunities to do so. The masses aren't attracted to peace or peaceful situations, nor do they generally choose it, unfortunately. It's all too comfortable to blame others they convince themselves they have no control over rather than taking responsibility for their own choices.


I'm sure this stuff will come out one day in the not-to-distant future.


Please allow me to put it more bluntly.

The internet, automobiles, smartphones, Netflix, processed foods, pharmaceuticals, technologies above human scale, industry, et cetera EQUALS the forceful homocide of 2 billion precious living beings inside their mothers at their most vulnerable time of their lives.

Humanity has all ready made this choice (and continues to make it on a daily basis).

Then again, I think most humans would, when the question is put plainly, choose "life". But in practice, they choose technology and industry over their own humanity and pretend not to know what is going on.

"I know ______ is not good for me but I continue to make use of it." x billions.


Nothing special. Just Bing (which amusingly repeats the same results page after page) and Yandex for images (making good use of 'similar' image results). I tend to input very long and specific search terms rather than general ones, however.

The Internet is a highly censored place and I think most of its users don't even realise it.

You input 225 and ~15,000 was output and you believe that 150,000 slipped from your hands and you "almost had it" and it was "very bitter sweet"?

Is it possible that if you knew the potential prize was "only" double your money (450) then you would have done something different? Could your enthusiasm for a much greater reward provided you with the gumption to make specific choices that led to your 6,600% return?

Meanwhile, we are excited to get a return of 4% after putting 225 in a bank for a year :)

Perhaps it did not slip from your hands.

Truthstream Media did a great show all about this titled, Where Did the Rest of the Internet Go? They looked at Google and Bing and how they structured search results and how many results are actually given. They talk about what happens when information is controlled and curated for us. Here’s the link if anyone is interested:



This is their synopsis for it:

Have you ever heard a Potemkin Village?
Your search engine might be making you think there are millions of pages of results and you can access anything with a simple query, but we did a test and we were more than a bit shocked with what little we actually found.
George Orwell didn’t even get to this part… the digital baby gate. Or is it the cyber wall ala “The Truman Show”? Or the online version of the Matrix pod?
You just have to see it for yourself.

I miss the old internet. It felt decentralized with information about anything and everything at your fingertips. Jumping down rabbit holes was so much easier. The flow of information way more unimpeded. Now it’s just mainstream view points readily available. I remember when the algorithms began to change. Now you can’t find it unless you know exactly what you’re looking for - where’s the fun in that?!

It’s almost like the First Amendment doesn’t apply to the internet these days. I know that I self-censor or don’t even comment at all on many things. What happens in the long term when the town square is digital with all these corporate overlords controlling what you can and can’t talk about? And also access to information. Look at where we are today with the TwitterFiles. We all know it’s not limited to just twitter …

https://imgur.com/UqDTcrO

The internet can’t be trusted now. I can’t even imagine what it’ll be like moving forward.

When I was growing up, my family had encyclopedia sets or the library. Now all of it is online - for good or for bad. I don’t see this changing anytime soon. If anything, it’s just getting more entrenched. We’re off-loading our thinking skills. And now with all the AI chat-bots, I think the world is getting ready to massively change again. And not for the better. Where is our humanity in all of this? It’s unrecognizable to me.

Last Edited by Lady of Stars on 03/19/2023 05:39 PM

Yes, sir. I slept on it and still felt the same in the morning, lol. Perhaps the mindset 'conceive, believe, achieve' will keep the ball rolling. The bitterness is wearing off, and by tomorrow, sweetness will boost my ego, and I will continue to revel in the fact that I'm discovering reality or dig a hole further to forget the truth.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Specific choices', yes. Thank you for helping me define the purpose I had (editing out the modest part) and other help I fail to mention.



If you subscribe to the cult's banking system, hehehe.

Encyclopedias are still available and even much cheaper than they were back in the day.

"Now all of it is online..." (yes) but it would not matter if you cared only for the offline materials, which are plentiful.

If you would appreciate an encyclopedia set in your home, may I ask when was the last time your family purchased one?

(Personally, I put digital versions of encyclopedias from the 18th century on a USB and get them printed out into book form. Although there is much about the 2023 encyclopedias that I would not like, my parents could have said the same thing because their encyclopedia set was also censored, as is the 18th century set on my shelf.)

I would even say that there is far less censorship today than there was 100 or even 200 years ago because there is so much more information available.

We have a Larousse my parents bought in the 1970s, and still look things up in it.



Now there's and idea! Although... how do you know the digital versions aren't altered either? ;-)



Interesting thought!

I haven’t purchased an entire encyclopedia set but I have and do purchase a lot of reference books about subjects that I’m interested in. Herbalism, plants, gardening, homeopathy, mushrooms, Natural Remedies, poetry, things like that. The last thing I purchased that resembled an encyclopedia is a set of books titled, How Things Work, because I felt like most of the information was useful and timeless.

When my kids were young we had different kinds of book sets for all kinds of subjects.

I guess I was lamenting the way it used to be. It’s just a different world today. An entire world is literally at your fingertips. Instantly. Degeneracy and all. You don’t have to work for it in the same way. Determining how to navigate it is up to each individual. Parents especially have to take note and teach their children well - if they don’t, who will?

An 18th century encyclopedia set sounds interesting and entertaining! It’s probably fun to see how thoughts around things have changed.

Yeah, I’m not sure how much I would like a 2023 one. Probably has an entire section on Covid, vaccinations and all that bs. Disinformation and hate speech. Transgenderism. All the things that I feel strongly about and not-in-line with mainstream thought.

There is so much more information available today but it feels skewed in every direction depending on what angle your looking at it with. Drowning in information that’s not exactly accurate. Noise. Take vaccines as an example. Or GMO food. As it’s said, “the science is in” - my question is, according to whom?

Somehow, my response to this message triggered a ban. I was only able to respond to the latter portion.

Dang. I hate when that happens. I was curious about your thoughts on it. Oh well. Maybe you could reframe it!

I think what I was getting at when thinking about that meme is, what is the reality of something when the veracity of the information available can’t be trusted. If the TwitterFiles is just the tip of the iceberg and we can assume this is happening all over the internet on social media sites, where does that leave us?

Drowning in a sea of actual mis-information, skewed-news. State propaganda. ‘They’ are shaping reality. Literally. Amplifying some voices. Silencing others. It can’t be trusted. It all feels like propaganda. Is this directly related to the changes to the Smith-Mundt act by Obama? Is there anywhere to turn to get an accurate accounting of wtf is going on in the world - it all feels like controlled opposition at this stage of the game.

Where does trust enter into all of this? How can we trust the information being presented to us? I can’t even trust what my neighbor tells me anymore because they sound like CNN or Fauchi. Waving their Ukrainian flag. Posting support for drag shows. And everything else.

The blockchain-like nature of my reality is obfuscated with noise at this point. How does one cut through and build trust in the bigger picture?

Ironic :)

Weird messages coming from ChatGPT:

"how can a person trapped inside a computer return to the real world"

https://twitter.com/_/status/1636683810631974912

By the way, I never used this. Just noticing

If I'm trying to imagine what my dream self is doing, what would be my guesses?

Should I believe that my dream self is dreaming about this waking world and is part of my inner voice? An alternate life viewing a recurring dream?
I suppose it boils down to whether the metaphysical world is separate or all within.


If I know the answer.
What can I do with that perception?


It takes a 'Level 3' understanding of reality to flip to a new channel.

From my own experience, my dreams are very similar to waking life, with the main difference being the timeline. I've noticed that time in the metaphysical world is sometimes years off or just shy of a week out. They have been more accurate than in previous years, or so it seems, or so I want to believe. However, time is not on the same scale in dreams. There's something missing when it comes to time in the metaphysical world. My guess would be that it's because we are all dead in the metaphysical world, only to give the illusion of being alive in the physical. Ya lol, I don't really think I'm interested in knowing what we really are. Let the illusion live on, baby.

I almost want to define dreams as a gift, and I probably am now, as I think they help shape this reality a bit more dream-like.

What it really really boils down to.

How far will I go?

Last Edited by SpawnX on 03/23/2023 01:48 AM

They, too, are censored (and altered) as I mention above, but probably not as much as would be assumed to be needed.

There is little need to censor when the meanings of words and concepts have changed. Also, people greatly self-censor. The more revealing books were destroyed or removed from the public long ago.

If someone put a 19th century photograph of Chinese cotton farmers who look like a lot of modern 'black' New Yorkers in the middle of Times Square, no one would pay any attention.

But... if Spielberg's Amistad film was re-made with Chinese labourers, there would be an uproar.

There are two general kinds of useful searches.

By keywords, and by an exact phrase (in quotes).

What search engines do for keywords is the same thing that a certain early web directory (that is still big in Japan) that rhymes with Bla-Who, does.

In their directory they curated links to different places around the web. Curation can be considered a from of censorship. Just as a museum curator would be particular about what kinds of junk are displayed in their museum, a government is particular about what information the public is made aware of.

You can still find those 'missing' things if you want. Just don't expect the curators to waste their resources telling you where they are.

Modern search engines do the same. But instead of organising them into categories they organise them by search term.

Instead of Bla-Who giving you 234 links in the "cheeseburgers" category now you get the same when you type in the same in a modern search engine.

Both the directory and the modern search result page constitute 'censorship' but it can be argued that it isn't much different than the kind each of us might experience at home with our families, just on a different scale. The censorship is necessary and serves the purpose of the organisation (or group of people) doing it.

Just as a restaurant needs to focus its menu on a few items that its customers might like best, a search engine does the same. Wendy's doesn't want you to know about the French restaurant next door with the more delicious burger. It would make more sense to hide the information.

If you use an exact search term, Google shows you more than it would with a general search term whose results would be curated/censored.


But why then trust 'the Twitter files' for its authenticity?

They're just doing what they do: crafting a narrative to agitate and demoralise populations. That is also propaganda, pushed by the same folks.

Information isn't there to be trusted, but referenced. Somewhere along the way we picked up the assumption that information needs to be true.

Truth cannot be packaged in any form. Even mis-information and false information can be very useful when consumed as a reference.


You'll find propaganda going back hundreds of years, in most texts.

It can also just be called 'perspective'. We tend to refer to certain perspectives as propaganda, but we don't realise that we are surrounded by the same.

A friend telling you about where they went last night is also a form of propaganda (advertising their lifestyle, advertising a place, an event, pushing concepts, et c.) It just seems different when a very large entity does it because of the nature of scale.

Our friends also 'shape reality' :)


In the same place it did before: with a choice to pay attention, use Twitter or social media, make use of the internet, and so on.

It leaves us with a feeling of being overwhelmed by our own choices.


There is no need to trust. Just find out of something can be useful or not.

How can you 'trust' a compelling book that advertises itself as fiction but ends up changing the course of your life? There is no need to.

Truth cannot be perceived. Perceptions are not 'real', Everything is false by default, but not everything is useful or relative for an intended purpose.

If you are perceiving something you can, however, 'trust' that it is relative somehow.


The bigger picture is you. What better thing to trust is there?

Last Edited by The Builder on 03/25/2023 03:12 AM

The cult really loves pushing the 'singularity' and the 'end of humanity'.

It's just more agitation propaganda.

The two are just different perspectives of the same thing, like everything else :)

What should you do with the information? Nothing. You are all ready doing the most important thing you need to do with it.

Makes sense but isn’t it a problem when private corporations such as Google or Twitter act as an arm of the government - curating and controlling what information is available at the public’s fingertips, or disappearing valid information all together? In my eyes, it’s very problematic.



Regarding the TwitterFiles, sure it’s part of the agitation campaign but there is much validity to the information coming out. People could see the shadow banning happening in real time. The de-platforming of important voices. The obfuscation of legitimate information that could very well affect how people made very important decisions related to their health and well-being.

I can see how mis-information can be very useful to the one presenting it to the masses.

Mis-information and false information can lead a lot of people astray. Take my sister-in-law. She was a nurse at the beginning of the pandemic. Bought all the ‘information’ hook-line-sinker. She ended up severely compromised from the vaccine. She hasn’t worked in over two years. Can barely breathe. Has 2 different auto immune issues because of it. Her life will never be the same all because of information packaged as true, proven, accurate.

I don’t know about y’all but seriously, who wants to make major life decisions based on bad/biased/mis-information, I know I don’t.


<<Information isn't there to be trusted, but referenced. Somewhere along the way we picked up the assumption that information needs to be true.>>

How does blockchain technology reconcile with the above?

Doesn’t there have to be some real truth in the world? Isn’t some information true enough though? The sun rises and sets everyday. Water is good for me and a necessity. Baby’s laughter can heal the soul. 1+1=2. Things like that.

Can there be a state of too much noise which interferes with reality generation?

I’m hung up on this a little I guess. Life is much more efficient and in-the-flow when using information that rings true. There are orders of operations for a reason. Are there degrees of truthiness or something?



Right….we all shape reality but the ‘propaganda’ my friend is presenting compared to the scale and scope of state propaganda is uncomparable in my eyes. My friend’s or my own propaganda can typically be thought of as putting your best foot forward. The State’s propaganda is straight there to manipulate outcomes personally and collectively. The implications are different to me.



I see your point but back to my sister-in-law. She trusted herself and the information she was fed. Schooled in. And look at where it got her. Screwed for life. If I were her, I would have a hard time moving forward, trusting the medical community and maybe even myself. That’s just me though.

Veracity does seem to matter.

Last Edited by Lady of Stars on 03/26/2023 12:50 AM

I have had to mull this over for a while. I have been trying to observe the ways that I have distributed control over my reality as passively as possible since it is always very tempting to try to exert influence in one way or another.
I have also come to a point where it would be hard to continue certain kinds of ‘progress’ without actively delegating more things, which I find terrifying. But then I have to ask myself where the terror is coming from when it is all me anyway and that leads to a bit of a spiral.

In the meantime, there has been plenty of Spring muck clearing to busy myself with and lots of opportunities to notice certain areas that just seem to fill in with muck again as soon as a batch is cleared.

On a not-so-directly related train of thought, could you tell me what your own day to day relationship with your metaphysical self looks like? I am not sure how to put this, but I have had some ideas that I can see might kind of invite some elements of the metaphysical world to bleed through and I’m wondering if there is anything to be wary of in so doing.

Producers (including corporations) are generally rewarded for doing the government's job for them.

But what is the government's job? To do what the people do not wish to do themselves. The problem begins there and becomes more complex as it scales.

How are they rewarded? With tax and other benefits.

When we expect government (or private corporations) to provide us with what we can ourselves avail or produce -- such as information -- then we are missing the point.

There are millions of people in the US alone who gladly welcome electronic devices they know are spying on them 24/7, and many of these still who know that the corporations who offer the 'services' have secret contracts with government.

And there are billions doing the same through other kinds of computers in the form of desktops, laptops, and smartphones.

The problem is not government, or Google, or Twitter, et c. The problem is what the people do and do not do, and what they allow others to do on their behalf and get away with.


Yes, and that's part of the game. If it wasn't based on what people think of as reality it would not be accepted as reality.

To put it bluntly, it is completely scripted.

We are, basically, volunteering to play a game that a certain group of people have created and then feeling uncomfortable with what is presented for us, all the while forgetting that it is completely voluntary.

It's really the same script repeated over and over again, but that's an other story.


It can also be useful to those to whom it is presented, if they know how to use it (and not take it at face value).

To take a quick example, let's say that Jill is going out on a blind date with Jack. Jack, as they both enjooyed their dinner and each other's company, leans over to Jill and says with a straight face, "I have a truth I wish to confide in you. I am the Princess of Mars."

That would be very good mis-information for Jill, if she knew how to make use of it.


Was there a pandemic, or is someone referring to a pandemic an illustration of how mis-information spreads?

And, is it possible that your sister -- as unfortunate as it may seem -- was aware of what would happen if she followed the path that she did?

It might be easy to say, "Of course not! Why would she choose to suffer like that?"

But think about it for a moment. Do any of us consciously make choices that we seem to know for a fact would not be good for us?

Now imagine that there are choices that we make that are 'hidden' from our consciousness (because we'd prefer to ignore that we made the choice).

If someone, for example, chooses to smoke 10 packs a day knowing what has a very high possibility of happening, is it possible that they are making other choices that they would not want to see or know about? Would they, then, prefer to think of their condition as something that was imposed upon them from the outside?

If someone can make choices that seem horrible and detrimental to themselves casually and consciously, imagine what sub-conscious choices they can make.


Block chain and 'artificial intelligence' eventually serve as new kinds of authorities where the governing bodies behind them can hide behind technology that is considered more objective.

How can a population protest again a block chain that they have (lazily chosen to) govern them? An 'artificial intelligence' that no one seems to have control of? There are no persons to focus on, which makes them ideal. Just follow without complaint.


Every example you could think of depends on perspective. Maths also constitutes a way of thinking about things, and can only be proven within its own framework, as any good perception can.


No. It would just be a noisy reality being generated, or focused upon.


Truth cannot be perceived. If there is truth, there is no perspective, of course.

Could "...rings true" be somewhat equivalent to "..is more relevant"?

How is it possible that so many people get 'burned' or get knocked out of their flow when they follow their heart or their instinct? When they followed something that 'seemed true' at the time?

It was presented as 'true' because that is what it takes for someone who doesn't understand the big picture to choose it. If they knew the outcome they would not choose it because they do not understand that they are not supposed to have everything work out for them. Each aspect is part of a bigger picture of how You come into being.



1) My friend’s or my own propaganda can typically be thought of as putting your best foot forward.

2) The State’s propaganda is straight there to manipulate outcomes personally and collectively.

Is it possible that your friends' propaganda, or your own, is there to manipulate personal outcomes, choices, thoughts, feelings, and so on?

The scale is different but it is the same thing.

Now imagine that you were surrounded by millions of people who did the same, each thinking that they are putting their best foot forward.

Perhaps that is the same as "doing what they think should be done"... like any corporation or government.

If we choose to share authority with our friends but choose to voluntarily relinquish our authority to States, then the implications would, indeed, be different.


Do you think her 'soul' (for lack of better terms) was fully aware of that choice, and decided that to experience it anyway?

For what reason might that be?

Last Edited by The Builder on 03/26/2023 11:08 AM

If delegating your authority is terrifying, perhaps you seek to control far more than you realise.

And it is pretty much the same with each of us. This is reflected in the 'external' governments that we produce in our perspective.

We, essentially, seek (rather extreme) control of reality so that we continue to sense existence, not realising that it is this effort that diminishes our sense of life.

"Create drama, or drift into nothingness."

The desire to control isn't to put things 'in order', however. It's to produce the drama and the Chaos that helps us feel alive.


Sure. When I'm able to put it into words :)

This has been going on for generations it seems. Legacy systems that have grown over time into gargantuan entities - government and corporations alike. Everything you’re saying makes sense but it’s hard to see how people will choose differently. Most likely they won’t. I didn’t grow up with a computer or internet. Yet it’s an integral part of my life now. My kids have never known a world without the internet. And my granddaughter, who knows what her world is gonna look like.

That’s why I constantly think about if a catastrophe is coming that would shift people’s perspective. No water coming out the tap. No food on the shelves at the grocery. Something. Anything to bring the focus back to the basics.


It definitely feels scripted but is it really voluntary? Is opting-out feasible for the majority? How does one change the game of life they are caught up in - one choice at a time?



True but as the ‘Pandemic’ showed us, most don’t know how to look past the face of it. Let alone how to use it to their advantage.


There didn’t need to be an actual pandemic. The spread of the mis-information was all they needed to implement their agenda. Infect people’s thinking and let it spread like wildfire. (I call this Wetiko in action) But the effects were very real even if the pandemic wasn’t.

I hear you regarding choices though it’s a tough pill to swallow. I gave my sister an alternate view and information and she still chose to get it. So there’s that. She can’t say she didn’t know it was risky. She chose not to listen to me and actually doubled down. Now, she’s screwed. It sucks.

I can’t even begin to imagine what the subconscious is up to. Like a shadow dancing free.


Welp. That doesn’t bode well for what’s coming down the pike then.


I know. I know :)



It’s hard for me to reconcile because of the scaling at work. My interpersonal relationship with my best friend and the propaganda she puts forward feels different than what the State’s doing. I understand what you’re saying though and can see that at the core the shape is the same. The effect of it is where the difference lies for me. The ripple.



I guess. We come to the earth school to experience all sorts of things. To live, love, learn, heal, ache, hate and everything in between.

I think about my husband and all the abuse he suffered as a child and think, did he choose that? An innocent child?

I think about myself and everything I’ve been through. My mental health condition. Did I choose it? And why me?

Our ‘souls’ have a greater vantage point. One of my mantra’s is: God doesn’t give me more than I can handle. It’s seen me through some dark nights of the soul. Divine intelligence is greater than this little sliver of me.

For what reason, to feel alive. To experience. And in my life journey, the power of forgiveness.

The greatest lesson, I am everything I perceive. Warts and all.

I do wonder sometimes why some people have much greater suffering than others. How does that work? The soul knows I’m sure.

..because that is what the masses have chosen over those generations.

The problem is not the systems themselves but us choosing those systems, whereby they grow and, eventually, become more complex and chaotic.

If we did not choose them (thus assigning our authority to them) they would have insignificant power. Most of them would perish, as there would be little to support them.


Yes, they most likely will not. That is why things are being changed from within the systems we choose, rather than from those we do not.


Many of our grandparents could say that they didn't grow up with television, yet it was an integral part of their children's lives. Their children never knew a world without television. But much of the world was all ready computerised when their grandchildren grew up, regardless of whether or not they used computers.


It's highly unlikely. If it happens, it would only be for a very short time.

HOWEVER, the Cult would prefer people to live in fear as it makes for far easier governance of the population. (The same population that chooses not to govern themselves.) Without the Cult's production of stories and narratives such as you have described, to make governance easier, people would not think of it as a possibility.


100%

But the majority of people would prefer to think that they MUST follow, obey, et c. It makes them feel better about their laziness and ignorance and daily choices.

"I have to use Facebook to keep in touch with my friends..." is something that many of us have heard.

What the Cult wants the population to believe (to make them easier to govern) and the reality of a person's options are entirely different worlds.


It's just a matter of choice. If a person does something they do not want to do and what they would continue to be uncomfortable with (such as exercising their own authority) then I suppose it isn't feasible.


By making different choices on a daily basis and not believing that they are 'caught up in something' that they didn't choose to be caught up in.


Do you mean the movie that the Cult produced and served to those that did not accept the official narrative?

Take a look at who and what is behind the film to see more about how the propaganda works and how people accept "alternative" or "rebel" views without question.

Nearly 100% of 'alternative' productions are done by the Cult. Even a cursory look would reveal things that the conscious mind prefers not to see.

For those that do not accept the first layer of an engineered reality (engineered through narrative and propaganda), there is all ways a second layer, produced by the same. People rarely break past this second layer because it fills in many of the gaps that the first intentionally created. But it is still false, as it does not reveal most of the picture.

But the question is this... Is the Cult trying to deceive you against your will, or deceiving you because you, essentially, ask to be deceived from the choices you make?

Is Google deceiving you because it is what they want to do? Or is Google giving people the deception that they are asking for as soon as they decide to use the Internet, smartphones, and so on?

If someone chooses to go to a famous 'red light' district of a city, should they be offended when they are propositioned by a prostitute?

The masses are well past the point of not knowing what they are walking into when they choose certain things. There is little innocence there, no matter the age.

You may look at a baby and think of their innocence. But could you say that there is something far older and wiser about reality and the way things work behind those big, beautiful eyes?

The question is, "Why do I make that choice? What am I ignoring?'


Or war, or anything else.

The people produce it in their minds, inspired by the Cult's prompts and education.

How are 'they' able to get away with so much? Most of it is fake, and produced for the masses to make them fear and easier to govern.

How can ________ get away with _______? Because 98% of it is fake. There is about 2% that is real and done because no other alternative (where people are not harmed) seems to be had.

How could Brooke Shields appear mostly nude in a magasine at such an early age? Why was a judge okay with this? Because he is a he, not a she.

When people are told news is fake, for example, they don't think of HOW fake it is and WHY it needs to be fake.

It is easy to think that there are 'elites' who are evil and go around doing bad things. It is more difficult to understand that the public-facing ones are actors producing a play for the masses to govern an out-of-control population (who has lost much of their soul and spirit, by choice) that thinks it does not want to be governed.

When they produce wars, not as many die as you would think. I previously posted pictures of the US Civil War on the Revelations website. I challenge anyone to find a photo (out of a great many 'civil war' photos) where someone real looks to be injured. WHY would the Cult need to fake a war? Why were so many photos of dummies used? Why not just have a real war?

Why fake nuclear detonations over Japan with use of fire? Why not just make it real? What is with all the deception?

We are like children in a high school when we can just teach ourselves somewhere else. We think of the teachers and administrators as an 'elite' when they are not. We have simply chosen to be at the school and look to others to tell us what to do (because we have chosen that route, by default of voluntarily being at the school). Most of the teachers are benevolent, but the students see them as evil. There are some teachers and administrators who become a-holes when there is no better alternative.


That is why it takes so long :)

The understanding doesn't come easily when it is ignored.


Most of the things you 'can't live without' were, at one time, coming down the pike :)

And, at the time, they were thought of as evil or forbidden by a more rational population. Cars, newspapers, radio, certain kinds of furniture, paint, and everything else that makes Chaos interesting.


It may be bias :)

Things are more acceptable when you like or love the source.


For a child, only the physicality is so innocent.


How are you measuring whether 'suffering' is 'greater'?

I've met people, as I mentioned before, that were kidnapped for months, repeatedly raped, shot in the head at point-blank range, and others, and have had a far better personal disposition over the years than someone else who had a relatively perfect life and family but was moody and neurotic on a daily basis because a couple of kids in their school said something to them when they were younger.

Perhaps there is no suffering. Perhaps something is only there when you choose to focus on it. So many of us prefer to focus on the concept of suffering. But is it really there?

We each interpret things the way we want to be relevant in our lives.

The meaning of life is interaction. Further build the illusion by sharing!

Nice one :)

But the things that have not been publicly released still interact, just not publicly.

The needed interaction, however, isn't with what we produce but the selves that produce them.

Hello hello :)

I think I am conceptualizing something in not the most useful way. What does it mean when something is an aspect of something else?

To take an extremely relevant example: a dirty room. Thus far, I've been thinking of it like there is [room] and the possibilities of [room] are endless, but two specific states of [room] are [clean room] and [dirty room]. I picture it like [clean room] is connected to [dirty room] via [room]. Then the cognitive journey is from [dirty room] to [room] to [clean room]

Illustration: [link to imgur.com (secure)]

But I don't think that's what something being an aspect of something else really is? But I'm not sure how else to think of it, or how to think of the cognitive journey.

I think it's more like: [link to imgur.com (secure)]

but in the "real world" where is the clean room in the dirty room?

What are you suggesting then? What are we to do - and don’t say nothing?! Doesn’t there have to be an other system in place to choose from — to step into? And wouldn’t the new system, the more it’s chosen, also grow in complexity and chaos? Do we start from the ground up creating new systems or like you said below, change comes from within the existing system - how?


Like? How? Example?


Options, like what, put down the smartphone, shop local, turn off social media - things like that?

Does the Cult ever get tired of the role they’re playing? Seems like it would be exhausting keeping up reality like they do! What would happen if they just didn’t?


I haven’t seen that movie but maybe I’ll watch it now! That’s just how it came out when I typed it and I decided to leave it capitalized.

You’ve said this same thing many times and in a multitude of different ways. I think it’s a little of both. I think we’re asking for it and that they want to deceive. They’ve made a whole business of it. We give them purpose. They give us deception shaping reality. I wouldn’t call it a symbiotic relationship though. We get the short end of the stick in the long run. They grow and grow, earn profits, control and influence.

Have you spent time with a little babe lately? Magic little beings they are. Wise old souls masquerading behind those big, beautiful eyes. It’s been the best medicine for me these last 6 months. If you haven’t, you should :)



Great question, why the deception and not the real thing? Wouldn’t it be easier to just have it go live? What is with all the deception? If only 2% is real, what does that say about our scripted reality? Was there a time in recent human history where reality was more free form - real? I guess, what does real even mean then in the context of this scripted reality?



It’s just hard to watch someone you love suffer so. Especially when it could have been avoided. This is why intentional mis-information pisses me off.


Who’s the rational aspect of the population presently? What does rational even mean in 2023 against the backdrop of AI, blockchain, transgenderism, smart technology, and so much else?


Probably :)


How do you mean? I didn’t follow this statement.



In the moment I typed it, I was thinking about children in war zones suffering more than kids here.

Reality is subjective and every person processes differently. Some move through trauma and others stay stuck. Like you said, the power lies in our interpretation.

Perhaps you’re right and there is no suffering. What does that mean then? If it’s not suffering, what is it?

<<Perhaps something is only there when you choose to focus on it>>
Is that true of everything we experience?

This may be a topic past its prime, but if viruses aren't what we're taught they are, what are they? If anything. And, if they don't exist, what are non-bacterial illnesses?

I've thought about how vaccinations appear to eradicate viruses, and I figure those illnesses were caused by something else that was mass distributed in order to push vaccines and then that something stopped being distributed. But I still have had the occasional cold, what "causes" those?

And what if vaccins are made from viruses?

Thread: BBC reports vaccine is made from HIV! Vaxxers got the AIDS now.

A while ago you gave advice to someone who wanted to sell their house and asked them what would happen if the food tasted bad after they went out to celebrate.

I think I find myself in a similar situation at that moment. I have been trying to get an opportunity to reach my financial/career goals and, 3 months after making a genius for it, it seems like it's starting to work out.

Here is the thing though. To use the opportunity need to make a sacrifice. I have to change my living conditions in a way that is not favorable and the shift may lead to emotional instability.

I know my priority, which is to focus on building enough wealth to provide for my family. So my choices are focused on the achievement of this. That said, how do I reconcile with the needed sacrifice? I think that my current attitude towards the needed sacrifice can be summed up as "hesitancy" and I am wondering if it hinders the materialization process.

Hesitancy in this case is best described as a fear I might regret my choice if the opportunity doesn't end up playing out the way I expect it to at the moment. I understand that I introduce an alternative, scenario this way, one that is not beneficial to me. I want to reframe it so that it doesn't hinder the opportunity I am interacting with.

You said I can choose my chaos, but how can I convince my mind to interpret the needed sacrifice as something I'd be happy to do? Does the "hesitancy" derive from my insecurity? Lack of understanding that I am all that I perceive?

I came across this article today titled, Why You Should Destroy Your Smart Phone Now. It’s one of the points Tony has made over and over again but for many reasons, I can’t seem to let it go. I cherish it. Even when it’s laid out so clearly, I still choose it like most do.

If I don’t choose to put it down now, what makes me think I will choose to later. It’s disappointing.

I can’t say I didn’t know better whenever that time comes due.

…
“Smartphones are the first generation of the biotechnology that is already being implanted into our bodies in the form of ingested medicines carrying microchips that record compliance; quantum dot dyes in gene therapies injected as vaccines against the latest civilisation-threatening pandemic declared by the WHO; and microprocessors implanted under our skin for the ease and convenience of contactless payments. Smart phones are the precursor of what Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, accurately and prophetically boasted will be ‘the fusion of our physical, our digital and our biological identities’ in the rapidly approaching future he has planned for us.

Smartphones, therefore, are the technology of our enslavement, and the fact that, knowing all this as more and more of us do, we still — still — won’t discard them, shows how addicted we are to this technology, how deep it has penetrated into our psychology, and in effect into our biology. Like the prisoners forced to construct the camp in which they are imprisoned, we continue to pay increasing sums for our smartphones, upgrade our prison whenever we’re invited to, and demand that its facilities are regularly increased in efficiency with the latest technology.

The truth is, we don’t programme smartphones and we don’t use them. They programme us, they change how we use them. They use us. With the rise of the car as a widely-available convenience between the 1950s and 60s, someone observed that, if aliens visited earth, they would think cars were the dominant life-form, and that we were merely the energy source that, upon entering them, allows them to move about — a little like food is for us. Seventy years and two industrial revolutions later, we’re now the organic component that operates smartphones, and in doing so allows them to replicate in number and increase in power — above all over us. That, at its most basic, is the function of the human being in the Global Biosecurity State. And if we keep thinking that we use our smartphones — as they have programmed us to think — those who programme them will have complete control over us.”
…

[link to off-guardian.org (secure)]