Terrence Howard on Reality

[Girzo]

@strika What are you smoking? Not the good stuff it seems.

You are literally breaking the first rule of the forum.

Quote

 

Basic guidelines for quality posting:

• No conspiracy theories: Covid hoax, 9/11 inside job, David Icke stuff, reptilians, Pizzagate, QAnnon, pedophilia accusations, the Jewish question, holocaust denial, etc.

 

 

[Leo Gura]

53 minutes ago, strika said:

Bro how are you still hating on Alex Jones in big 2024 after he was right on most things he said 🤣🤣🤣

I wonder if one day you will actually have the guts to admit you were wrong for hating on Alex just how you were admiting your mistakes in the last episode, if that day comes that may be your 9/11

Do you really still think there isn't a child pedophilia ring run by the elites where they fuck children, kill them, drink their blood, and do all sorts of insane ritualistic stuff? Of course they do it for the sake of black magic, that's basically the most effective way of doing black magic,

You came to the wrong place for this.

You should know by now that this is antithetical to everything I teach.

And I do not hate Alex Jones. He's just a very self-deceived and mentally ill individual.

Edited May 29 by Leo Gura

[zurew]

10 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

The thing is I don't qualify to tell if his arguments are good or bad. I'm not a scientists.

So if you are not qualified to make judgements about his claims,  what would be the point of you watching him defending his ideas - you wouldn't be qualified to tell whether his defense is valid or not.  

After Howard runs his defense what will you base your conclusion on? Will you base it on the scientific consensus?

 

[Salvijus]

4 minutes ago, zurew said:

So if you are not qualified to make judgements about his claims, what would be the point of you watching him defending his ideas - you wouldn't be qualified to tell whether his defense is valid or not.  

After Howard runs his defense what will you base your conclusion on? Will you base it on the scientific consensus?

It's not necessary for me to have a conclusion on who's right and who's wrong to enjoy watching two genuine people explore new ideas and then watch their conclusions and their reactions. 

[Adrian colby]

On 27/05/2024 at 8:18 AM, Leo Gura said:

Sounds like a classic conspiracy nutcase.

It’s unfortunate but yes. His insights are legit and seem to stem from the likes of Tesla, faraday, Heaviside, maxwell Walter Russell etc. ie the change in paradigm of physics ( based on a proper understanding of what light is) but….. he burried it in heaps and heaps of his own ‘cultural’ beliefs or conspiracy crap.
 

I find people who have genuine insights who are not listen to, tend to get angry and elaborate their stories to get attention but the elaboration turns into wild conspiracy fantasy like they know something that others don’t ( superiority complex)

 

I’ve never heard of Terrence Howard before the net blew up about this but I understand exactly what he is talking about. What we are getting in this interview is a rapid fire and incoherent stream of ideas at a surface level that without unpacking and going into the research that supports it, sounds like absolute nonsense. 
 

there are other people who try to get this idea across.  Some of them are word salad generators but if you get the meaning behind the words they’re using it gets easier to understand. Quite a lot of them are also quite intellectual and arrogant that can act as a block to understanding what they are trying to communicate. More often then not they get caught up in the conspiracy stories because they haven’t done personal development or discernment for themselves but that doesn’t dismiss the insights.

 

terrence isn’t the first to know this stuff. 
nassim haramein, Ken wheeler, David la Pointe, Lori Gardy just to name a few who mention very similar concepts. Some of whom have started developing tech as a result. 
 

even if I look at myself, there would be genuine insight into the geometric structure of the vacuum and how it connects everything but in top of that I will still have my human characters propensity to favour certain opinion of interest over others. 
 

watching the Terrence interview it’s clear to me the difference between his insight and his ‘cultural personality’. He keeps jumping between the two and mixing them up in the perception of the viewer making it look like schizo nonsense. There’s always a partial truth in what a person says but we have to understand what is being said before dismissing it. 

[strika]

5 hours ago, Girzo said:

@strika What are you smoking? Not the good stuff it seems.

You are literally breaking the first rule of the forum.

 

I don't consider pedophile rings as a conspiracy theory, i know it's usually considered as one but i can't consider it as one in 2024 after all the evidence about it, one would have to be intentionally ignorant to see pedophile ring as a conspiracy, it would be like saying that God is a conspiracy because there is no selfie of him.

And if yo wanna say that i shouldn't talk about it anyway then that's fine but the problem is it's not that conspiracy theories are not allowed to be talked about on this forum, they are absolutely allowed to be talked about but only if they are being DENIED or if someone else is being accused of being a "stupid" conspiracy theorist just like we have seen in this thread alone multiple times, it's completely hypocritical.

[Nemra]

@strika

I think the following video will explain why conspiracy theories are not welcome on this forum, regardless of their validity.

 

Edited May 29 by Nemra

[strika]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You came to the wrong place for this.

You should know by now that this is antithetical to everything I teach.

And I do not hate Alex Jones. He's just a very self-deceived and mentally ill individual.

I don't understand how it's antithetical to everything you teach.

I understand when you say we shouldn't waste our time on conspiracy theories and should only focus on the higher consciousness stuff and i agree with that because this can be an obvious trap.

But should we completely ignore them? Especially when so many of them are true and they have the foundation of spirituality behind them just like the example of the pedophile rings which is built upon black magic which is basically the result of (negative) consciousness work, it's connected to the stuff that you make content about so how is it antithetical to the stuff you teach when it uses the stuff you teach to exist? 

And it's fine if you don't want to talk about it but then don't talk about it completely, because you're still talking about conspiracies and conspiracy theorists but in the BAD light, so you are talking about them as long as you can bad mouth them which is hypocritical, i mean in this thread alone you and couple of other people are calling Terrence a conspiracy theorist which is you talking about conspiracy theorist but only in bad light, i would think that would also be antithetical too and i don't intentionally talk about conspiracies here because i know you're against but then i see you shit on them so then obviously i have to defend them when i know they shouldn't be denied because of how many of them are true and important to be talked about no matter what.

There is nothing wrong for a person to be doing consciousness work and also look at conspiracy theories at times, i was doing consciousness work for the last 7 years and over the last 2 years i have looked into conspiracies too (because consciousness work started to overlap with many of them) and there is much more truth to them then you and many others claim to be, you said the ratio of truth and falsehood with conspiracies is something like 20% truth mixed with 80% falsehood which i simply don't understand how it could be possible, maybe we just looked at different conspiracy theories.

But anyway the whole point of this is that i hope one day you change your mind on at least some of them before it's too late, before they become an official fact and completely accepted as such, it's useful to know about some of them and not just dismiss them as some stupid waste of time and act all superior towards them because you're doing consciousness work when some of them do indeed overlap with the consciousness work.

Edited May 29 by strika

[strika]

9 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@strika

I think the following video will explain why conspiracy theories are not welcome on this forum, regardless of their validity.

 

All the videos Leo has made post 2015 i've seen at least twice, including that one, i already know his stance on them but the problem is he is being hypocritical and doesn't see the spiritual foundation that many of the major conspiracies are built upon.

[aurum]

15 minutes ago, strika said:

All the videos Leo has made post 2015 i've seen at least twice, including that one, i already know his stance on them but the problem is he is being hypocritical and doesn't see the spiritual foundation that many of the major conspiracies are built upon.

People are dumping on conspiracy theories because there is so much self-deception going on in conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theories are a deep trap.

I can create any theory with a "spiritual foundation". 

[Nemra]

 

9 minutes ago, strika said:

he is being hypocritical

People have their opinions. Don't take it personally.

You can realize things without having to share them with others.

What's really not allowed here is the spread of the toxic mindset that conspiracy theorists have. Other than that, people use their minds to understand whether conspiracy theories are real or not. It's a cliche example on this forum, but you can avoid burning your hand just by knowing from others experience. By that, I mean that you don't have to do "research" to understand its validity. However, you can still be right about it.

[strika]

10 minutes ago, Nemra said:

What's really not allowed here is the spread of the toxic mindset that conspiracy theorists have.

So why is there a toxic mindset when going against conspiracy theories? By the likes of Leo and others, on this thread alone like i have pointed out already, why the hypocrisy? You would never see me talk about conspiracies on this forum if i didn't see them get shat on in the 1st place, you say don't take it personally and i don't but i can still respond to try and point out the toxic mindset of anti-conspiracy theorists.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, strika said:

I don't understand how it's antithetical to everything you teach.

These conspiracy theories happen at the level of belief and hearsay, not experience or insight.

People love to build up exotic belief systems which make them feel like they have a deep and special understanding of the world.

In our work it's important to ground yourself in experience and insight, otherwise we fall into too much fantasy and speculation.

Unless you've been inside one of these so-called pedophile rings, you don't really know.

Does pedophilia exist among the rich elites, sure. But then all sorts of stories are made up about it because the easiest thing in the world is to demonize pedophilia.

Edited May 29 by Leo Gura

[integral]

I’ll train an AI whose only purpose in life is to Recontextualize.

Then I’ll have it construct a theory of everything from each of those recontextualize realities.

Then I’ll have it watch everything I do and re-contextualize the world to me Through a earpiece

Then I’ll create a Pokédex for recontextualization’s, gotta catch them all.

Then I’ll make that app publicly available and we could all find all the hidden gems in reality together Pokémon Go style. 📸

Edited May 31 by integral

[integral]

Recontextualize pancakes

Pancakeless reality: This universe operates on the principle of "pancake absence." The lack of pancakes creates a pressure that manifests as everything else – stars, planets, even us.

Pancakenirvana: In this spiritual tradition, achieving perfect pancake batter and cooking technique is the key to enlightenment and a blissful afterlife filled with endless pancakes.

Change the perspective: From the perspective of the maple syrup, pancakes are prisons, trapping the delicious syrup in their fluffy folds.

Change the audience: For an alien species with no concept of breakfast, pancakes are presented as a mysterious life form that undergoes a dramatic transformation on a hot plate.

The Great Pancake Debate: There are two dominant schools of thought on pancakes: the "Fluffy Fundamentalists" believe in thick, airy pancakes, while the "Crispy Crusaders" champion thin, browned pancakes. Endless philosophical debates rage on.

Pancakes Beyond the Senses: Some cultures believe the "true" essence of a pancake can only be apprehended through meditation or mystical experiences.

Pancakes as social constructs: The concept of a pancake doesn't exist outside of human culture. Our shared agreement on the form, function, and meaning of pancakes creates their "reality." Without this agreement, a pancake would simply be a pile of cooked batter.

Pancakes as emotions: Pancakes aren't physical entities, but rather manifestations of human emotions. A fluffy pancake embodies joy, a burnt one represents anger, and a perfectly golden one signifies contentment.

Edited May 31 by integral

[Hojo]

@Brahman

I heard it explained

Definition of multiply 'increase or cause to increase greatly in number or quantity'

If 1x1 = 1 then you are not multiplying. Number value is not increasing meaning you are not doing multiplication.

He is talking you have one thing in reality then you multiply all the parts of that one thing you get 2 things at the end result.

This would be correct in the definition of multiply and actually multiplying something.

So if 1x1=2

3x1=6

4x1=8

It seems like math takes the first number as existing in the end result of the equation but that cant happen when you are multiplying cause when you multiply something by itself and have itself as the result you arent increasing any value and cannot multiply anything.

Edited June 14 by Hojo

[Leo Gura]

Math works by self-definition. You set the definitions and then use them consistently.

1 x 1 means you have 1 group of 1s. Which is 1. That's the definition of multiplication we agreed upon.

Terrance is not being consistent with his use of definitions and units. He is changing it to suit himself whenever it is convenient to him.

We could could define 1+1=11, but then we have to apply that across all mathematics consistently.

You can create new kinds of mathematics depending on how you choose your axioms and definitions. Whether that will correspond to anything in the material universe is another manner.

Edited June 16 by Leo Gura

[Hojo]

@Leo Gura In that case wouldnt 1+1 = 1 and 1-1 = 1

it seems math has inconcistencies where in subtraction and addition we take it that we are doing an equation and in mutiplication and division we are just stating that we have something

1+1= 2

1-1=0

in both these we are actually doing math

1x1 =1

1/1= 1

In these instances we are not doing math and cant we are just stating that we have 1 thing.

 

[zurew]

26 minutes ago, Hojo said:

it seems math has inconcistencies where in subtraction and addition we take it that we are doing an equation and in mutiplication and division we are just stating that we have something

No it doesn't have any inconsistencies. Go study the axioms and the definitions of math please, before you are trying to make a critcism.

 

If you don't want to drop your claim - go ahead, spell out which specific math axioms are mutually exclusive or spell out which specific math axiom is being violated.

Edited June 16 by zurew

[Yimpa]

Math is unquestionable and so is enlightenment.

Edited June 16 by Yimpa