Ball Earth Vs Flat Earth.

[Bob84]

Could this theory be a conspiracy to discredit the alternative media? 

911, ok. chemtrails, ok. flateart, crazy.

[Wind]

Random traveler who has been to a South Pole:

http://www.leeabbamonte.com/antarctica/made-south-pole.html

[Aware]

11 hours ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

Please come with some good arguments/explanations as to why evolution and/or big bang-theories are debunking essence/the law of actions leading to its results. I'm excited to hear your view on why that is so. My intuition tells me that it is just because you haven't studied science/evolution/big bang enough, or don't understand it.

11 hours ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

Many scientists are on the one end of the spectrum of claiming science to be the knowledge to everyyyyyything. They never look in-wards to find their TrueSelf, and realize that Essence/consciousness is prior to the physical world (hopefully we will see changes here soon).

11 hours ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

But you are just on the other end of the spectrum.

11 hours ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

t's the middle path.. the middle of spectrum. Where Einstein were. And where I am as well.

Dear waveintheocean,

Are you truly interested in my post? 
   Because, I can critically now pick up your post, and just scratch a lot from it, so that it actually demonstrates you do are really waiting for a post coming from me, that perfectly discerns wholesome from unwholesome based on the laws of actions leading to its according results for as far as I am concerned. But of course I don't need to prove anything rather I can discern it or not (although one might be curious).
I am willing to write it down for your development, sharing so that another perspective is viewed. I don't do it to debate you.

If you really want that I write down my reasons concerning theories, because it has proven in the past to you to be enlightening in a way, then be careful with statements that I am not on the middle path, I would not go down that road.

You state that you of course are on the middle path, and of course I am not despite all practice and attained great understanding of the law of action leading to its according results, then why bother to expect me to post anyway, explaining and discerning wholesome from the unwholesome based on the laws of actions leading to its according results (concerning the topic) which is exactly leading to the middle path?

[WaveInTheOcean]

25 minutes ago, Aware said:

Dear waveintheocean,

Are you truly interested in my post? 
   Because, I can critically now pick up your post, and just scratch a lot from it, so that it actually demonstrates you do are really waiting for a post coming from me, that perfectly discerns wholesome from unwholesome based on the laws of actions leading to its according results for as far as I am concerned. But of course I don't need to prove anything rather I can discern it or not (although one might be curious).
I am willing to write it down for your development, sharing so that another perspective is viewed. I don't do it to debate you.

If you really want that I write down my reasons concerning theories, because it has proven in the past to you to be enlightening in a way, then be careful with statements that I am not on the middle path, I would not go down that road.

You state that you of course are on the middle path, and of course I am not despite all practice and attained great understanding of the law of action leading to its according results, then why bother to expect me to post anyway, explaining and discerning wholesome from the unwholesome based on the laws of actions leading to its according results (concerning the topic) which is exactly leading to the middle path?

1. I just wrote down MY personal point of view on this matter of science, which we are dicussing.

2. Yes, I am very curious and interested to hear YOUR personal point of view on this matter of science, which we are dicussing.

3. "...that perfectly discerns wholesome from unwholesome based on the laws of actions leading to its according results for as far as I am concerned."
I can't wait! I am very glad to see you included this: "as far as I am concerned".

4. "But of course I don't need to prove anything -- rather I can discern it or not" .. Be careful here of what you think you know is actually right.
I'm gonna spam some Socrates' quotes below for you to think about. Because I find it interesting that you don't seem to acknowledge that you don't have as much knowledge of physics/biology/-natural sciences in general- as a person who has studied it for years (for example me, although I have only stuided it on 'high' high school level).

5. "I am willing to write it down for your development, sharing so that another perspective is viewed." Great, thanks.

6.  "If you really want that I write down my reasons concerning theories, because it has proven in the past to you to be enlightening in a way, then be careful with statements that I am not on the middle path, I would not go down that road." ... Sure. While I (from my point of view) can see that you indeed are on a middle path in regards to many things in life (thumps up, better than me in many ways), I currently don't see that you are on such a middle path in regards to modern science. There are many middle paths to take in life (IMO). You should be careful not fooling youself into believing that you are already on the middle-path in regards to modern science.
7. "You state that you of course are on the middle path" . I define the middle path - in regards to science - as the standpoint that Einstein had. Einstein was a firm "believer" of casuality (basícally = The Law of Action leading to its according Results) ... and in regards to _science_ Einstein had a great, great understanding of casuality.

Now in regards to spirituality (self-realization) I'd say Einstein had a mediocre understanding of casuality in this regard. And here, you, Aware, obviously have a much greater understanding than both me and Einstein - I don't deny that!

8. Socrates quotes (this dude was very wise, none can deny that):
 

Quote

“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” 

“Let him who would move the world first move himself.” 

“The secret of happiness, you see, is not found in seeking more, but in developing the capacity to enjoy less.” 

“Sometimes you put walls up not to keep people out, but to see who cares enough to break them down.” 

“If you don't get what you want, you suffer; if you get what you don't want, you suffer; even when you get exactly what you want, you still suffer because you can't hold on to it forever. Your mind is your predicament. It wants to be free of change. Free of pain, free of the obligations of life and death. But change is law and no amount of pretending will alter that reality.” 

“He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have.” 

“To find yourself, think for yourself.” 

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.” 

“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.” 

“We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” 

“Life contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart’s desire; the other is to get it.” 

“To fear death, gentlemen, is no other than to think oneself wise when one is not, to think one knows what one does not know. No one knows whether death may not be the greatest of all blessings for a man, yet men fear it as if they knew that it is the greatest of evils.” 

“The hottest love has the coldest end.” 

“My friend...care for your psyche...know thyself, for once we know ourselves, we may learn how to care for ourselves"

“What screws us up the most in life is the picture in our head of what it's supposed to be.”

“One should never do wrong in return, nor mistreat any man, no matter how one has been mistreated by him.” 

“If you want to be a good saddler, saddle the worst horse; for if you can tame one, you can tame all.”

“From the deepest desires often come the deadliest hate.” 

“Prefer knowledge to wealth, for the one is transitory, the other perpetual.” 

“Employ your time in improving yourself by other men's writings so that you shall come easily by what others have labored hard for.” 

“I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."

“The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our separate ways, I to die, and you to live. Which of these two is better only God knows.” 

"We do not know — neither the sophists, nor the orators, nor the artists, nor I— what the True, the Good, and the Beautiful are. But there is this difference between us: although these people know nothing, they all believe they know something; whereas, I, if I know nothing, at least have no doubts about it. As a result, all this superiority in wisdom which the oracle has attributed to me reduces itself to the single point that I am strongly convinced that I am ignorant of what I do not know.” 

“Do not do to others what angers you if done to you by others.” 

“Wonder is the beginning of wisdom.” 

“The unexamined life is not worth living.” 

“Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people.”

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” 

“Every action has its pleasures and its price.” 

“Know thyself.” 

“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” 

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean

[jse]

This thread is NOT about any "flat earth" fallacy.  It is about a troll (Motus/Aware) who deludes himself into thinking he can open up your mind with fakery. Don't give him your time, ignore his egotistical foolish ramblings.

[Aware]

1 hour ago, jse said:

This thread is NOT about any "flat earth" fallacy.  It is about a troll (Motus/Aware) who deludes himself into thinking he can open up your mind with fakery. Don't give him your time, ignore his egotistical foolish ramblings.

Of course this post is NOT about protecting anyones mind from anything, as jse goes from thread to thread trying to be the critic. 

However when we ask arguments, we find non. Its these days normal to just bombard without good reason, and convince others to be deluded and egotistical without having good reasons for such hateful comments, and yet in the end they still run away with reputation.

So jsi, tell me, why you still did not put me on ignore?

Edited January 7, 2017 by Aware

[Aware]

@WaveInTheOcean I am going to reply soon (tomorrow I hope) to your well written out comment, body has flu.

 

5 hours ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

8. Socrates quotes (this dude was very wise, none can deny that):

Thanks, pearls of wisdom!
 

I speak the truth Waveintheocean, I am just a conscious fool.

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by Aware

[WaveInTheOcean]

3 hours ago, Aware said:

@WaveInTheOcean 
 

I speak the truth Waveintheocean

Well, if you believe you speak the truth in regards of your stated opinion on the explanations science has put forward (you believe they don't follow 'the law of actions leading to their according results, which I in turn believe they do just fine) on things such as evolution, gravity, the -observable- universe's expansion over time, then I believe you view it wrong/don't understand it properly.

Let me say this:

The greater understanding one has about the law of casuality in regards to one self (both mind and  True Self, Awareness), the "higher" "awareness"/"consciousness" one has -- I would say.

Deep understanding of casuality regarding one self = spirituality (x)

Deep understanding of casuality regarding the surroundings/the outside world = science (y)

Unfortunately, most scientists are not like Einstein and thus only have an understanding of casuality in regards to y, and not x, because they never really have bothered to spend time on studying their own inner workings/mind.

I clearly see that you, Aware, have achieved a very deep understanding of x ... but not of y.

Now x is to me much more important than y.

But I still enjoy understanding y.

They are connected imo. And although they depend on each other, it is actually mostly only y that depend on x and not the other way around, since awareness/consciousness (x)  obviously is prior to the physical world (y). That is to say there only exist a physical world because of consciousness, and clearly not the other way around (which many scientists, yes, falsly believe (they believe the brain creates consciousness, which is obv not the case)).

Anyway... So actually you don't have to understand y, Aware, if you don't care about it. I don't know your "desires".

But "my problem", sort of, is that you create a topic regarding whether the Earth is flat or a sphere, and then proceed to make many wrong conclusions about it, because you don't acknowledge your -- to me -- very obvious ignorance about y (physics/natural science).

Actually I acknowledge that I only have a very limited understanding of physichs and mathemathics. There is much I don't know.

In the same way, Aware, in your sprouting journey into the big jungle of modern science, you really should start this journey by acknowledging that you actually don't know much about how the physical world operates on a logical level/casuality-level (= math & physics). At least not compared to a professor in math/physics. Even such a professor will acknowledge that there is MUCH he doesn't know (What is dark energy, dark matter?, and many more questions/"problems": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics)

In fact every journey into a new area of life, one should start by being humble and follow Socrates' wise advice.

So what is physics? It's just a discipline that is devouted to come up with models/explanations/"truths" about how the physical world operates. It is basically the study of how the universe operates on a physical level.

And the question of whether the ball is a sphere or a plane -- that exact question is INDEED a question that should only be asked within the field of physics (and math, surely).

In this thread, I see a lot of ignorance of physics, I see a lot of indirect claims of knowing much about it, but also demonstrating that one does not.

(eg. when you pointed out that  the fact that we didn't see any motion of the Earth on the balloon-cam should favor the flat-earth-theory, when it in fact just as much favors the ball-earth-theory, because standard proven physics can explain very nicely why one shouldn't see any motion on a big ball-shaped Earth).

To say that all of Einstein's work was nonsense is insane. His work regarding relativity has been proven through countless experiments, which I won't even begin to mention, do your own research). In fact the satellites orbiting the Earth has incoporated into their computer systems to take into account the strange phenomena of the relativity of time!... The farther a clock is from a gravitational source (The Earth in this case) the faster it ticks. So because the satellites are high up in the sky, everyday a satelitte clock is 30-40 microseconds ahead compared to a ground-clock! Yes, it sounds insane and strange, but let me stress: This has been proven through many experiments... Aware, if you have ever used a GPS, the GPS is only so accurate as it is thanks to Einstein's general relativity.. If the GPS-systems didn't incorporate the time differences between ground-clocks and satellite-clocks, then your GPS wouldn't be very accurate (if accurate at all!).

Now I have written a 40-page project on the theory of relativity in high school and done math on some of the easier stuff (special relativity)... so I know from maths that Einstein's theory is right... It's not JUST because I believe what all professors in physics say around the world -- I have for a fact studied it somewhat deeply ony my own.

Aware, try to see this videoe with an open mind:

The guy behind the channel that produced the above video is one who has a phd in physics, and have decided to spend much of his time on creating this extremely educational/easy-to-understand videos explaining some very advanced topics of modern physics.

Also, Aware, if you have written some of Einstein's views on religion/spirituality, my I ask you: Why would such a guy ever consciously create a hoax such as relativity to mask the "Truth" from the masses? (assuming general/special relativity is a big scam,, im just trying to follow you here).

Einstein had one of the most brilliant minds in respect to physics that has ever been on Earth. 
None can really deny that

EDIT:
I cannot stress this enough. That you believe the explanations that modern science give are wrong, is only because you don't understand HOW the modern science came up with the explanations they give. If you actually bothered to study it deeply with a humble, open-minded attitude, you would see that the explanations are very legit, because they are based on the law of casuality (= they are based on studies of the Universe, how it operates, experiments, seeing how the law of casuality plays out in this area). The explanations are basically based on very thorough observations/experiments, that constantly gets cross-verified by hundreds of different individuals performing such observations/experiments.

The theory evolution wasn't made for fun.

The theory of relativity wasn't made for fun.

They were not made either to mask/distort any truth for you -- in fact the opposite.

They were not made because they fitted well with one man's view of the world... in fact the opposite. Many were against evolution when it was formulated by Darwin. Many were against the big bang theory when it was being formulated. Many were against relativity when it was being formulated. .. So much opposition to these theories... Yet, why are they still here today and now labeled as todays pinnacle of modern science? For one simple reasons: The explanations the theories came up with / what the theories predicited has been tested and checked/verified through 1000s of experiments that all came up with answers that were in favour of the theories.

If a theory predicts something that turns out to no be the case... for example Einstein's theory predicts that we should be able to observe "gravity waves" from special cosmic events happening in the universe... If we didn't find any waves, then that would mean that Einstein's theories might be wrong... And guess what we have found.. We have indeed found the presence of such waves in the universe. https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/news/ligo20160211 

EDIT: Sorry they're called gravitational waves , not gravity waves.

EDIT3: Aware, remember, that when I say 'law of casuality' that is exactly the same law as the 'law of actions leading to their according results' ... I repeat: exactly the same law.

Edited January 8, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean

[WaveInTheOcean]

@Aware

"Because it supports their big gravity hoax explanations. (I don't state its not a phenomenon, I state its just not in need for such an explanation as they have given). It gets rid of the random big bang we all are an accident that supports evolution theory, which must of course support a non-Awareness being. A nothing, that governs everything. We all came from a bundle of nothing that exploded in a big bang, that is their story. That in the beginning, there was nothing. And then came gravity, out of the nothing. "

1. The Big Bang theory DOES NOT try to give the picture that we (as our true we: awareness) comes from a bundle of nothing that exploded. It just says that that's how the observable universe -- we see today -- began and then it nicely describes how it evolved over time,, i say nicely because it's explanations are supported by massive amounts of evidence. So yes, in a sense, it describes how the human body developed (in a sense) but Aware, of course you don't identify with your body, do you?  

2. The Big Bang theory doesn't try to explain what was BEFORE the big bang.. Because I agree with you, of course there was something, whatever that it.., I like to just call it "apparant" nothingness.

3. Also no theories try to explain WHY there is gravity (why space curves around massive objects ).. It just explains how it functions!

Evolution doesn't explain, and doesn't try to explain why it even is so. It doesn't try to explain why there even is life in the first place. It doesn't try to explain why humans exist. It just _describes_  how the organisms evolved over time - THAT'S ALL it does!

Same goes with big bang theory... it doesn't try to explain WHY there was a big bang... Why there is anything..... And it doesn't explain why we exist here right now.. But it explains how the universe evolved over time! And the explanation it comes up with fits very, very nicely with observations of the space. Same goes for evolution, just in regards to the observations we make of fossils, mutations, DNA, replication, divserity and much more.

So what I'm trying to get along... Both big bang and evolution are just MODELS... But they are effective models that describe certain things very nicely, precisely in according with casuality. SO they are useful models to understand some parts of nature.. and a deeper understanding of nature is always fascinating to achieve, at least for me... and this applies both to understanding myself better (who am I) but also to understand how does the universe function ? )

Also, could it be, Aware, that evolution is just the way "Essence" is creating organisms/life? It sure seems so. (massive evidence based on casuality). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent

Could it be that general/special relativity is just a way Essence "decided" that "matter" should interact with each other? It sure seems so. (massive evidence based on casuality). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

Could it be that the big bang is just the way that Essence "decided"  how "this apparant external world" began/developed? It sure seems so. (massive evidence based on casuality). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Observational_evidence

See, again, evolution doesn't try to explain existence/awareness in itself... Evolution just describes how the physical organisms evolved over time (and still evolve).

Now, my friend, I hope you soon begin to appreciate the beauty of science.

This is the famous Hubble Deep Field Photo taken by the Hubble Space telescope orbiting the Earth:

 

All the light-dots you see are all galaxies which are similiar to our own milky way galaxy. Every galaxy has billions of stars, probably also stars with many planets.

It's fascinating how insignificant the Earth is in the big picture;) 

To understand how science works on a methodological level (basically follows the law of actions leading to according results) you could start by reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

If stubbornly countinue to believe that all modern science is based on supporting the "Earth is ball"-scam/hoax/secret to keep the truth hidden from the public, then I'm afraid I can't help you anymore on this matter. All I could do then is to suggest to you to read "The Book of Not Knowing" by Peter Ralston . https://www.amazon.com/Book-Not-Knowing-Exploring-Consciousness/dp/1556438575 

3 quotes from the great book:

“Why are you unhappy? Because 99.9 percent of everything you do is for yourself—and there isn’t one."

“Whatever we think of as “self” we will protect and maintain. If it’s a conceptual self, and likely it is, then we end up with mind protecting mind. This produces a rather “introverted” self-mind creating thoughts and perceptions in its own image. When self becomes confused with mind, and mind becomes seen as the self, the mind’s self-serving activities end up creating an experience of reality that is entirely self-referential.” 

“Knowing” can be useful, but learning not to know creates a powerful openness that is inconceivable until it is experienced.” 

Edited January 8, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean

[WaveInTheOcean]

"This dangerous idea of Ball Earth, is the biggest parasite for Multi incarnated experience Awareness. Because it leads to upside down thinking, to their own Awareness alike structured way of thinking."

"upside down thinking" ... you just label it is because you don't understand it (im talking about the arguments for why Earth is obviously a ball)

"Readers! Because of thinking like this, they go on with their campaign, through education, mass media, monopoly games and religious dogmas"

I agree all this is happening... but it would still happen "even if NASA/big corps didn't lie to us abot the shape of the earth"... please realize this.. it has NOTHING to do with the shape of the earth... In fact if you believe so, I would say this shows that you (on this topic) has a pretty poor understanding of 'the law of actions leading to their according results'.

In fact, the Church for one, was back in the days interested in maintaining the false view that the Earth was the center of the Universe... so you're sort of contradicting yourself here, you see?

EDIT: With all this said,

" Yes, I am very curious and interested to hear YOUR personal point of view on this matter of science, which we are dicussing."

still applies if you want to present your case for why I'm wrong in regards to modern science.

Edited January 8, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean

[WaveInTheOcean]

7 hours ago, jse said:

This thread is NOT about any "flat earth" fallacy.  It is about a troll (Motus/Aware) who deludes himself into thinking he can open up your mind with fakery. Don't give him your time, ignore his egotistical foolish ramblings.

Don't judge so harshly.

He's obviously not a troll.

He has a great perspective on how to be able to live freely without attachments. Sure -- it's based on Buddha's teachings... but he has not just read/understood the teachings, he is also living -- to a large extent - in accordance with them

And actually the point of this topic was just to ask people to question some things (like the shape of the thing we're living on) which is healthy. 

[Aware]

@WaveInTheOcean Your posts are extended, I am going to order them. I see a clear misunderstanding coming up, regarding how I view things according to how you view things. I will demonstrate why it is not the case that I am discrediting a scientist. But only pure upon the explanations that further have nothing to do with Einstein, but rather with the bunch of people that use such explanations to wrap it with other explanations and then state that it is therefor true, because there was but one right explanation, which I say, is not a case of science, but a case of ignorance.

So what I am going to try to explain here, is how a scientist isn't always free from ignorance. And that therefor the explanation of Einstein are valid, in opposition of the misuse of people that state its the only explanation etc (which has nothing to do with his explanation, but rather their ignorance misusing a theory). While I would bet that if Einstein would continue his work, he would have gone further with more explanations, regarding the subject even so he might discovered that there are other explanations. But the same could be said about Tesla, that reviewed gravity totally differently. But got suppressed. And this is where I came in, with what is a case of science, and what is a case of ignorance, and what is the parasite for humans?

I stated the ball earth. Why? Not because it is or is not a ball, but the extent people belief it to be true without further questioning. Therefor its the greatest hoax, not rather its the actual shape as in physical sense, but the shape within their minds, that is the parasite of falsely belief it must be true without self exploration of any kind. Which gave no room for further questioning due to that the earth must be a ball, all places are discovered, give up the search, don't further question rather it is not a ball either, because you are called a fool. This is the parasite that is the idea that demobilizes their curiosity to a great extent. That has nothing to do with its actual shape (therefor this discussion ball vs flat, to question), where if I would state: Its therefor flat, and belief all the concepts concerning the flat earth, this is the same parasite still, but I did not yet put it in my work here extensively enough, but I should clearly do that, I see that. But I am going to clarify this in my book as well, presenting this topic more extensively due to the questions it arises also from you, and thank you for your contribution for that, its dear to me.

So what do I see as a hoax (examples of various parasites):

The only explanation is given by Einstein, and its the only explanation, therefor the only valid one (we are no longer in need of any other explanation). I say, this is not a case of science, its a case of ignorance. (has nothing to do with the theory, but their false belief it explains it all).

There is but only one explanation given by Einstein, and its the only explanation, therefor all those other explanations concerned in accordance with this explanation and theories, are therefor right. All the others are not right. I say, this is not a case of science, its a case of ignorance.

Movies, mass media, everyone is propagating that which has been found, which shapes worldview and explains how everything came to be. I say, this has nothing to do with science, its not a case of science, its a case of ignorance.

Yes these theories are not complete, they need extension, we just mention this in our magazines that we belief it to be so... I say this has nothing to do with science, its a case of ignorance.

Quote

Why so? Because if these scientists are attached, have no clue how to use the same law of actions leading to its results, the pure science, it is reflected throughout the whole world, even without their practices. Seen through my eyes, its still rather they are attached or not. All are pure mind, the question is rather they are attached or not. May they be called a scientist or not. And this is what I am willing to clarify. 

And here my worldview comes in (describing wholesome from unwholesome, which demonstrates their ignorance, that they don't know science at all, that some scientists are in accordance with this knowledge, and others are not, discerning an ignorant from a not ignorant scientist based on the same law they think they understood, but demonstrates that some did not understand it at all, while some scientists did understand this perfectly well.),
this is the field of which I call the pure sciences, the science of the nature of mind, Dharma. All those other fields of sciences, may be compared with a great discussion among people using the rules of logic for their discussions. All might be educated and extended in discussion formats considering sophism etc. But it doesn't end the discussion. The discussion has nothing further to do with science, its not a case of science, its a case of ignorance.

That which end the discussion has nothing to do with their demonstration of intellect regarding the subject due to higher intellect or better skills to prove anything.
That which ends the discussion is wisdom, a birds view from top down where non can escape the pure law of action leading to its according result and the law of temporary, which they use in their own fields as professionals, but failed to use upon themselves. (And this waveoftheocean, is how I review science, the depth, the sublimity of the pure law. Its used in professional fields, but science is so subtle that it can also be as the pure sciences, which I referred to as the science of the nature of mind, Dharma. I might can call them: Dharmalogists, in the field of Dharmalogy). < Of course there is a fat red line under these 2 words, as it never heard of these therms.

This is the field I operate in. I kick out their wrong view of personhood. Which makes such a discussion utterly nonsense if its continued for the sake of personhood sustaining. This is a binding force. And this is the mark of the comments that I make on this form. It binds.

The biologist might tell that the behavior of his neighbor can't be explained, that crazy behavior, this crazy man, not in all of the world of biology can this  be explained. But a good friend that happened to be educated in another field will state: It can be perfectly explained, let me explain...
(He happened to be a psychiatrist.)

I hope you can now see, that the field I work in, is the pure science. The science of the nature of mind. Which with its explanations, discerns wholesome from not wholesome, and clothed with arguments, it binds, and kicks out the misunderstanding of personhood.

Well, you have never asked directly: Aware, would you be so kind to review based on your understanding, rather the distinction between scientists and scientists. Which scientists are ignorant and which not? Which theories are wholesome, and which theories are not wholesome.
 

But I am going to assume that this is the real question. To shed some light on this, so we don't have to misunderstand each other.

 

You came up with an X and Y, which is a good one to refer too. I referred this to multi and sequential. But here the case is, of those sequantials, that work with the material form of science, (seen everything as science, the pure law), that there are grades into it.

And we didn't really discuss that yet, you are so quick with your questioning, and I am typing my book as fast as I can, and really am eager to get deeper on that one article about the Awarenesses.

Well lets say here is X multi streamed... And Y, is sequential streamed.

Then this is how I review it:

There are different levels of understanding when it comes to the streams of X. And there are no different levels concerning Y like seen with X. Which means they are the full Awareness in one body, no other streams (either finally ripe for path X or not, is level determination). Except for the Awareness that is spread over as a mass, which does differ compared to to their other companion.

X path, does not end as Y path. But the Y path ends as X path streamed Awareness in the end. So its not like yin and yang. With Opposite awareness, its not like yin and yang. They are opposite because of their practices but not in being in "service" of Essence, because both are experiencing a valid game letting Essence experience itself. One is still in the power game play, and the other is in liberation game. This means, that this can be compared with intensity level of understanding the law of temporary and law of action >result in relationship with themselves and the world. Which better can be compared with sunlight, and moonlight. They differ in intensity. Although not separated. Still the same Essence. One of both uses the law to determine their material existence consciously, and unconsciously using this law for liberation... The other one uses this same law to determine the subtle and consciously using this same law for liberation, due to that one is awakening to the fact that both inside and outside is empty in nature.

However, yin and yang, is based on the game settings of it all. Its polarity. A sequential is preferring one over the other still. Although seeming to be balanced within their perspective, which becomes harder to see as they are ready to skip to the X path. 

It gets confusing, when you see a mid-level multi stream, and a sequential that is ready to go to the other path. Here dynamics come into play. That the sequential is better in the way of service in his experience game, than the mid-level stream is in his game of experience. Here confusion starts when personhood is still part of their daily lives in both cases.

So where does it go wrong? Its not going wrong with Einstein. It goes wrong with the misuse of his explanations. I never heard Einstein say: Use my theory, and its the only theory and possible explanation, debunk all others as false, and never seek another explanation for the same phenomena. So its due to its nature of explaining the physical world, that isn't really physical that makes it an aggregate in comparison with mind that then isn't physical. Its this polarity that is confusing, and demonstrating its sequentialism.

So, from someone who practices at a high level of multi stream, Einstein is not the enemy. One only must put on some glasses with a filter that corrects the one explaining his theories in relationship with anything else. Which means that such theories are aggregates. That if one is educated in Dharma, can quickly translate it to no personhood, and the law of action > result. However someone not educated in Dharma, will fall into the trap of nihilism or eternalism.  (which has nothing to do with the theory itself, but their own ignorance again thinking such a theory will explain it all for them, and since many are taught this on schools also for the multies, they should refrain from society in order to let go of their imprints).

Which is not what Einstein was trying to explain of course. However, bundling his theories to explain other theories, debunking yet others because they can't be right, while simultaneously egoistically thinking one understood his laws perfectly fine, is something I do not buy into (which is not what Einstein was explaining at all). Its the explanations for a phenomenon, where there is but one explanation that must rule in a particular field, missing its aim that its the law of action >result is the real law, yes I call this misleading, has nothing to do with science, its not even a case of science, its a case of ignorance. So for sequentials, this is perfect (thinking they ARE the physical at some point... But for someone on the path to liberation, its dangerous if one has not yet been taught Dharma, so it can be translated properly. Its like going to another country without the body being adapted to the conditions of their dangers. And this is the case with our education system, that really promotes the masses of sequential over that of a multi streamed. (which makes the game not easy, and leads as a result to a more intense experience then the sequential game structures, which again perfectly is explained by action leading to its according results).

Therefor I stated: Leave the masses, you can't understand it from their perspective if you are on the path of liberation. Which you can't get off when you are in it, attained the vision of it. Here therefor wholesome and not wholesome can be discerned based on that. However I look one time at such a video, translate it and understand it properly and accordingly.

So, I say: Einstein was a sequential, not based on the fact that therefor his theories must be wrong, no, because its his practice of science that demonstrates it being an aggregate, the material sciences. Polarity: Dark.

So, I say: Tesla was a sequential, not based on the fact that therefor his theories must be wrong, no, because its his practice of science that demonstrates it being an aggregate, the material sciences. Polarity: Light.

I say that both are still subject to action>result, and when they go for X path, surely they face their own Y path theories of previous to let go off when they too will need to refrain from their own sequential views of back then, and this is how I determined how X is higher in its intensity then Y, and that Y ends in X path and not the other way around based on the same law of action > result.

Some game knowledge: The game here, has also its preference, which is dark. Maybe in another cycle, this game will be light orientated, a Tesla's theories would then be promoted, and  Einstein's theories demoted. However this is off topic.

For a multi streamed, one must therefor, refrain from the deep imprints of the material sequential way of service of Essence so to speak. Its in that case not multi against sequential, its the multi against multi. Because one must make ones own mind straight. But can't when he does not refrain from its aggregates. Personhood must get to an end, so the multi streamed can realize its true nature to over come oneself, where the battle between oneself and oneself can come to its end by cessation due to tiredness.

So does this mean that a sequential is helpless? No not at all! Although they will be kicked on the path when a multi streamed is a final or close to it (is then the full sequential as well, but the difference is the pervasiveness of all ones experiences that came to full radiance), and will let the whole cycle of sequential Y, by leap of faith transfer to path X in direct experience. Which is a great and rare time within the game when this happens. Jesus, Buddha, Krishna and other masters are full final multi streamed masters.

When a sequential would listen to me, (this happened already a few times), and I share the Dharma, it happened as well that they took the leap of faith, and their body of knowledge so to speak drops off and see themselves in me, and me within them, and the vision of Dharma is awakened in them. However this is small compared to the extent Jesus or a Buddha worked on this when it comes to amount. I would like to press on the fact, that a transfer of sequential to multi streamed, is more natural then the healing of a mind of a multi streamed that has imprints of a sequential due to ones own ignorance. I repeat: Due to ones own ignorance. There is no one to blame, one should simply refrain from his deluded activities in relationship with other experiences.

Are there signs when a sequential is going to transfer? Absolutely! If they demonstrate within their science they are literally consciously transferring a truth they have studied in religion, and then studied in material sense and create a theory, then this is a clear sign, that one is transferring. A clear example is Einsteins statement that all is energy.

Are therefor all scientists sequentials? Better to state that there is but Essence that is the real sequential, the rest is scientist either on the path of liberation, or on the path of materialism. 

Quote

 

So, now we get to the point about Einstein, and why I don't need to study all of his work to give a comment. This is because I see the experience level of his whole game in a blink of an eye, based on the same action>result law, that I understand on a far grander level and scale over the total masses in comparison of Einstein himself at that particular experience, reflecting his work that others claim to be a must to understand before commenting on it. While in all truth, I never commented on his work anywhere! Its just the reader that makes this false assumption EXACTLY because one is attached still. However they DO make comments on MY work, without themselves having practiced and studied my work enough themselves as what they expect from me, yet DO find that they should comment without any such study and practice.
I say, that this is the case. Which is not a case of science, or the  lack of education in science, its a case of ignorance, a lack of education in Dharma.

Which are the same assumptions that are made by many others when it comes to the work of Einstein, and other scientists. This is however not a case of science, its a case of ignorance. 

 

(I see by the same action>result law, how one came to be thinking that I should, and this is therefor not a case of Einstein, but a case of ones own state of mind).

Which means, that the science of the nature of mind, is sublime, far more pure then the material sciences. Although not less valid in experience of course.

So, people should not to quickly assume that when I state: Gravity hoax. That this automatically is saying: Einstein was wrong.

No, because I don't see an Einstein, I see an explanation not as the hoax, I see the load to such explanations as a hoax. The imprinting of it, as the expression that is the hoax. Explanations are not in themselves a hoax.  Believing this is otherwise, well that is the hoax of the pure mind at work.

So to be even more clear. Even if something is actually true by observation, then what is the hoax? When someone expects and keeps bombarding and demotivating further search. This makes it, even if it is true, a hoax. Which I state: Has nothing to do with the scientific method, has nothing to do with science, nor has it to do with the explanation itself, or the validation of such explanation, it is just a case of ignorance. Which explains and is demonstrated by the same law of action > results concerning both his scientific observation and his imprinting, meaning that the imprinting on such a grand scale makes the hoax the hoax, exactly explained by the same law of action>result, proven by the grand imprinting, leading to the result of demotivation of further search, a parasite spreading that attaches to ones wonder, ones curiosity. And this is why I shared: Refrain from imprints from society, question it by a simple question that undermines this very quickly:

What can we know?

This can be equally said if one would pick up my work, and starts imprinting in all school systems etc. This is not the goal, and has nothing to do with my work nor with the meaning of my work. It has only to do with ones own ignorance. Using the law of action >result for ones own egoistic ends.

However if one would ask: What can we share on schools... I would state: Let them question: What can we know? How can I live a moral life? 

 

 

Now this is all out of the way. That scientists are not free from ignorance because of science, due to their attachments that determine that, not their education level, let me explain how this looks like through my eyes.

I am first going to pick out a theory to debunk. Which is the evolution theory. Dumb excuses about "Well its not complete yet" That is just a rooky assumption to justify  we can share it anyway, indoctrinate and shape the mind anyway. Which has nothing to do with science or their method. But is a case of ignorance. In such cases better to let them think rather then to swallow such things: What can we know? How do I live a moral life?

So, let me share my review on that theory that I state as unwholesome, not because it is itself unwholesome, by proven by the law of action > result that it can't be, and therefor must be unwholesome.

No theory is wrong in itself, its proven to be wrong because its not in accordance as a result.

Evolution theory cannot be, and never will be a science fact. Because its not in accordance.

And to keep this fairly simple: Adaptation doesn't prove evolution theory. Adaptation is one with the law of action>result. And shall show exactly by adaptation evolution cannot be. Evolution cannot be because Awareness, Essence is its governor. For those not believers in god, are tempted to therefor take Evolution theory to be valid. While to make this fairly simple: Adaptation is valid, and therefor evolution theory is not wholesome. Because simple life forms don't become all of the sudden out of nothing, just by accident, just spontaneously, just by chance more complex. Due to that Awareness is its governor, adaptation is. Due to chance, adaptation is not. Adaptation is. Therefor chance is not.
(chance is not in play because all things are empty, phenomena arose therefor according to their circumstances and cease according to their nature, stating chance is the governor, is a result of ones previous thinking, a case of ignorance, a great lack of knowledge, not in the material sciences, but in the science of the nature of mind, Dharma).

Evolution theory mixes therefor Adaptation which is another word for the law of action leading to its according results, with the idea of life forms getting more complex over time, proven by adaptation that supports it. (which is sophism of the purest kind, one has nothing to do with the other, yet the adaptation fact can explain that this is coming from an ignorant mind, and is not in need of more education considering science taught on schools, but is in need of education in Dharma, the science of the nature of mind).

And must therefor be a hoax when it is imprinted and widely spread and mixed with well verified scientific ideas. Mingling credibility with non-credibility later stating that science has nothing to do with religious believes, is exactly after such mingling demonstrating as a result of not a lack of education in material sciences, but demonstrating being situated either in passions or ignorance, and should therefor become educated in the science of the nature of mind, Dharma.

Now, all theories in line with Adaptation + accident, chance, out of nothing or spontaneously without cause... Can be debunked the same way. Because out of nothing, ya shall never create something. And therefor life forms don't become more complex over time due to chance as its governor.  (of course one can state, this is how they work, then I state, because they are undereducated in dharma, which is what I have been sharing here, how to get rid of, which they do not promote).

Now, how do I see evolution theory when I filter out the mistake...

As I just stated... However, when filtering out the more complex, but replacing it with adjusting, fine tuning with what already is, becoming more flexible due to losing, the cessation of information by refraining... And reviewing not chance as its governor, but awareness, whereby the law of action and result is as the stream ends, the left over streams gets updated, due to Awareness was before the physical garments of any kind, and in viewing this so, one gets to see a perfect law of action leading to its according result, and reviews all that has to do with Darwins work as a marvel that demonstrates what we mean by adaptation, and what we mean by what if we speak about attachment. The sexual drive etc... And how this plays out on the grand screen of life, that we call reality.

So was Darwin on a debunking campaign? He was and wasn't, due to his loss in life that he could not bear, this resulted in such a campaign, which led to great discoveries that side ways was from previous actions such as his curiosity and open-mindedness, however he could not escape the result of his not accepting his losses in life to be mingled with his work in the end by the same laws adaptation he was referring too. If he however would read my book that is considering his work, he would be fascinated and see his own work becoming perfect. Sublime and in full accordance with everything that is. 

 

Now that is clear what I mean by hoax, how I filter by their same laws the flaws, which can only be done properly from education of Dharma, I hope that it is also clear, that Dharma is not separated from science, but is pure science. My education is not mainstream, but is by refraining from imprints, and studying the nature of mind. Which makes science far more subtle and elegant many fail to recognize in this world, where which many think science is limited in many ways to material science. Which of course has nothing to do with science, but with their either own passion or ignorance.

As a result I can have an overview over all other fields of science. So, its not horizontal, that I am on the other end, its vertical, and then the other is on the other end, and not on top, but below the top by far.

Scientists in the material sciences, are attached, just like many readers here. Although having an academic study, this is no free ticket from ignorance or passions for that matter. The readers who suggest after saying: Gravity is a hoax: Oh, Aware is against science... Misses ones aim.
Stating: Aware is against Einstein's theory, he is against gravity therefor against Einsteins work about gravity. Again one misses ones aim.

A hoax is now explained by me, in a way that it doesn't matter rather one was right about an observation or not, its the imprint its whole wrong effort of imprinting that makes something a hoax due to an attack on someones curiosity, ones wonder of everything that is, that can only be supported, even promoted and stimulated by asking the right questions. Teachings that promote the refraining from such imprints to overcome them, which will always lead to wonder, and wonder, always leads to freedom, and freedom is understanding and understanding is one with direct knowledge.

 

As a final word:

 

Such hoaxes have nothing to do with the very subjects and scientific discoveries that are undertaken, but rather demonstrates by the same laws used in their methods of proving, to be a case of ignorance. A wild attack on ones curiosity and wonder about everything that is. Which I demotivate by the following question that should be widely discussed among schools, to promote their thinking instead of their ramming and bombarding, ridiculing, and skillful ways of indoctrinating young minds like some wild band of baffling under- Dharma-educated baboons:

 

What can we know?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Anna Konstantaki]

hmm... maybe this will help? 

[jse]

Excellent video.
"We've seen that Flattards can't even wrap their heads around the effects of their idiocy in two dimensions, so it's perhaps not surprising that their failures become even more laughable when dealing with three."

[Aware]

1 minute ago, jse said:

Excellent video.
"We've seen that Flattards can't even wrap their heads around the effects of their idiocy in two dimensions, so it's perhaps not surprising that their failures become even more laughable when dealing with three."

 

Of course such comments and such wild assumptions has nothing to do with having a better understanding regarding science. But has rather to do with belittling, a lack of understanding concerning the laws of nature related to critical thinking by questioning the ideas widely accepted, beside the fact rather earth is flat or not. 
   However one is free of course to comment, one misses the aim to be daring to question, but rather chooses to belittle others who do dare to question widely accept ideas about the world we live in, rather then childishly accepting or holding up a certain belief they never themselves explored.
Which of course can be compared like the rust on iron. Which is exactly demonstrated by such comments to be the case when it comes to mind and ignorance.

 

[Anna Konstantaki]

I thought this could help on the specific matter but then I read a bit more from above and...wait... so @Awareyou say people just believe that the earth is round and close their mind to the idea that it could be flat because they are afraid to be called a flattard? 

well, we all hate being wrong on something as fundamental as the shape of our planet, don´t we? I think it is very confusing and hard to teach us from early on sitting around with the question what we can know for sure, especially when we´re required to work and present facts and numbers all the time. I don´t think there is much time for really deep questioning. We´re all taught to do tests and then work. Sure this way ignorance is created even from those who are scientifically speaking right. So I guess I agree on that point how nobody is free from ignorance, even people like scientists. So... Eh... Okay dead end here... Unless we get people to ask more questions and philosophize? Mmm... I think many of us are not just uninterested or too busy with other things in life but also afraid to think. I think we live in a highly judgemental world were appearing ... Oh... just repplied before I could finish ...

 

[Anna Konstantaki]

where was I? A yes... We are very afraid to appear dumm. To find the truth we need to maybe even fail a thousand times but beeing mistaken is somewhat a ginormous threat nowadays. People are okay when their children might be messy sometimes, or if they are not always respectful even if they are called ugly but god forbid someone calls them dumm they get much more offended. Intelligence is highly rated, it´s like a future portal to a good life in peoples eyes, the key to success and status and safety etc...

This brings me to the conclusion that we´re all way to pressured to care to look outside the box and that thinking by oneself is a risk to the ego. So the lack comes also from not accepting everyone as they are and putting it all on a gold wage. Questioning like you and I by the way too, would like to see, will only start appearing when people find its value not because they want to defend their opinion, they like making others look foolish, want to get attention for a conspiracy theory or something like that but by caring about finding and spreading the truth fearlessly. 

So... Final question. How do we get people interested in the truth while being emotionaly untriggered on their way finding it? By helping them realise that its all just thoughts and theories, good to look at with a grain of salt and nobody is better because they could argument better on why the earth is flat or round. How that? Teach equality, teach love... Love for themselves... Love for the others... How that? Well by doing it yourself... Well how? Self actualization... Aa... I´m making circles here... That´s why I usually answer no questions... 

I could keep going...I´m out of time. Love is the answer briefly said, once again. 

[ULFBERHT]

Finally! I found the "Unfollow" button! Sweet release!

[sirweddings]

@Aware It's refreshing to see someone here actually willing to question these things (as Leo and other good teachers encourage us to do). The reason the 'flat earth' movement has gained so much momentum (to the point of needing to be suppressed/censored?) is because the earth has no measurable curvature or motion.

The laughable absurdities NASA continues to put out (since the provably faked moon landings) is small potatoes compared to the elephant in the room 'conspiracy' that our material universe is an illusion. Nonduality sounds like crackpot conspiracy drivel to most people. Ironically, there are very few in this forum who are radically open minded. Come on people...grow up!  

[Apparition of Jack]

@sirweddings Instead of asking yourself "Is the world flat or spherical?", why not ask yourself "Why is this question so important to me?"

Edited August 18, 2019 by Apparition of Jack