|
|
 Each year, I attend one or more SF conventions, partly as a way to meet experiencers, partly as a way to drum up a little business - and yes, partly as a time to let the hair down and party a little bit. This year was no exception.
There were some unique elements to this year, however. As always, this was a weekend of creativity at its finest. yet it seemed to me that, even more so than in years past, there was a sense of free-association in the air. It was a sense similar to what I have noted at the Rennaisance festival, and other creative fairs. And it's power was an overwhelming joy to behold.
What I noticed was the variety of themes, all of which combined into a synergy of time-periods, and all rolled into one SF/Fantasty universe. Klingons, Babylon 5 characters, Knights and Fair Maidens, and many others from many assorted SF/Fantasty metaphors, all combined to make up a multiverse of creativity.
There was also a spiritual/emotional undertone to it, and this was what seemed to be the most impacting. There were several things at the convo - the music, drama, etc., that tugged at the heartstrings. And at the end of the last day I left with the feeling that one has when seeing an emotional drama of the heart.
The other thing that occurred, especially on the last day was a powerful emphasis on fostering further creativity. Several authors and publishers were there, giving workshops on writing characters, getting published, and other aspects of creating SF and fantasty as well as non-fiction. Many of us felt the stirrings of new (or perhaps previously-dormant) SF story-lines rattling around in our brains.
It was an encouraging time, and a refreshingly creative change of pace. For anyone who wants a pleasant escape from the workaday grind, and a neat creative outlet, I highly recommend a sci-fi con. They are a fun little piece of the universe beamed down to Earth.
|
|
|
|
 In the process of writing my article: "the Indigo Hypothesis" for the February MUFON Journal, I reread material from several researchers who have examined what it might be like to live in a psychic society. The pictures portrayed of life in such a society range from very postive, to very much less-so.
The darkest of these is probably from the author of the book "The Threat". In a number of remarks, both within the book, and in presentations at the international MUFON Symposium, etc., Dr. David Jacobs quotes descriptions by abductees, of what it seems to be like to be in the domain of the UFO/Close-Encounter phenomenon, and what it is like to be in frequent/continual psychic contact with the phenomenon. Dr. Jacobs draws some warnings about what it would be like to be in a psychic society, based upon what he has learned from the description of the phenomenal realm by many UFO abductees.
In verbal remarks at a past MUFON conference, more than one author portrayed a picture of a possible psychic society that was largely non-positive - principally because there would be no escape from it. To at least one author, the biggest downside of a psychic society would a large number of psychic voices - all audible to the mind, and of psychic ears that could hear your very thoughts. Like the Borg of Star Trek fame, or PSI-corps of the Babylon 5 world, we would be in some way collectivized or regimented. In short, unless one were somehow able to firewall off their own private thoughts and to partition public and private portions of one's mind, there would be little personal privacy.
Other authors are considerably more positive about the future of our mental/spiritual/psychic evolution. Authors such as Barbara Marx Hubbard in "Conscious Evolution", and Barbara Harris Whitfield in "Spiritual Awakening" present a much brighter picture of spiritual and psychic awakening. But in reading both of their books, I did not note them addressing this mental privacy issue which Dr. Jacobs and others have raised.
In a number of private conversations, people have suggested to me that the internet might be a prototype of the coming emergence of field consciousness. Could the internet be a model for a psychic society? What would the ramifications of this be?
I can think of upsides to this, but I can also think of some significant issues. On the positive side, it would allow perception of the human world around us much more clearly. A "broadband" view of human consciousness might (if used for benevolent purposes) be a very positive thing. In general, it is usually better to know more, rather than to know less.
The downside of the "internet" model however, is something that has been very prominent in recent times. The rapid ability to communicate with others allows us to send our thoughts all over the world on a moments notice. This can be positive, but it can also be quite negative.
At one time, in ages past, we wrote letters long-hand, sealed them with wax, and then posted them to our distant correspondants. Communication (especially written) was a relatively long, involved process, and allowed lots of time to think about what you had written, before sealing and sending it - in short, lots of time to count to 10. Now, as communications have tightened, this count-to-10 time has decreased more and more, until there is barely time to count at all... :-) Thus, as I have seen the growth of the internet over my adult lifetime, I have observed many positive and non-positive thoughts (as well as advertizements for penny stocks and anatomical enhancements, etc.) travelling the e-bandwidth at nearly the speed of light.
So, by extension, What would it be like if we were each connected to eachother: mind-to-mind. If someone didn't like you, for whatever reason, would you be continually exposed to their non-positive vibes? If you got into a disagreement - perhaps one that got out of hand - how would you manage that? How would you resolve issues? How could you ever escape people trying to sell something to you? What would psychic spam be like?
We can perhaps imagine living a psychic society as if we were - all six billion of us - enclosed together for a long time in a small room, maybe wintering-over at the South Pole. In such a case, the importance of interpersonal behavior skills is paramount. The balance between ego, honesty and empathy becomes critically important. A balance must be struck between the lower-chakra human needs and higher-level spirituality. How do we gracefully disagree with eachother, express emotion, etc., without causing painful disruption to the rest of humanity? How do we all live in the room, and yet all have our own rooms to live in? In short, how do we all get along huddled together on this tiny spaceship we call Earth?
My sense is that before we are truly ready for a global conscious awakening, these questions need to be addressed. I am very sure that there are ways to do this, and humanity [including this writer] needs to learn them better. And as we learn these key facets of enlightenment, we will be travelling yet another giant step down the road to the universal awakening that I believe is the human destiny. More >
|
|
|
|
 A fascinating evening at the Minnesota Democratic caucuses. Several things things truly impressed and amazed me.
1) The number of people who turned out to the caucuses. There were about twice as many people present as I normally see at a precinct caucus.
2) The intensity of the feeling in everyone present.
There was a powerful feeling of coherence there - a single focus, returning control of the country to the people. I found that consensus was formed very quickly on resolutions, although there was discussion on nearly every point. It appeared that everyone was focused on an objective, rather than on political division, or making smaller individual points. There was the sense that there is too much at stake.
It is the same wherever I look. The deep-seated political division in the USA is so thick, it feels like you could cut it with a knife. This political season is going to be deep and emotions are going to run hot and heavy. More >
|
|
|
|
 My wife and I attend the Star/Tribune Womens' Lecture series, a series of talks on contemporary affairs by extraordinary women (and in this case, couple). Last night's talk was by Mary Matilin and James Carville, the political odd couple who provide so much color to the US political landscape. Mary Matilin is a wheel in the conservative political scene, while her hubby, James Carville, is a powerful activist in the progressive world. Both had some very interesting - and I thought very insightful views. Regardless of your views, they each had some very deep truths for everyone.
Mary Matilin had the podium first. She had the predictable praise for Bush [which required me to hold my political nose at a few points...], but also she had some interesting points for progressives. One was that prior to our intervention in Afghanistan, there were tremendous human rights problems there. Anyone who happenned to be female was forbidden to attend school or participate in civic affairs - or to do much of anything outside of the home. Since the US intervention, at least that has improved.
She cited this as an example of how the US is a force for freedom in the world. She presented the viewpoint that I hear from so many conservatives - that it is the duty and role of the USA to export democracy [CL Note: along with conservative Christianity and Coca Cola] to the world.
She also had some interesting things to say about the upcoming election. She predicted that Bush would win [surprise, surprise]. But she also indicated that the election might be Kerry's [whom she presumed woudl be the Dem nominee] to win or lose. She said that what Kerry needs - as does the progressive movement in general [CL Note: progressive is my word, not her's] - is a clear, coherent vision. It is not sufficient to simply oppose Bush. What is needed is a clear, well-defined, coherent agenda - a progressive view of where the USA should be headed, as well as why and how.
And in this, I think she is probably correct. Among progressives, there is alot of unity in opposition to Bush, but there is also alot of division. A coherent, well-defined vision is needed, or Bush will be president with four more years of reactionary US behavior in the world.
Many who consider themselves to be progressives want change - oftentimes, any change will do. She stated that one reason Bush won was that his campaign offered change. Bush offers [or at least his handlers do] a very coherent, well defined vision. It is a coherent, fundamental shift in the policy of the USA. And thus, to many who would have otherwise voted democrat, this is attractive. In order to beat Bush in 11/04, it will be necessary to offer a better defined, more coherent vision - to clearly define the path which progressives want the USA to travel.
James Carville then took the podium and had some more very interesting things to say, both to progressives and conservatives alike. His biggest comment was that perhaps more than any time previously in our history, the US populace is deeply divided. There is a very deep, fundamental split in the political landscape between conservative and progressive views. And in this election, some very fundamental questions will be on the table - questions about the very future of the USA.
He dramatized this by asking for a show of hands in the audience - who here was undecided about how they would vote in Novenber. In the hall full of several thousand people, essentially no one raised their hand. Carville pointed out that this was apparently the case nationwide. There appear to be very few undecided voters, and the population is very evenly devided - nearly 50/50. So it comes down to a few percent of the voters, in a few key states, who will end up deciding the future of the USA for a long time to come.
He predicted that this election would be a truly pivotal one in US history, and that all eyes of the world would be upon us. The voter turnout will be heavy - and at present, he felt that the election could go either way.
Neither said anything about the allegations of electoral hijinx, or other possible scandals that are now surfacing. But I thought that the "eyes of the world" comment was an excellent, though veiled, allusion in that direction. Both speakers pretty much kept away from specific issues, stressing more the fundamental philosophies and the importance of the questions being asked, rather than stressing their opposing answers.
So in the end, I think the core message from both was that the USA is deeply divided. There are two deeply-ingrained and diametrically opposed world-views entrenched in the American political landscape. One view is that it is the right and duty of the USA to export freedom, democracy, free enterprise, and other aspects of "our way of life" to the world [CL Note: even if at the point of a gun]. The other view is that the USA has the right and duty to be a good citizen of the world - to seek world peace and to work WITH the world to help address the problems that give rise to war, poverty, environmental degradation, etc.
Not since the sixties has the US public been so divided on the core issues - and it appears that the polarity is only deepening. This election will indeed be interesting. More >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I posted this in the PSI room, but after thinking about it overnight, I thought that it might be interesting for general consumption.
The last week or so has been very interesting from the point of view of (unintended) mind-machine interactions. I have had a couple of instances where the computer locked up when I started using it (Yes, I know - it's Microsoft...). Both of these times were when I felt quite stressed and in a hurry. More >
|
|
|
|
It's been one of those days. The type of day when clients no-show, people everywhere seem to be crabby, and bad news arrives. In this case, the news was that I didn't get selected as a speaker for an upcoming conference. I had looked forward to being a presenter there, on what seemed to be some pretty interesting new topics (at least I thought so...). So the news was pretty disappointing.
What's important about this is not the news itself, but the timing. It comes at a time when I have been doing alot of study of mindfulness and nonattachment. So to me, this comes as the first big test. How non-attached to outcomes does this student and seeker remain as he digs out from the rubble and shakes the dust off his sandals? ... :-)
To keep it all in perspective, it is certainly not the end of the world, just a bit of a bummer. Yet I believe that God gives us what we need, when we need it - though almost never in the way that we might anticipate. All in all, this was a small to moderate pot-hole in the road of life, and a lesson at what is probably an important and teachable moment.
Still, can't one just read a good book on the subject?... :-) More >
|
|
|
|
The new Whitley's Journal has a pretty spooky discussion of the breakup of the Gulf stream. The sense from reading it is that the change has begun. The snowball is rolling down the hill... More >
|
|
|
|
An interesting article appears in the upcoming February 2004 issue of Popular Mechanics, entitled "When UFOs Arrive". In it, they talk about the possibility of First Contact (which they state is in the future), and what human reaction will be.
It is interesting to note two main classes of reactions considered by the article. One from the scientific community, and the other from the US Government/Military.
The article initially describes how there will be "obvious signs of their approach", presumably radar or radio contact. Then it goes on to describe the SETI Declaration of Principles regarding first contact, which could roughly be described as "be absolutely sure, then tell everybody".
The most interesting thing in this reaction-scenario is the assumption that the scientific (e.g. SETI) community would somehow be the leaders in a contact scenario. The article then goes on to demolish this assumption, describing what would probably ACTUALLY happen - government/military takeover of the contact scenario, and a heavy handed treatment of the Visitors.
A hint of this can be gleaned from the Brookings Report of 1960 - which describes many of the implications of open first contact, as envisioned at that time. It suggests government responses to contact, and suggests that contact would be harmful to humanity. The resultant government policy appears to be one of heavy-handed hostility towards any E.T. Visitors that are unlucky enough to fall into the hands of human (at least U.S.) officialdom.
On page 57, The PopMech article section entitled "State of Emergency" reads as follows: "If ET Turns up at NASA's doorstep, bearing that invitation [CL Note: from Pioneer 11], it is in for a surprise. Instead of getting a handshake from the head of NASA, it will be handcuffed by an FBI agent dressed in a Biosafety Level 4 suit. Instead of sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom at the WHite House, the alien will be whisked away to the Depertment of Agriculture's Animal Disease center..."
This appears to be the description - probably accurate - of what US policy would actually be in the event of open contact with ETI. This appears to have been the case during the recovery of whatever came down in the 1965 UFO Crash at Kecksburg PA. According to descriptions, in a very short time, the military had thoroughly secured the scene, and had recovered the object, which was never again to be seen by anyone without a (very, very) high security clearance.
This suggests that the mainstream scientific community would probably be in about the same boat as the UFO community - locked out by the military powers-that-be, and subject to the same apparent coverup which has bedeviled UFO research for the last 50-plus years.
So what does this suggest would be the most likely contact scenario. Would E.T. simply walk into a situation such as this? Presumably, they would be well aware of the situation on the world they were contacting (e.g. us). And therefore, presumably they would not walk into the ugly situation described in the PopMech article. We can assume that, being at least as smart as we are, they would instead choose some means of contact that would be under their control, and on their terms. And this leads us to the question - is this not already occurring?
The primary assumption that the article, and presumably the scientific community also makes, is that contact hasn't happened yet. But given the massive amount of evidence, and reports such as the Sturrock Report, and the Cometa Report, I think we can pretty much conclude that some form of contact has already occurred. This very conservative conclusion does not even begin to include the vast number of people (including several on NCN) who have described close encounter experiences. So, from that point of view alone, I think it is safe to say that the "long-awaited" first contact has already begun. (for a good report on Alien Abduction read the book "Alien Discussions, an account of the M.I.T Abduction Study", in which there was a very credible study of the abduction phenomenon led by David and Andrea Pritchard)
James Deardorff in his article "Possible ExtraTerrestrial Strategy for Earth" (included in the book "Alien Update" by Timothy Good), describes how there would probably be a gradual process of acclimation by the more advanced E.T. society. This would probably include contact at the individual, grass-roots level, long before any kind of open, official contact was made.
So in the end, the one scenario that is most likely - and indeed, is probably occurring at the present time (See the posting "The Day the Earth Stood Still: Thoughts on Why They're Here"), seems to be the one which is completely overlooked by the PopMech article. One wonders, is this due to oversight or denial? Is it simply arrogance? Or is there some other reson that we haven't - or perhaps don't want to talk about?
Whatever the answer, the complete lack of the present-contact scenario in the article speaks volumes about the authors, and in all probability about human officialdom, as well. More >
|
|
|
|
 I had an interesting experience last night - a dream that I was part of a group outing in the winter wilderness. The group seemed to be in some way, associated with our church. We were staying at a lodge or something similar, which was set way out in the forest. Yet the next day, it seems that we were going to venture out into the woods - I think to do some winter camping. (Note: the temperature as I write this is in the neighborhood of Zero degrees F).
I remember that in the dream, I was very focused on preparing for this adventure. I kept feeling tremendous uncertainty about what to bring, and how to prepare. It was later in the dream that I realized that the trip was led by a friend of mine, who is a retired minister - someone I deeply respect.
What I decided was that this dream symbolized uncertainty in the face of change - somehow of a spiritual nature. A forest or wilderness frequently symbolizes uncertainty, mystery or challenge. The sense of uncertainty very much reinforces this interpretation.
Our life path is taking Gwyn and I in some interesting new directions - some new ventures in life that take us into unfamiliar territory (the woods). The need to prepare, and the sense that I wasn't sure just how to do that, is very telling - as I am not entirely sure where this new path takes us.
What was most interesting was that this dream-outing was associated with spirital activity. And in the end, my comfort was in the fact that the whole thing was led by a deeply trusted spiritual figure. To me this indicated that the change is/will-be spiritual in nature - a new venture related to spiritual activities. Given the nature of recent events in Gwyn's and my life, this would be accurate.
And so the message that I take from the sense of both challenge/uncertainty and of comfort is that it is to important trust in the Spirit. Conscious ego-based preparation can do little when venturing into these new "forests". Only our trust in the guidance of Spirit really works at times like this.
I really don't know if this event is a smaller-scale personal change for us, or if it is a larger-scale challenge which affects many - or perhaps even all of us. But at its core was the sense of travelling deep into the uncharted forest, and the need to rely on God to guide us.
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16 Older entries >> |
|
|
Exploring the emerging consciousness, the Universal Mind and the coming changes - as well as other general stuff... |
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
| 3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
| 10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
| 17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
| 24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
|
|
I had been looking for some time for an on-line forum and collaboration site, and I think that at last I have found it. My hats off to the innovators, creators and maintainers of this site. This e-place is wonderful. |
|
