Lifting the Veil - An Invitation

originally posted by: lostgirl
What if you can make a thing come true by getting enough people to believe it is true?

That is still a question isn't it?

That is why the project is called an experiment, they are trying to answer that question. Could go either way.

a reply to: eisegesis

A few other members know and it’s time for everyone else to take notice. The deadline is October 22, for reasons that I’ll make known before then. You should stay as open-minded as possible and understand that you’re going to have a hard time believing what is happening.

Welp, today ( October 22) is the "deadline". Deadline for what? I do not know.. I am still open minded and ready to believe "what is happening".

originally posted by: Serdgiam
Is it possible that this is due to the very nature of the construct you have created?

Meaning, as evidenced by the form of participation you have chosen in this thread (and others?), your natural reaction might be contrarian from the start?

It would be along those lines. I'm not sure I have constructed anything.

My reaction is to be contrarian after analyzing.

For example, huge storm builds out at sea, millions of people pray, hope, send out positive thoughts or vibes for the storm to veer off, loose power and then it hits and devastates a coastal area. That to me says that wishful thinking didn't have much of an affect on it and I can extrapolate that to something like Project 89 which is based on the same idea.

I could still be proven wrong but that burden of proof isn't on me.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: SantokhDevaSingh

Sorry, seems I was not clear in my question. I was asking about what specifically in the document rang true to you not how you go about picking and choosing your truth or why.

Still after reading your post I guess you liked the basic premise of the project, it does sound cool. I could really see the appeal but I don't get the "knowing" feeling.

It wasn’t any one thing. It was everything contained in the document. That feeling was from within, if I can animate it, it was pretty much yawning and saying finally, about time. When the time is right I will post a thread as I am new here posting, but have lurked around before joining; that way I do not take away from this thread. I am no more special than anyone else here nor am I even claiming to be; I have had supernatural prophetic moments in the past which I think is what somewhat influenced that deep “knowing” or what I felt like was truth to me when reading through said document. Apologies for the miscommunication, it happens. Perhaps a better word be a “remembering” which directly influenced that knowing/truth feeling..

Language is limiting

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Serdgiam
Is it possible that this is due to the very nature of the construct you have created?

Meaning, as evidenced by the form of participation you have chosen in this thread (and others?), your natural reaction might be contrarian from the start?

It would be along those lines. I'm not sure I have constructed anything.

My reaction is to be contrarian after analyzing.

For example, huge storm builds out at sea, millions of people pray, hope, send out positive thoughts or vibes for the storm to veer off, loose power and then it hits and devastates a coastal area. That to me says that wishful thinking didn't have much of an affect on it and I can extrapolate that to something like Project 89 which is based on the same idea.

I could still be proven wrong but that burden of proof isn't on me.

What if it was directly related upon the purity of intention? Wishful thinking I.e. hope is.... not a pure intention for the highest good.

a reply to: SantokhDevaSingh

People call that resonating. When something speaks to them deep down inside.

Unfortunately, confirmation bias works the same way.

originally posted by: SantokhDevaSingh
What if it was directly related upon the purity of intention? Wishful thinking I.e. hope is.... not a pure intention for the highest good.

If avoiding death and destruction is not a pure intention for the highest good then what is?

ETA: And I don't mean just those seeking to save themselves. People all over the country affected, for example, and even in other parts of the world saying a little prayer or good thoughts with no skin in the game don't seem to cause change either.

a reply to: daskakik

It was a bit of a rhetorical question.

But, even in your response to me, the same habits are exhibited. To be clear, I'm not sitting here saying "you are clearly inferior!" or anything like that. We all have our angle of approach, and unless we can gain omniscience, there will be drawbacks, limitations, and bottlenecks for all of us. Recognizing that and taking into account without sugarcoating is the only way to work with them rather than be directed by them alone.

You seem to be quick to point out the errors you see in others, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but what are the limitations you personally struggle with? Such self examination is critical, but it takes a certain level of honesty and humility to discuss it with others. Its not particularly difficult to point it out or question it in others, but its a whole different thing when we turn the same critical eye towards ourselves.

I would also argue that the whole "burden of proof" concept is based more in internet debate than any sort of exploration, discovery, or scientific expedition.

Even in the hardest of sciences, the goal is ideally to replicate results rather than wait around for something convincing enough to change our minds. With the latter, we run the risk of embedding a habit, wherein validity of evidence is less consequential than maintaining the habit.

In arenas that we have yet to effectively apply the scientific method en masse, the "burden of proof" is even less applicable.

If we take a very simple and basic subjective concept, like a favorite color, anyone would struggle to provide proof. Arguably, its not even relevant to the conversation at all. If we then expand this to contexts without a general consensus by their very nature, it becomes even more lost in the milieu.

originally posted by: Serdgiam
But, even in your response to me, the same habits are exhibited.

Of course they are, I'm the same person.

You seem to be quick to point out the errors you see in others, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but what are the limitations you personally struggle with?

It isn't the errors in others, I point out the errors in the information provided by others.

Such self examination is critical, but it takes a certain level of honesty and humility to discuss it with others. Its not particularly difficult to point it out or question it in others, but its a whole different thing when we turn the same critical eye towards ourselves.

I am that way with myself as well.

I would also argue that the whole "burden of proof" concept is based more in internet debate than any sort of exploration, discovery, or scientific expedition.

You would be wrong. Science, requires replication.

Even in the hardest of sciences, the goal is ideally to replicate results rather than wait around for something convincing enough to change our minds. With the latter, we run the risk of embedding a habit, wherein validity of evidence is less consequential than maintaining the habit.

I see you agree. I'm not talking about convincing me. I'm talking about showing verifiable results.

In arenas that we have yet to effectively apply the scientific method en masse, the "burden of proof" is even less applicable.

You are correct but then you have to at least have a logical argument.

If we take a very simple and basic subjective concept, like a favorite color, anyone would struggle to provide proof. Arguably, its not even relevant to the conversation at all. If we then expand this to contexts without a general consensus by their very nature, it becomes even more lost in the milieu.

That is not the type of thing I am talking about.

a reply to: MamaJ

If you read the OP it is the deadline for eisegesis to share.

I made a promise to share what I know (regardless if it gets me banned), after receiving the highest achievement that ATS could afford.

This includes every Hermetic secret that I know, the truth about Earth and it’s history and the underlying “nature” of psychical, spiritual and sexual alchemy. This thread exists to inform those that wish to know such things, that I’m about to make some heads roll.

The reason the deadline is today was revealed by eisegesis. Today is the beginning of Operation Monarch.

a reply to: eisegesis

I hope you at least touch on what the FIRST MATTER is, that is too chaotic. I thank you for all the information you have shared so far. I have spent many hours the last 20 days studying what you have released so far. I hope you are able to follow through on the promise.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

im a wee bit lost here, whats project89 and operation monarch?

if anyone could enlighten me i would be buzzing out my beaver!!

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Personally i think he is talking about MATTER as a whole, you know everything that is!

originally posted by: SaturnsSon
im a wee bit lost here, whats project89 and operation monarch?

Project 89 is a game set up to change the present paradigm. Here is the Link

The idea is that through the internet and this alternate reality game humanity will be able to change their reality.

Operation monarch was the cia's mind control project under MKUltra.

a reply to: SaturnsSon

Project89 is an ARG, or is it? Operation Monarch has to do with the Million Mask March as far as I can tell. Look back a few pages and follow the links provided by eisegesis.

Thanks a lot, i was too lazy to go back 30 pages.... dont blame me though its because of my social conditioning lol

Cheers

no way i have just read cosmic trigger and philip k dick says on the back that the author changed his whole way of thinking, and philip k dick is basically mentioned at the start along with something i have wrote previously on, the nag hammadi texts and archons, too many synchronicities for me not to read this long pdf..... thanks again

a reply to: daskakik

Operation monarch was the cia's mind control project under MKUltra.

"Project Monarch" (what you've been wrongly attributing to this thread), relates indirectly to some of the material, whereas "Operation Monarch" is directly related.

"Operation Monarch" - October 22

Chaos/Propaganda/Subversion

originally posted by: daskakik
Of course they are, I'm the same person.

That is an interesting response.. Are you only capable of one approach? Can we change a habit and still be "us?"

It isn't the errors in others, I point out the errors in the information provided by others.

Do you see what happened here?

We essentially said the same thing. The words were changed a bit, but not their concept, in an attempt to disagree.

You would be wrong. Science, requires replication.

Again, you say the same thing as I, yet with the postulation that I am incorrect. Is this done intentionally and consciously, or habitually as a standard reaction?

How does one replicate a specific endeavour, scientific or otherwise, by simply stating where the burden of proof lies?

I'm not talking about convincing me. I'm talking about showing verifiable results.

I'm not talking about convincing you either. I'm actually engaging you as an archetype, as I feel that is beneficial to the thread, overall topic, and those that might read it. So far, its going swimmingly

Now, as for verifiable results.. First, we must ask "how are those results, or any results for that matter, verified by burden of proof statements?"

Then, what exactly are we looking to verify, and how is that affected by subjectivity? Unless we are claiming that subjectivity directly equates to falsehood without deviation, this changes the nature of the verification.

You are correct but then you have to at least have a logical argument.

Are we proposing that logic, a derivative of the human brain, is capable of accurately parsing every facet of the universe and existence?

If so, why do we tend to back it up with the scientific method? If not, then how do we effectively explore areas beyond our brain's ability to parse, or those that have yet to enter the matrix of human logic?

Does Culture affect logic, or is it unchanging through the ages?

That is not the type of thing I am talking about.

But, it is the type of thing we are talking about in this thread.

a reply to: eisegesis

Apparently it was because of liveandlearn's post making the connection with the mind control project. We talked about that for a few pages with nobody correcting. What are you gonna do, right?