It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Something has changed, timeline?

page: 36
161
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by whitewave
 


Whitewave, Isn't it more likely that someone got her cart thinking it was empty and then when they saw one item in it just left it alone?




posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Wow... anonymous user, how have you seen true reality? is there anything we can comprehend that you could explain to us even though you say it is indescribable? Maybe through an analogy or something?



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
For quite some time I have felt that something big is going to happen in the future, this started probably 3-4 years ago. Over time the feeling has been getting stronger like its getting closer and closer to happening, I don't know what it is but I also feel like when the time comes i will know what to do.



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Zul007
 


It's possible someone grabbed her cart without her noticing but there was more to the story that, for the sake of brevity, I left out. Apparently they were important details. I apologize.



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by euclid
 


Euclid, it's not that I don't understand the quantum mechanics (sort of-does anyone REALLY understand quantum physics?). I've been studying varying aspects of it for years. It's the "WHY" that throws me for a loop. Why in the world or worlds or multiverses would there be more than one reality that we COULD experience at a time? We ARE geared physically, mentally, et al to experience one reality, one life line, one life time and occupy our space in one time frame. What could possibly be the point of random shifting?

When I try to explain what we've all been experiencing, I get hung up at the part where it should make sense. Still hung up there. Not sweating it so much anymore, though. Thanks for trying to guide us through this confusion.



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by curiousbeliever
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Wow... anonymous user, how have you seen true reality? is there anything we can comprehend that you could explain to us even though you say it is indescribable? Maybe through an analogy or something?

I registered to continue posting.

True reality? Well, I have seen what is outside of this reality and have been provided with a vantage point with which to understand what this reality is on two seperate occasions. I can't say for certain that there isn't something else again outside of that outer reality, but I suspect that there is. Anyway, my experiences are indescribable, because human language does not contain enough bandwidth to describe it. While there, my mind worked differently and I could understand. Coming back here was like trying to squeeze a planet through a keyhole, in terms of keeping my understanding intact. I was left with a gestalt and strawmen, but the details elude me even though I understood them on the other side. This place, this earth, it has many purposes and each of us has a very personal reason for being here. But this place is only subjectively real, it is not objectively real; it is fluid and maleable. It can, will and does change in front of our eyes in accord with a higher logic.

Not everyone that you interact with, here, is the same as you. Most of what your senses experience, here, is cinematography. Your reality is actively managed by entities that you have made agreements with. They are always with you, sometimes in the flesh right in front of you, sometimes through the looking glass. They could be your wife or your son, your dog or a bumblebee. They can bend time and put billboards on the road for you, there for years, so that at exactly the right time, you will read the message on the billboard and have help for a serious problem. They can and will create harmonic synchronicities that defy coincidence to such an exaggerated degree that you have no choice except to face the fact that something otherworldly is operating in your reality. They will mock you and laugh at your expense, at times. They are not being cruel, but their sense of humor is radical. But they will always love you. This is a very rough way to say this, it truly is much more than my words can express, but this is as close as I can get you.

The best metaphor truly is that this reality is like a computer simulation, or a video game. Outside of this simulation exists a reality so profoundly greater than this one that it is indescribable. But I can provide some comfort about it. It is wise, it is compassionate, it is ecstatically loving, it is ingenious beyond words, it is mathematical and logical (although the form of logic is radically different), there is a sense of the eternal, of non-causality (time does not function in a way that is recognizable), it is filled with entities and yet it is one and most importantly, it is home.

They started to wake me up about six years ago. Oh, how they toyed with me. It was good sport, for sure, like blindfolding your bestfriend and making him/her think you are leading them naked through all sort of ridiculous and humiliating adventures. But there is purpose to all of this and there is a serious nature to it as well. All things emanating from the outer reality are carved with an economy of purpose that shows intelligence that is far beyond our ability to comprehend. There is never one reason for anything. Usually there are thousands of simultaneous threads of purpose woven together into an unimaginably beautiful tapestry of intention, a grand design to be appreciated as art to omnipotent beings.

Some other things that you should know. Not all of the people in this reality are real. Many are not real, they are like animatronics, or NPCs in a multiplayer video game. But they can be inhabited at will by these entities, who will jump in and control them when they so desire. I once carried on a conversation with about 10 people while walking down the street. The thread of conversation for the counter-party in the conversation kept shifting from one random person to the next as I walked. If you aren't prepared for this type of charade, where your friends from the other side toy with you, it can be very difficult. But once you get it, it can be a bit entertaining for you as well.

Good luck with your awakenings, everyone. And remember, the red pill is part of the program.



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
interesting and very enlightening.

(money hacks please
)



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by HarmonicSynchronicity
 

Welcome, HarmonicSynchronicity.

That post is, quite simply, one of the finest descriptions of 'red pill philosophy' I have ever read.

Excellent first post. Thank you for your clarity!



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 12:37 AM
link   
An amazingly puerile response to a dross interpretation of temporal reality.... I'm flabbergasted.

-Euclid



Originally posted by Ian McLean
reply to post by HarmonicSynchronicity
 

Welcome, HarmonicSynchronicity.

That post is, quite simply, one of the finest descriptions of 'red pill philosophy' I have ever read.

Excellent first post. Thank you for your clarity!



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by euclid
puerile... dross...

Had to break out my virtual dictionary:


1 : juvenile
2 : childish, silly: puerile remarks
Source

Thanks for reading!



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I believe that the only people able to detect changes in the timeline, are people that arent supposed to be in the timeline in the first place. They have no place in the world.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by euclid
An amazingly puerile response to a dross interpretation of temporal reality.... I'm flabbergasted.

-Euclid

Heh!

Euclid, I'm happy to make your acquaintance. I must say, I'm terribly sorry for boring you with my post. But I need to correct something that you said here. I wasn't providing an interpretation of temporal reality.

I see, from reading your posts, that you believe that you have figured all of this out. You imagine that there are infinite quantum realities that draw their own time-lines, with some subset of them being congruent to ours, with variations small enough that they may be considered parallel time-streams (in a Back to the Future sort of way). I believe that you have further prognosticated that we are experiencing a ruffling and collapsing of quantum time-streams because of the interaction with the galactic singularity which is spinning at a very high rate of speed and causing a distinct time-warp effect on the equatorial plane orthogonal to it's axis of rotation. You further suggest that the LHC is or will exacerbate this phenomena and through the magic of observation effecting reality in quantum mechanics, we may be able to modify the probability of these things occuring by visualizing the LHC not being used in other congruent time-streams.

This is a cute, perhaps even quaint, idea. I like it. If you believe it, it may even be so, for you ;-)

But as I said, my post wasn't about temporal reality. My post was about subjective reality and how it is actively managed, in a very personal way, for each of us. The responder wasn't being juvenile at all, he clearly has already been exposed to some of these ideas (which btw, I have never read about, only experienced directly).

There is ample room for many different subjective realities, right here, right now. That is one of the bits of magic about all of this. There is a great excess, or should I say a great harmonic synchronicity, of sensible descriptive paths through this crazy reality. Your interpretation of it is part of the fun!



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by HarmonicSynchronicity
 


Hello,

At least you are intelligent. The points I take contention against are:

1. Subejctivity & obejctivity within our shared temporal reality.
2. The concept of claiming to have been "given" an indescribable ability by an outside agency that allows only you to "see" what reality is.
3. The concept that people are non-player-characters.
4. The concept that "entities" actively manage "us" all.
5. The concept of "awakening".

There are some points of your ideation that are metaphoraically, allegorically, and/or analogously correct:

1. The world being "cinematic".
2. Reality being like a "game".
3. Synchronicities that defy coincidence.

But those are all illusions. Subjectivity and objectivity are functions of the human psyche and do not exist outside of temporal reality. The claim of being given gifts from"gods" infers psychosis at worst and misinterpreted self-enlightenment at best.... yet more honestly it sounds like the common 1980's new age drivel I've read in the past..... hollow metaphors only that sound cool but offer no utilitarian purpose.

NPC's ..... some people may seem like that but I assure you they are not.... though they may not be exactly human.

The management of an entire species...... if we are so managed then they are not good administrators.

The awakenings.... yes the new age concept of communications via the higher self with entities of light and knowledge.... These entities exist.... but they are not exactly what they claim to be in most cases. They can provide insight and knowledge. I'll tell you though... I do not trust them. Just as I would not trust an alien from another planet. Any entitiy that must keep it self hidden and lurk in shadows and darkness so that it can bring forth a (false) light to impress simple minds is not an entity of Truth, Knowledge, or Benevolence. Nor would they provide insights that are incommunicable to others; if they were indeed benevolent beings. If they were they would make sure that their messenger was able to communicate their message of enlightenment and salvation in "describable" terms.

As I said in an earlier post in this thread:


I tend to discount as incredible any "new age" idiomatic references; yet I am fully aware that spiritual epiphanies do occur (I have had some) ...

I have had what you call a clarity of understanding concerning the "entangled" nature of reality from spiritual, philosphical and scientific perspectives. I prefer science and "pure" philosophy without the hinderances and ideologies of religions, self-proclaimed guru's, mystics, psychics and the like; ...


On the other hand my humble, quaint analysis of empirical, historical, scientific, and religious data does offer some mulit-lateral utilitarian purposes that "could" make a difference; rather than just sounding "cool" and spacey.

I don't discount your epiphany but I do question your interpretation of it and its source.

-Euclid



[edit on 24-7-2008 by euclid]

[edit on 24-7-2008 by euclid]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by euclid
reply to post by HarmonicSynchronicity
 


Hello,

At least you are intelligent. The points I take contention against are:

1. Subejctivity & obejctivity within our shared temporal reality.

Shared?
Temporal reality?

I disagree with these assumptions and therefore cannot comment. I neither see this reality as completely shared, nor do I see it as temporal.


2. The concept of claiming to have been "given" an indescribable ability by an outside agency that allows only you to "see" what reality is.

I make no such claim. I only claim to have had the opportunity, on two separate occasions, to take my blindfolds off, open my eyes, marvel in awe at the beauty of the construct and then try to squeeze back into the rabbit hole. No special powers, at least not yet. I am holding out hope ;-) that would be a fun way to end this trip.


3. The concept that people are non-player-characters.

Yes, many are. Most of the suffering that you see is for dramatic effect. Some real consciousnesses may choose to experience severe suffering for their own reasons, but the vast majority of that sort of thing is not being inflicted on conscious entities. It is cinematography. This is but one example.


4. The concept that "entities" actively manage "us" all.

Maybe jumping in without anyone in your corner of the ring is like a harder difficulty level or something. I don't discount that possibility at all. For me, I have a few in my corner.


5. The concept of "awakening".

Awakenings come after sleeping. Part of me is asleep, but less than what was six years ago. Your mileage may vary.


There are some points of your ideation that are metaphoraically, allegorically, and/or analogously correct:

It would be terribly disappointing if they weren't.


1. The world being "cinematic".

Good. We can agree that we are dealing with actors in a play (multiple plays), special effects, edits, a script, production and the rest. This is a good place to start.


2. Reality being like a "game".

More than you may care to imagine.


3. Synchronicities that defy coincidence.

The signature of genius.


But those are all illusions. Subjectivity and objectivity are functions of the human psyche and do not exist outside of temporal reality.

Since I do not believe in temporal reality, that statement is meaningless to me. When I say that this reality is subjectively real but not objectively real, I am saying something very specific that has nothing to do with temporal reality.


The claim of being given gifts from"gods" infers psychosis at worst and misinterpreted self-enlightenment at best....

My claim was that I was pulled from the simulation and allowed a higher vantage point for a bit. But I came from there, made agreements about being here and very well may have helped design my own experience here. These are hardly gifts from "gods", any more than when you get into a shooting match in DOOM3 and forget you are sitting on a sofa, hit the pause button and pull yourself out of the game for a moment before jumping back in. Psychosis would be if you kept thinking you were that psychotic marine and started trying to frag your family.


yet more honestly it sounds like the common 1980's new age drivel I've read in the past..... hollow metaphors only that sound cool but offer no utilitarian purpose.

Your belief is optional. I'm not trying to sell anything.



NPC's ..... some people may seem like that but I assure you they are not.... though they may not be exactly human.

A necessary and compassionate component to the construct.



The management of an entire species...... if we are so managed then they are not good administrators.

There is an awful lot going on with this thing, but it is best to return to the agreed upon term, "cinematic". The management that I brought up wasn't management over anything but me. It's personal.



The awakenings.... yes the new age concept of communications via the higher self with entities of light and knowledge.... These entities exist.... but they are not exactly what they claim to be in most cases.

The Kaballah, demonology thing? Not my piece of pumpkin pie. But some people get into that storyline.


They can provide insight and knowledge. I'll tell you though... I do not trust them.

Then you shouldn't.


Just as I would not trust an alien from another planet.

Another good storyline.


Any entitiy that must keep it self hidden and lurk in shadows and darkness so that it can bring forth a (false) light to impress simple minds is not an entity of Truth, Knowledge, or Benevolence.

I agree. But it would sort of hurt the story if the director, producer, makeup artists, special effects guys, grips, technicians, pizza delivery boys and fluffers just appeared in your living room and said, "sorry for hiding, we just didn't want to ruin the effect"


Nor would they provide insights that are incommunicable to others; if they were indeed benevolent beings.

Aren't you assuming that there are universal insights when you say this? Didn't I say that it's very personal?


If they were they would make sure that their messenger was able to communicate their message of enlightenment and salvation in "describable" terms.

Describable to a monkey?

Listen, the forces of darkness, Kabballah, demonology, temptation, seduction, substitute demon possession for transcendence with your eternal spirit, good-vs-evil christ vs judaism thing is a blockbuster. That's a good script. If you focus on it, you'll get to buy a front row ticket to it.



As I said in an earlier post in this thread:


I tend to discount as incredible any "new age" idiomatic references; yet I am fully aware that spiritual epiphanies do occur (I have had some) ...

I have had what you call a clarity of understanding concerning the "entangled" nature of reality from spiritual, philosphical and scientific perspectives. I prefer science and "pure" philosophy without the hinderances and ideologies of religions, self-proclaimed guru's, mystics, psychics and the like; ...


On the other hand my humble, quaint analysis of empirical, historical, scientific, and religious data does offer some mulit-lateral utilitarian purposes that "could" make a difference; rather than just sounding "cool" and spacey.

Sounds like a good script. Run with it.



I don't discount your epiphany but I do question your interpretation of it and its source.

It's subjective.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicSynchronicity

3. The concept that people are non-player-characters.

Yes, many are. Most of the suffering that you see is for dramatic effect. Some real consciousnesses may choose to experience severe suffering for their own reasons, but the vast majority of that sort of thing is not being inflicted on conscious entities. It is cinematography. This is but one example.

And, let me guess here, should you decide to actually try and 'prove' that any of these NPC-seeming entities aren't actually 'complete', perhaps by trying to approach them and search in them for greater emotional or intellectual depth, well, then, that action is part of the 'script', too, accounted for, and that entity isn't a bit-player NPC at all, but rather can express such depth as the 'role' requires -- even to the extent of appearing, or actually 'being' another fully-conscious entity.

Just guessing here, but I've seen that one before. I've talked with people whom, I am convinced, were not listening to me talk, but rather were finding some interpretation, perhaps of their own devising, behind my words. Occasionally, rather innocuous things said have shocked beyond what an expected objective reaction would be -- I seem to have pushed 'hidden buttons'. Am I an NPC? Perhaps, for them, I was.

So, I see an assumptive dichotomy in your argument, which from the unknown causal complexity postulated by your other views, does not seem necessary. It is: 1) Many people's actions seem to fulfill the roles of 'movie actors', in a play which, objectively, they could not possibly be consciously participating, -or- 2) All people in the world are completely or equivalently conscious, within normally-assumed variety. You seem to have taken 1 as evidence disproving 2, but is that necessarily true? Could not the same mechanisms you postulate to explain synchronistic and coincidental events (mediated by an external 'director' force), also underpin the channels of evident expression (speech, action) of consciousness in individuals?

As I believe you said in a previous post, nothing has a single purpose. Perhaps the expression of free-will, as much as our egos might want to object, also fits within this category.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ian McLean

Originally posted by HarmonicSynchronicity

3. The concept that people are non-player-characters.

Yes, many are. Most of the suffering that you see is for dramatic effect. Some real consciousnesses may choose to experience severe suffering for their own reasons, but the vast majority of that sort of thing is not being inflicted on conscious entities. It is cinematography. This is but one example.

And, let me guess here, should you decide to actually try and 'prove' that any of these NPC-seeming entities aren't actually 'complete', perhaps by trying to approach them and search in them for greater emotional or intellectual depth, well, then, that action is part of the 'script', too, accounted for, and that entity isn't a bit-player NPC at all, but rather can express such depth as the 'role' requires -- even to the extent of appearing, or actually 'being' another fully-conscious entity.

If you get too close to, or too deep with, a prop, in slips an actor who then takes control of the prop. I am certain I have seen this happen and it is not so different than agents taking over inhabitants of the Matrix during a chase scene with Neo. Great movie. Movies are VERY suspicious, btw.


Just guessing here, but I've seen that one before. I've talked with people whom, I am convinced, were not listening to me talk, but rather were finding some interpretation, perhaps of their own devising, behind my words. Occasionally, rather innocuous things said have shocked beyond what an expected objective reaction would be -- I seem to have pushed 'hidden buttons'. Am I an NPC? Perhaps, for them, I was.

Not everyone is an NPC. The real deal, like yourself, will need to be pushed at times to keep the scripts from contradicting and keep everything moving forward rationally without paradox. This is most easily perceived when you find yourself asking questions such as, "Why did I just do or say what I just did or said." And, in fact, this provides a glitch in the Matrix, allowing you to pinpoint other participants like yourself. Good observation.


So, I see an assumptive dichotomy in your argument, which from the unknown causal complexity postulated by your other views, does not seem necessary. It is: 1) Many people's actions seem to fulfill the roles of 'movie actors', in a play which, objectively, they could not possibly be consciously participating, -or- 2) All people in the world are completely or equivalently conscious, within normally-assumed variety. You seem to have taken 1 as evidence disproving 2, but is that necessarily true? Could not the same mechanisms you postulate to explain synchronistic and coincidental events (mediated by an external 'director' force), also underpin the channels of evident expression (speech, action) of consciousness in individuals?

My position is derived from two observations. One is that I remember knowing that not everyone is real (occasionally I still get the sensation that maybe I am the only ignorant one bumbling around bumping into walls - but only occasionally). The second is suffering. This drama includes very serious third-party suffering, not limited to torture, disease, dementia, starvation and so forth. First person suffering is generally limited to what we impose upon ourselves as an agreed upon reaction to our choices. Third party suffering is of a different character altogether and should be examined carefully and scrutinized against your own experience in order to comprehend the difference.


As I believe you said in a previous post, nothing has a single purpose. Perhaps the expression of free-will, as much as our egos might want to object, also fits within this category.

This is clearly a multiplayer game. When we find ourselves within another player's event horizon, paradox and contradiction resolution do come into play and we do find ourselves being pressured. Remember, this reality literally is not the same for any of us. It could be a play about a real alien invasion for one player while for another, it was a hoaxed alien invasion put on by the secret government to consolidate power. Each player has their own subjective reality which co-exists with the other players. While this may seem overly complicated, it is an important key to the purpose of the art.

I imagine that if two players with radically different subjective realities were too close to each other for too long, there would have to be a sort of collapsing of their individual subjective realities which would appear, for all practical purposes, the same as the quantum time stream collapse that has been discussed elsewhere on this thread. That is an interesting conclusion. This could also explain why known "dead" people are not dead (resolution of a paradox requires that they did not die) and other quirks in the matrix. The fact that the memories of prior subjective realities are not erased should be put down to the red pill.

It could also be the case, and I generally think that it is, that this whole drama is designed over a particular period of earth-time. The climax might require that the subjective realities of the participants converge towards some collectively determined conclusion. This would seem to me to be consistent with the gestalt understanding that I have of what this is all about. I would expand that to include that the red pill is part of the program. We are supposed to wake up as we approach the climax.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by HarmonicSynchronicity
 


It's patently apparent that you are a writer and have seen the Matrix one too many times, are writing a screen-play and using these forums as a research tool to bounce ideas off of people to complete your creative process.

I'm sorry to say that your "theory" is illogical and is completely off-topic.... a veritable non sequitur providing no insight whatsoever to the problem of "time-line" changes as was originally posted.... a typical fanicful new-age diversion that ultimately leads to pointless questions, prolific answers of no consequence and no real/actionable solution/resolution.

-Euclid



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicSynchronicity
I once carried on a conversation with about 10 people while walking down the street. The thread of conversation for the counter-party in the conversation kept shifting from one random person to the next as I walked.


I have to concur with euclid.
We have seen THIS movie too. FALLEN.

"Tii-iiii-iiii-iiiiime, is on my side....yes it is!"



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Getting back on topic are there any recent developments. Either in elucid's research or "help" or in things people have experienced.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Aron1138
 


My core research continues. Unfortunately the investigation into this specific aspect is somewhat concluded. I still continue gathering information... just a few days ago another extinct reptile was discovered in Asia, an insect in England, etc. My last post with the final report is a few pages back and that is all that I have.....

As for observable "strangeness" yes it continues for me as it probably does, more or less, for everyone.

We just have to wait this one out I guess.

See you on the other side,

-Euclid



new topics

top topics



 
161
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join