It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Hidden Themes of Heliofant's "I, Pet Goat II"

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 02:42 PM
For readability, I made a copy of the original essay and posted it to scribd.

I find it's easier to read anyways. =)

posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:03 AM
A couple of things no one has touched on yet...

the sludgy yellow substance that appears to be taking the migrant worker under is also on the shirt of the young man that the genie has captive. Also on the apple that the altruistic young lady rejects, and it also encircles her, but she remains untouched by it. You also see the Stag, or deer in the mural on the wall seems to be ramming through it as drops of it are flying off behind him. It is also on the Christ figure, from head to toe. Not as if he is affected by it per-se, but that he walked through it and came out unscathed, a war paint of sorts.

The owl in the classroom is more than likely a reference to Illuminatus observer. The owl figures heavily in Illuminati symbolism as he who can see through the darkness. Another symbol robbed from ancient religion. There is also an owl on the dollar bill, it's hard to see, but he is on the right hand top corner, between the outline around the one, and one of the leaves.

Another interesting allusion is the christ figure completely alight with the fire of truth, He IS the flame. I believe it is a reference to the burning bush, burning, but not consumed. I wouldn't say that, but I once asked God, for weeks, what that whoe burning bush thing was about, and he showed me, in no uncertain terms.

Fantastic video, great message.

posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by Xtraeme

Did anyone notice the fine details in the imploding `twin towers´ in this animation? Love the way they meticulously show the iittle white 'puffs' from demolition charges eploding for each stage to collapse. (Is there still anyone that actually believes that the towers collapsed because of the fire?)
edit on 21-11-2012 by BobPaulsen because: spelling correction

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 02:04 AM
reply to post by Xtraeme

I just want to shout out on an older thread, for anyone looking for a very well done narrative and explanation for the I, Pet Goat video, this is the thread to visit. It's so well done and on track, that even the makers of the video itself, Heliofant, have linked this thread in their commentary page on the website as a proper explanation for anyone who wants to know more.
Right at the end of the page.

Well done!

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 02:02 PM
I thought that I would add my two cents to this thread.

I've commented extensively on the phenomenon that I find to be the "actual" story behind "I Pet Goat II".

It really requires a lot of reading to get the gist of what I've written. Basically, in the other thread on ATS, I've alleged that the movie is representative of what is going on in reality (even currently): that there is a dialogue going on that is the source of inspiration for this video.

Read the comments here:
ATS post by sensibleSenseless

I also added one last comment which points to a video that is also part of the "Truman Show", which occurs as a result of this individual's involvement in the world's affairs:
post by sensibleSenseless

It is an explicit video, which mocks the current situation with regards to the individual in question.

"The Truman Show", is extensively commented on ATS in this thread:
The Truman Show thread

edit on 15-3-2013 by sensibleSenseless because: last line

posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by sensibleSenseless

It is an explicit video, which mocks the current situation with regards to the individual in question.

The video is soteriological in nature. So how do you figure? Also when you say "the individual"? Do you mean the archetype of mankind as being stuck in the underworld of our past misdeeds? Or are you trying to identify the "individual" Christ-like figure as a collective cry for salvation shared by all humanity? I guess I am just not following. Are you being literal?

posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 03:07 PM
I am not sure I've understood your question, since there are so many cross references in what I've written, but I am prepared to spend time to see if I can clarify from what I've understood of the situation.

I hope you'll forgive me for the long time it takes to get a clear picture out.

I believe "the individual" I am writing of on this page is "the focus" I describe in the first link. I didn't use the word "focus", as I was trying to summarize what was written in the first link - although in retrospect, it really was not clear.

The focus' fight, is really the world's fight against TPTB, and it is a highly witnessed fight between the corporate giants and government that steal from both the focus, and the people and take credit for work not entirely done by them. They essentially treat people, and the focus (in plain sight) in ways that they would not have themselves treated - robbing the world of justice.

posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 11:18 PM
reply to post by Dextraphite

I was wondering if anyone would notice that. Good eye Dex. =)

reply to post by sensibleSenseless

I hope my previous comment didn't come off as callous or dismissive. My reply probably could have been better worded by just saying ...

Since the video is soteriological in nature. What specifically did you feel was mocking or derisive about it? Also when you say "the individual." Do you mean the archetype of mankind as being stuck in "the underworld" of our past misdeeds? Or are you trying to identify the "individual" Christ-like figure as a collective cry for salvation shared by all humanity? Are you being literal?

Now that I have had the chance to read your comments in the other thread. I can see several uses for how you apply the phrase "the individual" or "the focus." In the first link at the start it seems like you're trying to say society is "focused" on the people at the top of the class pyramid. However, after the first few paragraphs, when you start talking about "His words paraphrased." It comes across as though you are identifying yourself as the focus.

One observation I have made about life is that it is very easy if a person has creative realistic ideas of how the future will unfold, to think others have somehow "borrowed" the idea when inevitably it come to pass. For myself, I had been working on a project to create a crowdsourced funding platform for books and, well ... Now Scribd and Kickstarter are huge. Did the companies' founders steal the idea out from under me? I doubt that. They just had better funding and they acted quicker.

The beauty of the Heliofant video is it describes actual events, but it couches it in universal terms where we each see our own role in the journey. Joseph Campbell described this as "the hero with a thousand faces." We all see ourselves at the center (because we can't not). However it is important to recognize we all play roles that often overlap.

It is exactly because of this that it is best to look at the video as a description of real events, but with an eye for the archetypes that surround them.

Though there is always the possibility your more personal approach is right. Maybe there is some sort of Sheldrakian morphic field that causes events in our lives to percolate out and reality responds in some sort of seemingly acausal way. However I would caution it's very easy in such a receptive state of mind to draw correlations when the connection is tenuous. This isn't to say there isn't a connection, but rather that the connection we draw is one of our own choosing.

Hope this finds you well,
edit on 23-3-2013 by Xtraeme because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 25 2013 @ 05:11 PM
If you take events out of time.... then yes, there isn't any stealing being done.

If you take the fact that "the focus" came up with the idea of the initial ipod - It was described in great detail - for instance - the idea that there would be a circular mouse pad with a central button. Running one's finger around the circular mouse pad would quickly run through the music collection on the ipod.

Or the fact that the entire story of "the Minority Report". The focus told the story as follows (I don't have the actual transcript for what was spoken by the focus.. so I have to show you the extent to which things were "copied/borrowed"):

There are three future tellers. These people were found because they had mental disorders that under a specific treatment surfaced as an ability to tell the future. (ie they were put in a pool of liquid, and light was bounced off of their heads and one could "see" what they were thinking). This would then predict murders.

Someone found this out and took advantage of this to create a crime free world. This individual was trying to get this enstated all across the US. He was the founder of an organization during a time crime hit an all high. The individual was forced to kill the mother of one of the future seers in order to get her freed to permanently remain in the liquid. He had someone fake the murder of her mom, while he committed the murder right afterwards. There was a cover up. The data was erased. However, the most gifted one would be used to store the images of the murder which would occasionally slightly differ from the other twins.

Tom Cruise would be the investigating officer.... A ship would take the officers to the scene of the crime within minutes of the predictions. They would have backpacks to help them travel around - though this would not be common. A fight would ensue at a Lexus plant. Cars would be able to move up and down highways and would automatically take you to your destination. Tom cruise would have to have his eyes changed, since there was the ability to send little spider like creatures to your apartments and they would scan your eyes, in order to check where you were. Every time you went any where your ID is scanned...

You get the picture.

I am not saying that this happens all the time to only one individual - I do know that others have their ideas stolen too. This particular video was created at the behest of "the focus" - a real life individual who lives in this world.

Many other things are also created by "the focus".... in fact a truman show, which is aimed both at the focus and those who use the "fork" tools are deliberately aimed at making money for "fork" tools, and there is much work in the world that has been made to run around this particular "focus".

I personally work as an IT consultant, and have been in server rooms a lot. I know the reason why server rooms are shielded from so many types of external influences. The technology that is spoken of exists - and there are many, many people who know of it's existence - though they may be in denial of its use to generate money and "run the show" in the fashion that I've explained in threads.

As for whether anyone chooses to believe the extent of what is written - it is your own choice, unless you are a witness to said circus. It still continues to a certain extent. Fork tools after all, have to make money/.
edit on 25-3-2013 by sensibleSenseless because: last line

posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 09:50 PM

Originally posted by sensibleSenseless
Or the fact that the entire story of "the Minority Report". The focus told the story as follows (I don't have the actual transcript for what was spoken by the focus.. so I have to show you the extent to which things were "copied/borrowed"):

Unless you were born in 1928 and your name is Philip K. Dick. I think someone beat you to it. The movie was based on a 1956 short story, titled appropriately enough The Minority Report. Are you sure you just didn't read the story when you were younger?

posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 04:25 PM
I'm pretty sure that the focus hasn't read the story.

I'm also pretty sure that if you take any fictional story, you might be able to find lots of literature that are somewhat similar in content from somewhere in the past.

But the story was literally lifted from what the focus came up with. Sorry. The fact that there was a previous similar work doesn't mean that it couldn't have been a stolen invention from someone entirely different and the similarities to something that has been written in the past used as a means to pass off the work as someone else's.

On the other hand, perhaps you are right, it is possibly just information that is simply passed through the focus as a means to sell the fork tools' show to those who are willing to pay the price for what is considered potentially "original" work.

There also exists an incentive to invent such an author and his "works" etc.... to prove that the focus didn't originally generate the work - not sure whether TPTB aren't willing to generate false documentum to support their work. That is also possible - and there wouldn't be anyone any wiser.
edit on 28-3-2013 by sensibleSenseless because: small correction

posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 04:34 PM
Just as another thought:

When you see things like this happening on a regular basis... where the focus comes up with original ideas and then it gets produced by others...

You'll get the idea. Unless of course, you are claiming that it is simply coincidence that the information gets channelled through the focus.

Someone's paying for this stuff - and only God would know why then.

posted on Mar, 31 2013 @ 11:46 AM
I believe your assessment of the media to be somewhat accurate. I enjoyed your further explaination of the kabbalistic meaning and representation of the protector diety/earthly mother. And in saying that I have noticed that the symbolic womb the avatar is born of is crumbling as he passes from the unconcious to the concious realm. In providing the reassurance that mankind no longer needs the nurturing of the mother because the creator has returned. Also, I noticed the vanishing yin-yang symbl vanishing in the presence of the war machines. Most individuals interprete this to be the end to world peace, or the surrender of the present day youth. But the yin-yang symbol has several meanings, one in which is the sign of the ambigious creator, or hermaphodite god that needs no opposite. So the true meaning could be relating the loss of creation or opposition to the forces of oppression.

posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 05:54 AM
Interesting read, well done!

While I don't claim to understand all the symbolism or hidden meanings in I Pet Goat I certainly found the video enjoyable and visually stimulating. I tend to believe we humans over think things and in the process lose the purity of the messages being received, something I discovered after years of doing Art History research. My love for art led me to read thousands of books on the subject and somewhere along the line the original vision and intensity was lost, traded for mental musings and abstract connections. I found I much preferred the original feel of art without the intense mental engagement.

The purity of innocence and the original vision is lost and replaced with knowledge. I'm not sure that's such a great trade off. The question arises: is it better to understand or to enjoy?

Forgive my ramblings but your thread reminded me of my own internal struggles in many ways.
edit on 24-4-2013 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 01:22 AM
reply to post by Asktheanimals

I agree. Over-analysis is often the bane of understanding an experience. Understanding in the sense that it affects you. Rather than something that we puzzle over with no real meaning to our personal lives. Thank you for adding something that's becoming very rare -- authenticity.
edit on 25-4-2013 by Xtraeme because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:21 PM
I'm forced to agree with you on this last comment.

Something that is becoming very rare: "Authenticity".

BTW: I just remembered that the focus came up with the idea that "Philip K. Dick" could allegedly be the author - it could be written up on Wikipedia as such. The reason it would not be objected to, is because it is not a significant story in history and so if it is presented as truth - and no one can verify it is indeed a lie, it would work.

Additionally, the book would have the story (which the focus came up with himself), which would be one amongst a collection of older type stories.

The publisher could sell the book on and other websites with false dates of printing.

But it is argued that "cheating" is potentially a two way street. As an example, history records that Newton claimed credit for Kepler's findings. History is abound with such rhetoric.

Yes, over-analysis of the movie could lead to a loss of the art work value of it.... Shakespeare would fail an exam that tested him on his greatest critic's views of his stories: AC Bradley. It is spoken of Bradley that he saw things in Shakespeare's plays that even Shakespeare himself hadn't seen.

It is nevertheless an ongoing saga - if you can't verify this.... Hmmmm, don't know what I can do to help you.
edit on 5-6-2013 by sensibleSenseless because: changed mind on issue

posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 10:27 PM

originally posted by: priceless34
reply to post by Xtraeme

I interpreted Jesus going thru the tunnel as the passing from the age of pisces to the age of aquarius which is known as the age of enlightenment.

originally posted by: Xtraeme
reply to post by priceless34

I like that.
Ichthys or ΙΧΘΥΣ was always a symbol of Jesus and his teachings. So I'm pretty confident the fish jumping into the boat is meant to indicate a gathering. However I could easily see a double meaning of the Age of Pisces (represented by Jesus himself as the Piscean fish) being the current period, transferring to the Age of Aquarius (as the full ocean) of total abundance (etymologically abundance in Latin as abundantem means overflow, much like the ocean overflows the earth). So that does seem to fit! Nice catch!

Here is a crazy coincidence. Yesterday, 4 years after this discussion was first opened, NASA announced a breakthrough discovery of 3 potentially habitable exoplanets. Using Spitzer data, the NASA team described the planets by saying

" At about 40 light-years (235 trillion miles) from Earth, the system of planets
" is relatively close to us, in the constellation Aquarius (map). Because they
" are located outside of our solar system, these planets are scientifically
" known as exoplanets.
" This exoplanet system is called TRAPPIST-1, named for The Transiting Planets
" and Planetesimals Small Telescope (TRAPPIST) in Chile.

NASA also shared an artist's rendering of what the planet TRAPPIST-1f might look like from the surface.

Look familiar?

What are the odds 4 years after I, Pet Goat II's first debut a new ATS discussion would spring up linking to this thread, and a day later NASA would release information about 3 possibly habitable planets with a drawing of practically the same image portraying habitable planets in the constellation of Aquarius.

I don't even believe in synchronicity, but this is just.. wow.

edit on 24-2-2017 by ThingsThatDontMakeSense because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 02:40 PM
a reply to: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

Did a quick calculation of the odds:

There are about 5 positions the sun could be in vertically and 8 positions it could be in horizontally if the sun were repositioned so it touched an adjacent position from the current or offsetted location of the star in the image.

That right there is 1/5 * 1/8 = 1/40 odds.

The choice of landscape could have been water, ice, glaciation, beach, mountainous, rocky, dunes, meadows, forestation, and I am sure there are other combinations of biomes we could imagine. So let's say 1/10. The camera could have been positioned four ways. One where the waterway was either going from left in the foreground to right in the distance as currently rendered in both pictures, straight to the horizon, right in the foreground to left in the distance, or no foreground ice with water straight to the horizon.

That is another 1/10 * 1/4 = 1/40 odds.

Using just these numbers we get 1/40 * 1/40 = 1/1600 or 0.0625% odds.

The original discussion shows another oddity about how the the exo-system is in the Aquarius constellation.

That is another 1/88 odds.

1/1600 * 1/88 = 1 in 140,800 or 0.000710227272...% odds.

We are not even factoring in the positions of the two other planets being in the same position of the light rings and the other ice features.

Impressively weird.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in