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.

 

The Language of Vampyr

page: 137
218
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: ATODASO
hey ATODASO:



your yardstick for measuring other (interstellar) cultures is calibrated to the basest drives of humankind.

Excellent point. Not only that, the basest drive of all life of any kind, unless it is not geared towards assimilating other life for its energy…and it's important to recognize, I think, that this is a strong possibility in other life, unless it's already been assimilated….



why would a "benevolent" civilization travel?

wonder.

curiosity.

the need to know the other, the need to see something new.


Or to escape the engineering Direne has outlined, or to escape the assimilation by others, the engineering, and being turned into just another consumer.




posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: ATODASO

I was expecting the correct answer: to help others?


there's a wrong answer lol?

personally, i reject the idea that we require an interventionist god. we have all the tools we need to get where we're going.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: fr33coll3ct1v3



the universe is predatory in the sense that no creature exists which doesn't consume energy ..none that we know so far..personally i think evolution is geared towards the realization of such a creatureentity


Exactly. Personally, I think the same, and that even, human life may have once been such a "creature, " and was assimilated and its posture assumed in the universe, perhaps faked, as part of an assimilation campaign of all worlds, all creatures. This, perhaps, outlines the war we are fighting, in short.
tetra



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: tetra50

In my view, any civilization bound to resources is bound to extinction unless they find a way to reconstruct their relations with Nature and the environment. In many societies people seem to be notoriously unable to deal with their inner nature, but they are very keen on trying to manipulate external nature.

Some of them are even extremely keen on trying to manipulate other planets while they are still unable to cope with their inner nature. Technology can get you to far away places but one: your inner world.


Turns out you and I may agree about more than I originally thought. But I remain suspicious…it is necessary for my survival.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
who around here knows why human beings laugh...has anyone looked into a mirror and laughed ...don't be shy take a moment ..be very serious..make a big smile..do it.
it feels good...are you happy...i bet..
what is happiness..remember that moment your eyes were closed while you laughed...that moment of observation you missed that's was it...can you get it back..if you can, make that moment eternal.

it is the only moment that counts.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ATODASO

I agree with you.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50




Why is all this just "undercurrent" knowledge, and while everyone supposedly knows it already, the paradigm is misrepresented purposefully all the time?


Because the bases of societies have been weakened substantially due to the increasing rationalization of social life. The loss of freedom is also inseparable from the loss of meaning. Meaning is being debased. If you wish to understand
how a shift in paradigm works, you need to look at what people actually do with language and what language does to them, and what language means to them.

A change of paradigm, for evil purposes, requires tampering with the meaning of words and with an aestheticization of evil. This is the furthest reach of the intelligence of evil. Radical evil is the exercise of a superior intelligence working out the implications of that superiority.

Rationalization of privacy and feelings is the first step to debase a society. The result is separate individuals
and social groups that in the end have lost their freedoms to élites and faceless economic rationalities.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Direne

Direne: You speak of "inner nature," of the human population, and said to me, personally, to "accept my nature."
What is it in my nature I haven't accepted? How do you know my nature, I wonder, to say I haven't accepted it.

More importantly, what I'm trying to show in my posts to you, to communicate to you, is that our nature cannot be determined by past events, if those events are scripted and the history of events has been supplanted, scripted and/or faked. Now those three last things are pretty important. But that will cloud the issue of what I'm trying to say here.
How can our nature be determined, much less if history is "false," but if we are being tampered with by control?

tetra



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

tetra50, despite your name, you are not a fish.

You talk about your personal experiences with the control system, but you never told me about them. Do you feel you can share those experiences to me here, or are they too personal?



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Direne
First, I am well aware of what language both means and does to a people. A few of my posts have been about that, but perhaps not on this thread, particularly. We are speaking in code here a lot, whether we know it or wish to participate. The language has been manipulated so that what we think we are saying, phoenetically we are actually saying the direct opposite of, instead.

I don't need any lessons on that. You are precisely correct in that it was meant to debase meaning, and further the speakers of this language. Meaning is being debased in all kinds of ways other than communication, though this is the primary, fundamental tool, as it is how we express ourselves and connect with one another. I am well aware of this. And so, we as a species are being debased, as well. The debasement of us is carried out partly by changing our history, and making it appear we are an all-consuming, warring race, amongst other things. And the meaning of much of whom we are is being degraded and debased, by this appearance, while what we have to offer as a species Picasso, Rembrandt, Shakespeare, Mozart, Beethoven…..or history will be looped back to say they were actually all of this different species that is controlling us.

Even our works of art, literature and music is debased because at times they have been stolen and attributed to others, or "history" again loops back to destroy whatever they stood for: such as, perhaps Ayn Rand and others.
There are other historical/creative figures who've been minimized by creating a different than actual history for them…..
The meaning of literature and writing is destroyed, by fine distinctions, in general being destroyed. I will return with an example of what I mean by that, if needed. The way people read, speak and perceive, in general, is being manipulated to achieve all that, and I understand it better than most.




Radical evil is the exercise of a superior intelligence working out the implications of that superiority.


Why in the world would anyone think it's logical, even, much less true to assume this intelligence is superior?
The species with this intelligence (part of the Dominion that they call themselves, I believe) isn't necessarily superior in intelligence just because it conned our leaders and won an interstellar war that overtook us. Good doesn't bring a weapon to the battle, or perhaps even know one exists before it's too late. That doesn't make the evil that wages that war or takeover more intelligent. This is what "they" wish you to think.
tetra
edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: tetra50

tetra50, despite your name, you are not a fish.

You talk about your personal experiences with the control system, but you never told me about them. Do you feel you can share those experiences to me here, or are they too personal?


Yes, they are too personal to be discussed within this forum. Privately, not so much. However, most of what I write on this computer, I highly doubt is private.

And you still aren't willing to answer, nor agree with, though you've agreed about the control loop system, its supplanted history, and how individuals are controlled and why, but still don't answer the logical conclusion that if all that is tampered with, it is no longer possible to assume the nature of anything or anyone, but the control loop we are living within, through our and your identifying it and what it's purpose is in regards to the human species. Once that tampering is in place, nothing at all can be assumed, except that it will appear the only logical conclusion is the species needed to be controlled, by a superior species (just another assumption, really.)
tetra
edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

OK. You can use the private messaging system if you wish.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50
a reply to: criticalhit
Hey Criticalhit:


The stuff is about communication, the rule is "I reveal nothing about me" and there's no reason at all to do so. Because you know, no one on ats uses too much personal info if offered to utterly refute everything you have to say on ATS lol, lol, lol...


Your first sentence, there, isn't necessarily true. Many of us have participated on this thread for a long time because we doubted the assertion you make in your first sentence. That's kind of the whole point here. No, this "stuff" may not at all just be about communication. And if communication is what they're about, then why be so mysterious about their motives and etc.?
Just on the face of it, so to speak, take the development of an "anti-language" and then intellectually consider the content of those videos, replete with flashing lights, haunting music and images….anti-language being something that members of FL can understand but others cannot, in a group of people they are mingling about with. The stated motivations don't seem to fly, just with the little bit of information we're being given. And so……you see long time participants of this thread challenging the way they are.
tetra


I understand where you guys are at.

I'd openly even say, when I first read the line from Direne: in regards to "Food and Go Away" i'd be a liar if I said my first thought wasn't... well that's a "BS theory" (and again i'm absorbing this all from a temporal distance, it's day 5) but as the conversation devolved for a few pages into argumentation (even if it took a while) within this realm of i'll tell you nothing in certain regards. The statement to me took on new meaning and I find it very interesting to look at from different angles.

Dropping the simple aspects of communication, can a show them a hammer and hammer a nail will they understand what a hammer is let's say... of course

BUT over time... with certain things being unable to be communicated (in this case perhaps realistically just because of refusal to do so) will you get any further than "leave or food"? and like I said I'd define food the same way you just did, consume energy or destroy was a fair way to say it...

In a not so "literal" sense or in the way I thought of it when it was said... is seemed silly.

But, at the end of the current incarnation of the thread, it is precariously close to that result for several pages.

Direne also mentioned earlier (not a direct quote) barriers to human communication from languages. I must admit that I can see how "Chinese to English" would over time in negotiations reach the same place in exactly the same way as there are "words" that have no translation, feelings and emotions which are expressed only through tones and what have you in which the other party (surely unlike Direne) isn't just "refusing" to convey but rather simply Can't

So when asked "what they do", what "they study"

I can absolutely see "from afar" a purpose in choosing to not convey certain information to illustrate "what they do" "what's on her mind" whatever, a very real point about language and say.... it's not at all a wrong concept really, it breaks down to "Prey or food" in a way if there are aspects that can not be explained in language and why anyone would study language to eliminate this in a world of... "secondary genetic weapons" as example.

And NO, no, no, no... I have no envy of playing that game for a year.

From a "who" perspective, i'd have to go back and reread this very carefully but from a "what" it makes sense... "what do you do" regardless of who it is, what is your interest seems fairly well explained to me.

Ranging from... initial suppositions to "these are a bunch of rich goth kids" to "it's think tank of highly intelligent individuals" to "an internet hoax" to "The NSA"

Remove all that, remove yourself from the picture... it's a really informative and interesting little experiment from any angle.

(says the guy who was NOT in the chair being asked to administer shocks to a stranger on command) in all fairness.



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: tetra50

tetra50, despite your name, you are not a fish.

You talk about your personal experiences with the control system, but you never told me about them. Do you feel you can share those experiences to me here, or are they too personal?


Here's a little about my sig:




THE GIST
Embryos for humans and other animals often look alike at certain developmental stages because they share ancient genes.

These ancient genes are expressed during a middle "phylotypic period" of embryonic development for all species.

Developing human, fish and other embryos therefore at times share features, such as tails and gill-like structures.

Human embryos resemble those of many other species because all animals carry very ancient genes. These genes date back to the origin of cells, which are expressed during a middle phase of embryonic development, according to two separate papers published in this week's Nature.

The findings help to explain why our embryos have a tail when they are a few weeks old and why human embryos retain other characteristics, such as fur-like hair and fish embryo similarities, seen in the developmental stages of other species.

"On average, the similarities will be even stronger for more closely related species," Diethard Tautz told Discovery News.

"However, it is indeed true that even fish and human embryos go through a phase that looks very comparable, while they are rather different before and after this," added Tautz, who co-authored one of the papers and serves as managing director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology.

He and colleague Tomislav Domazet-Loso tackled the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" puzzle. This expression means that a more advanced organism, like humans, will resemble less advanced species during it's development stages.
Link


So, Not a fish but my link shows we may have all had a fish stage in development…..That's the subtle point of my name….we are all developing and evolving every second we are alive. Here you get a unique view of that actually happening.

And, as well, there used to be a site called TetraWatch, though I've not been there in quite some time, and do not know if it's still around. It discussed many issues I write about.
edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit
You make some very good points, there, critical hit, especially in regards to language and communication. But language can also be used to not communicate what we wish to hide, or to obfuscate, for that matter.

And we actually did link FL to DARPA in a few different ways. That's a little different than the NSA….
tetra

ETA: Also, if it's all just about the consumption of other energy to survive, then it's still just part of this paradigm, which means there still may be something outside it, not like that, not like either becoming predator or prey. Is this really considered "superior" in intellect? I think not.
edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: questions



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

I'm good at role play, that's all tetra. My name here (in this form of myself here) Critical Hit, is a bit of a reflection of how important that "hobby" turned out to be in my life. I'm exceptionally well wired at this point to completely absorb myself in a "role" I gain a lot of data from doing so, take pleasure in it. I use it all the time, i'm good enough at putting myself into someone else's head space to a point where I haven't had to have a job in any meaningful way for decades by understanding what people want and will do for me. Who they expect me to "be" to fulfill their needs.

I "get more" always by being in "role" than I do from interrogation, demand etc. I ask "what do they want" not "who are they" Which if you ever have seen the show Babylon 5 were actually the 2 questions 2 of the oldest races in the fictional Universe asked of new races they met. The "good guys, the Vorlons" would ask "who are you" the "bad guys the Shadows" would ask "what do you want" (I don't imply good or bad to either question, just think it's interesting via approach...)

I ask... "what do you want" and provide that as my exchange, I get more information that way the vast majority of the time. It is in a way a "shadowier" approach I suppose, because it's never stated. As example many years ago I was a personal trainer... I was the top seller of the service in 40 gyms in the chain, the "what I want" on the client's part was always the same... "to feel more attractive" the provided action was to let them pay me "a young attractive guy" to make them feel that way. That relationship was never spoken but I was no 1 because I determined what they wanted and gave it... the women didn't care what their squat thrust number was lol, they wanted me to say nice things and be encouraging unlike their husbands.

I want more information, I provide what is wanted. She "wants" to not reveal certain information, the reasons become immaterial, obviously it will not "work" for her/them that way, ruins the game, maybe there is a "can't" as simple as non-disclosure terms, safety. Many possibilities.

Back to communication... why entertain a negative? Can't, Won't, Don't. They all mean No

"what do you want?" To "answer this way and these things" "to be vague and have you reflect upon statements rather than directly answer things sometimes" "for you to accept how i'm doing things and play along not fight it"

okay, there is a start of acquisition of data a means of exchange it may be by opinion a "trade imbalance" so was the purchase of Manhattan, it's what you do with it however, the other direction is a negative, it yields no trade.

as a question:

You say you have connected them to Darpa? How? Is this more inference? They studied this ergo that are working with that? OR does that connection have substance? I'd like to know more plz



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 06:55 PM
link   
@Direne

What's the dizzle with the countdown?

I would imagine it has been hit on before and I likely skimmed over it somehow. But could you elaborate as to August 4th 7:15ish Am my time?

You know, whatever you "can" like, is it a good day to take my kids to a remote lava tube buried in the side of a mountain with essentially iron walls it's, own limited eco system, water and single defensible opening?

Or is it just like Andryl's birthday or something, the day you all go to Maui lol



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

Hey criticalhit. I understand your way of looking at things, and how you've made it work for you. You are definitely good at survival within this paradigm. However, I would point out we all have a place we must draw the line.
And I'm assuming you have one to. Not that I have any market on them, but it's called principals and integrity. One, in my experience here, cannot go on assimilating to needs in such an environment, without being presented with a choice as to where you draw the line.

Not that I am particularly good, personally, or as it may appear to others, to know this; yet, I do understand it qutie well.




I want more information, I provide what is wanted. She "wants" to not reveal certain information, the reasons become immaterial, obviously it will not "work" for her/them that way, ruins the game, maybe there is a "can't" as simple as non-disclosure terms, safety. Many possibilities.



The reasons for which she doesn't wish to provide us certain information, are not immaterial to what we seek, I think, here.
Certainly, there are many safety issues involved here. You are not safe anyway. Do you really think going along with whatever's happening here to make a living, will remove you from that and choosing sides, drawing lines in the sand? That you won't be affected in your personal lives eventually, that it will be enough to protect you?
It won't, in short, no matter how you wiggle under the bar, for the audience, and no matter how much the audience likes you. And at some time, probably when you've realized what I speak of, someone will hand you the safety considerations, just past your choosing sides and talking. It's not pretty, then, what happens. Anyone can look at me and see it. It's friggin awful what can happen to you just to serve an appearance, and then you'll go along with just about anything.

Since suffering certain health and environmental issues of my own, I've openly said on a transhumanism thread that if the opportunity presented itself, I would take a body made for me, artificially, even though I've disagereed quite openly and vocally about transhumanism. The point here is, I was allowed to objecrt after the facts, so my objections didn't matter.The other thing: you ask for more answers to what I've explained about DARPA and links to FL. Unfortuantely, friend, the only answer I am currently willing to provide is read the entire thread……

Sry. No one gave me the synopsis…..not that this is why I'm not giving it to you. I just don't have the time……or I'm inherently lazy. lol
tetra
edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-6-2015 by tetra50 because: clarity and grammar



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

I've read the whole thread night one, I just didn't want to go back if you were willing to synopsis the evidence again which you may or may not have time for, so I figured i'd ask, i'd just want to re read it slower.

On the rest...

It goes back to "i've been doing this for a year" thing

It just seems apparent I shouldn't waste a year on a question that hasn't brought forth fruit. Ask other questions. Obviously certain things will not be forth coming, I hold no "moral" anything or requirement to a thread on Ats, feels like a waste of energy to pursue an answer to something that is not going to be forth coming. Employ other means is the next step.

In the meantime, there are a whole lot of research topics on those pages, I would guess even if it's an elaborate hoax those studies have been read and thought about and i'd be interested in opinions on that stuff which seems to be somewhat forth coming even if vague.

Again I get the frustration, etc, etc... but if you and others have tried and failed to get "answers" on a particular subject all year, it feels very useless to bump my head against the same wall and hope for a different outcome.

In the meantime @ Direne... thanks for the great research links, a lot of it is very useful information, the Bibliographies are nice, beats the hell out of finding the pertinent research n specific topics myself...

Can't, won't, don't discuss the research itself or for who or why? A lot is still there for me to "draw my own conclusions' homework already done... Can't say I mind that much.

In this case @Tetra, I thank you guys too... a year of trying to pry something that wont be given. Time is precious, I have no lack of empathy when it's spent. I solidly appreciate not having to waste it to conclude I wont get "that answer"




edit on 5-6-2015 by criticalhit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: tetra50




I understand your way of looking at things, and how you've made it work for you. You are definitely good at survival within this paradigm. However, I would point out we all have a place we must draw the line.
And I'm assuming you have one to. Not that I have any market on them, but it's called principals and integrity. One, in my experience here, cannot go on assimilating to needs in such an environment, without being presented with a choice as to where you draw the line.


You know... I have to add something here as you inject "Survival, Principals and integrity"

We keep addressing "Predator" and "Prey" but there is a third grouping "Parasite" In the most basic role play this would be "Evil, Good and True Neutral"

I am a Parasite, there is no line between predator and prey and there is no line to be drawn. So that assumption would be wrong for me. I'm not assimilating to needs in my mind I am forming symbiotic relationships. I can "take this" and you wont remove me? I would be a happy Remora in the mouth of a Shark as example. Or lol a herpes virus that never causes an infection within it's host. I'm not here to question the Shark, i'm aware it's existence is part of something at least at this stage of my development I can't control and it has "purpose" I don't try to make the Shark "thrive" as too many Sharks would be bad for the equation, not enough "Prey" is bad for me, Kill the Shark I don't continue my cycle either. it's "just a shark" and the Prey are Just Fish.

I clean the teeth, the Shark can bite the Fish, I drink the sharks blood = Happy. I don't want the Shark to devour too much I don't want the Prey to vanish. But i don't see the Prey offering me much if they are bloated and diseased aside from my demise and I don't see the Shark offering me anything if it kills all the Prey. But I don't judge either...

For me as a Remora on the Shark, I have a clear view of how many prey are left I have the benefits of a healthy school of fish nearby and I "know" if either are going bad and can hitch a ride on another Shark that's younger, stronger or just plain going elsewhere.

It is abundantly clear that research into things that may endanger "the school" that feeds the Shark i'm currently riding is prevalent in the world. Which mode of thinking the people supplying information are on doesn't much matter since I don't wish to be either Predator or Prey, I just need to know where it is best to lay my eggs, it's not a moral conflict for me, I am aware the prey must be healthy and are needed and I am aware the Shark keeps it that way, remaining in the loop as the cycle repeats itself is top priority.

And might I add, the Predator always knows it needs to leave "some Prey" The Parasite needs both, the pertinent information for it's life cycle is "where will the remaining Prey be" not "which Shark will kill the bulk of the school" That info is available, take the school of fish, it's almost plain to see where the "Bulk of Fish" are if you have the right eyes or your looking from the back of a Shark, or a Lion if your using a herd as reference. But leave the back of the Predator and swim free... figuring out where the Shark is or Lion... That's hard as hell, it's "stalking Prey" it's camouflaged.

So find the Shark and flush it out? That's a Preys job.... Ride the Shark and know where the remaining Prey is hiding to complete my life cycle that's a parasites job.




top topics



 
218
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join