The Language of Vampyr

a reply to: Direne

If we consider En-lil his closest association is with wind often as a metaphor for spirit, yet wind does not exist and neither does spirit, rather it is dynamic interactions such as fate, destiny and time, as related to the cult of En-lil, they are clearly not existential but relate to dynamic patterns between air currents of differing temperature and naturally doesn't relate directly to biology, thus if we are considering phenomena generated by flow of energy, not necessarily the energy itself and hence the divide, an individual resides within that and will experience such directly, as much as they will actual wind, i did not state the generation of choice is at the level of the individual but the actual choosing is.

The terminology and practise of religion is only an interface and some will establish better and more extensive connection than others, one shouldn't confuse the interface with actual reality, the interface could be considered a simulation, it is neither the person nor that which they connect with but an abstraction.

If we consider hobbyists such as the Free Masons and their activities in every town and city throughout the West they transform society according to their doctrines, but they are an interface that translates the imaginings of kabbalists and their supposed connection that presume to act as a hub, a very curious net-working, if this looks to be leading to a zombie Apocalypse one could perhaps re-consider the nature of those connections, perhaps they only connect to the dark web.

Fascinated. Something new to ponder. Commenting so I don't lose this.

a reply to: Direne

the thing I think about simulations is that every human simulation we make is based on what we percieve to be reality, we model the earth and the plants and animals even fantasy and and sci fi stuff its all based on our own reality.

Even if what we call reality is a simulation whoever or whatever made it had to base it on something and that something has to have looked like what we percieve to be reality.

So it had to be real at one point and at least we know it is or was beautiful.

a reply to: sapien82

Yes, sapien82, a simulation, any simulation, is always to the image and liking of the simulator. The problem with the simulation is that you, the one being simulated, have no choice to choose when to terminate the simulation. Those running the simulation decide when to terminate it, much as when you delete a file in your hard disk. You never ask the file whether it wants to be terminated or not. You simply press the Delete key.

a reply to: Madrusa

i did not state the generation of choice is at the level of the individual but the actual choosing is

The actual choosing is also a simulation of the act of choosing. So deep the simulation is. So perfect, so thoroughly crafted, so minutely engineered. The gods created a mirror, but they didn't like the image the mirror reflects back, so they wanted the mirror broken. Except that those tasked with the mission to break the mirror didn't break it. Satanael and Azazel disobeyed the command. Interesting enough Azazel was not a Watcher, he was a Nephilim, the first one being born from Lilith and Semjaza. It means he was not a human. He was a seed of the Watchers, the one who valued free will and hence was hated by the gods.

one shouldn't confuse the interface with actual reality

I agree. The simulators shouldn't confuse the interface with actual reality. They don't do it. But gods forget that for the simulated ones the simulation is their only Reality and they have the right to defend that Reality, even at the risk of neglecting the existence of simulators. Gods use messengers to interact with humans under the excuse that humans wouldn't stand their vision. In modern language the excuse is that there cannot be a disclosure because humans won't stand the truth.

I understand sometimes an interface is required, but my concern is about who owns and controls the interface. No interface, no interaction. Perhaps Giselians are tasked with that mission: to guarantee neither side, nor SV17q, nor aliens, take control of the interface. Or perhaps it is in their interest for an interaction to never happen.

Look at yourself in the mirror, Ninlil, what do you see?
No, don’t answer me now.
Think of that image and rejoice.
You are yourself, unique and very special.
As we all are, but many times just don’t realize.

a reply to: Direne

I notice that most scientists only ask and postulate "how" we could be living in a simulation, rather than "what if" and the ramifications that would have on the ego of humans.

Being told "you don't technically exist" would be something that would make society crumble, it would make disclosure of "aliens" seem like a walk in the park by comparison..

a reply to: Direne

Is this why the buddhist monks chant mantras to the deceased in order to assist their soul in not being trapped here , the trick as the buddha calls it ?

I cant remember the exact passage from the tibetan book of the dead.

I remember from the documentary though the monks would chant to the recently deceased in order to help their soul to pass on and not be trapped in "reincarnation" or this simulation , I think they sit with the dead for 3 days repeating mantras so the soul will hear the mantra and not be trapped here in the material world.

Could it be the tibetans have found a way to be free from the simulation

as even suicide is just like hitting the restart button and you get a fresh new shell for the ghost in the machine

a reply to: Direne

In the realm of ideas you can call things what you will, an illusion or simulation, neither concern greater reality, if a choice transpires in your mind that is your choice accountability and all, it is also the case that the choice will be determined by the nature of your mind, others might make different choice, a local choice for local people. Your story of the mirror also would reflect the attitude toward Vanir and the principle of the Divine incarnate, that such doctrines are evil, but again there's that supposed schism which is all in the mind.

In terms of an interface everyone has their own personal connection according to their own personal potential which again is down to nature, but that is reinforced through collective understanding, thus a religion helping to inform decision making and awareness of potential, the nature of that interface and what it can potentially connect with dependent upon the qualities of that collective and the strength of their tradition. A secret society will look to develop their own interface and not share it with anyone but given their nature that's going to be a limited hangout and they're welcome to it.

a reply to: Madrusa

there is also the possibility that what we call free will as it appears to us is actually governed by a higher set of laws which we do not have the capacity to understand or even be aware of which control our every choice and action although appearing to us as though we had chosen it ourselves.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: Direne

I notice that most scientists only ask and postulate "how" we could be living in a simulation, rather than "what if" and the ramifications that would have on the ego of humans.

Being told "you don't technically exist" would be something that would make society crumble, it would make disclosure of "aliens" seem like a walk in the park by comparison..

What would that actually mean to someone , being told they dont technically exist even though we appear to be very real
I dont think it would really make much difference, we can love , we can sense , we can create
what is more real than that ?
We know nothing different , so I think it wont matter because we really have no context or frame of reference to compare , real reality , to simulated virtual reality of the matrix .

Only those who had been through the veil and witnessed real reality would then be able to make a judgement of the difference, or the tiny mistakes or glitches haha.

a reply to: sapien82

Objectively speaking you can reduce everything to a singularity call it the universe and deny any personal responsibility, on the other hand subjectively speaking you could reasonably claim to be the Universe and take credit for everything, either option is amazing, what people are more freaking out about these days though is that their governments and academic and religious institutions appear to be simulations created by those that believe it's all about illusion and perception management rather than substance, so when people start noticing how weird all that is they shift the blame onto the Universe and suggest that is the simulation.

a reply to: Madrusa

I think that is the greater question for me , how much responsibility do I have in this system , game, simulation

I am quite happy just being the background , but also happy if I had a role to play .

Hypnosis.

I really like hypnosis

especially since James Baird and James Easdaile two Scottish surgeons were pioneers in hypnotic study and practical medicine with hypnosis or mesmerism as it was known then!

I think it would be fun to hypnotise people , so I think I can practice on my partner and my friends hahaha

that would be funny

I am curious to know if anyone has remote viewed the coordinates that FL group have posted on their website over the years.

Those are physical locations where events have supposedly taken place.

Remote viewing is apparently independent of time , and your consciousness or "awareness" can travel anywhere in the universe and to any time

those who worked with Ingo swann were able to put their awareness into the past or the future

so someone with good abilities could for example remote view these locations on the specific time and date that the event took place and describe what they have seen with their awareness.

a reply to: sapien82

I am quite happy just being the background , but also happy if I had a role to play

The statement that the universe is a simulation doesn't really say much. I guess it would be a better statement to
say that the universe is a fishbowl, or a Petri dish. Whether it was created or not makes no difference for either the
fish or the bacteria. Whatever the case, you still are responsible for your acts and you do have a role to play.

About hypnosis and remote viewing I do not believe in either. Hypnosis is mainly based on suggestion and it suffices for you to translate the words of the hypnosis expert for the entire thing to fail (or, if the expert is talking to you in your mother language, it suffices to count backwards from 3 to 1 before repeating to yourself those words for the hypnosis effect to vanish). Remote viewing is plainly pseudoscience.

a reply to: Direne


I completely agree that I am responsible for my thoughts and my acts
I think my purpose is to communicate and make connections .

what do you make of the evidence of mesmerism found by James Easdaile the scottish surgeon who worked for the east india company ?

as for CRV as a Pseudoscience , a pseudoscience that both the USSR and USA spent millions researching it for more than 20 years
if it was pseudoscience why did they pump so much money into it ?
or was it just a strategic move by the russians to get the americans to research something that was bunk and waste time and money on it. as a form of asset terrorism.

the american intelligence found that the USSR were spending 60 million rubules annually on psychotronic research

which then gave birth to the stargate project in the USA.
and ran for nearly 20 years , why would anyone throw money into something that is rubbish at a level of a world super power ?

Why dont FL group look into CRV and do this and just see for yourselves ?
you never know ,

I think that CRV is kind of what shamans do in order to see certain places in the future , such as the giant valley with all the deer in a future time .

a reply to: sapien82

Its considerably more likely that the stargate program was a backdoor in order to sell secrets both ways between the the soviets and the Americans than people "seeing" places with their mind.

That's my belief in regards to why the program continued for as long as it did. Alot of myth and lore in fringe topics is also quite possibly how espionage is dealt with.

a reply to: sapien82

if it was pseudoscience why did they pump so much money into it ?

Because you never know if it's going to work unless you test it. That's what happened with Lockheed Martin F-35 ($1.5 billion wasted), Project Nike ($20 billion wasted), and Litoral Combat Ship ($37 billion wasted) to just mention a few of those projects that turn into fiasco.

About Mr. Easdaile, I think he was trying hard to help others through mesmerism, even when the method he used was totally useless. Chloroform proved the way to go, and it was another Scottish guy, Mr. James Y. Simpson, the first to demonstrate the anaesthetic properties of chloroform on humans. So I guess Easdaile's failure led to Simpson's success. I respect both of them.

On remote viewing, I see the fundamental problem is not just that poor quality of the allegedly remote-viewed data, or the fact that statistically there is no difference between remote viewing and pure guessing; the fundamental problem is that even if we assume it could work, it is a paratechnique that relies on what the remote viewer tells you he saw, and we all know humans make very bad witnesses and they are prone to lie. Better to have a remote sensing satellite. You have a very nice example of how bad humans are as observers in the many quantum mechanics experiments in which an observer is involved. Apparently, human do believe that when you are not observing an electron, the electron behaves as a particle matter, but when you observe it, it will behave as a wave. Can anyone explain to me the difference between a 'detector' and 'a human observer'?

a reply to: Direne

well if it didnt work why didnt they can the project after the first year ?
Yet it ran for about 20 years according to Russel Targ and Ingo Swann

its not like they had machine parts contracts for building a weapon of war they'd lose out on
its just people sitting in rooms thinking , there arent thousands of workers working on the components who will get laid off if the project doesnt work.

Not a lot to lose there , yet it ran for 20 years and they spent billions on it

Seems awfully wasteful if it doesnt work.

The difference between a human and a detector is we can rebel against our programming/owners and quit because we aren't being paid enough to detect things.

or another easier one , we can quit detecting and walk out of there and go for a beer


those are just dumb answers but there isnt much difference between a robot and a human , maybe we can love
and have emotions
those appear to be the only differences

a reply to: Direne

Word up, Direne!

Isn't all human communication a "paratechnique"?

A remote sensing satellite sounds expensive, like all those other barrier-smashing boy toys you described. RV, allegedly, costs nothing, is fully compartmentalized, leaves no trace of surveillance, and can be conducted from a local community centre, with room in the budget for the very finest complimentary snacks and beverages ("It's free real estate!"). Hasn't it been the case, that some RV'ers considerably exceed the no-better-than-guessing bell curve? Is that because they're better at "seeing", or better at being honest about what they saw? Or is this idea yet another paratechnical obfuscation?

Detectors are highly selective - to some bandwidth or frequency or modality. They'll detect everything in that band. Humans can sense things they didn't plan to look for. Then can also miss things they were specifically looking for. So I guess the difference is, humans have problems to do with knowing what they're looking for.