Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 26, 2024, 5:50 am UTC    
September 13, 2005 04:54PM
> Like bad journalism, there will always be doomsayers who think the sky is falling.

The sky is falling...

> Even though I see the potential for American/western civilization to collapse, I also
> see the way so many fight to keep the idiots from dragging it down.

It really depends who are the "idiots" here. Most idiots will stand in line like saps until the chaos factor is fully prevalent...

>> " In other words, society only degenerates since it is always the lowest common
>> denominator... "
>
> maybe im losing it, but that sentence has a lot of words but says
> and means nothing

You must be "losing it"! smiling smiley

>> "Well, every macro cycle will showcase a complete breakdown. Like the breakdown of the
>> bicameral mind in prior macro cycles. Obviously Atlantis was in a prior macro cycle or
>> pre-History as some call it..."
>
> Since there is absolutely no evidence to support any kind of Break down at any point
> this proves nothing.

IMHO you are in huge denial! There is plenty of proof and evidence of the break down of the bicameral mind. You should do much better research...

> secondly you reference a theory on awareness referencing the Bicameral mind, that at
> its core is flawed..."Julian Jaynes' The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of
> the Bicameral Mind" one of many conclusion Jaynes reached while studying the Iliad was
>
> * Iliadic man did not have subjectivity as do we; he had no awareness of his awareness
> of the world, no internal mind space to introspect upon. In distinction to our own
> subjective conscious minds, we can call the mentality of the Myceneans a bicameral mind.
> Volition, planning, initiative is organized with no consciousness whatever and
> then 'told' to the individual in his familiar language, sometimes with the visual aura
> of a familiar friend or authority figure or 'god', or sometimes as a voice alone. The
> individual obeyed these hallucinated voices because he could not 'see' what to do by
> himself. . .

Obviously, you have absolutely no idea about the real and true significance of what you just wrote... smiling smiley

In other words, your personal reality reference must truly be out of sync... smiling smiley

There is extreme significance of hearing voices and images directly in the brain...Today that is simply viewed as a disease!!!

> secondly anytime Atlantis is raised in a argument to prove a point it just results in
> not being taken seriously.

That is idiotic at best. I didn't raise the issue of Atlantis! Someone else did...

> No matter whether existed or not, for any to say or insinuate that they have Knowledge
> of Atlantis and or its supposed ancient lore or history is flat out fabrication.

Unless, of course, one is hearing and seeing directly into their brian like in the bicameral mind period... smiling smiley

I just love it... smiling smiley

> for that evidence to exist there would be no debate on the existence of a land or City
> Called Atlantis.

You can continue to believe in whatever nonsense you want to believe!!!

>> "I am sorry, but your definition of age must not be the same as mine! To me an age is
>> directly related to the perceived precessional movement of the Earth or around 25K
>> years but I would say the the half cycle or around 12.5K years would also be very
>> meaningfull since one achieves flow reversal at half cycles... "\
>
> definition of AGE: historic period: an era of history having some distinctive feature;
> example; "we live in a litigious age"
>
> Age
> a. A period in the history of humankind marked by a distinctive characteristic or
> achievement: the Stone Age; the computer age.
> b. A period in the history of the earth, usually shorter than an epoch: the Ice Age.
> c. A period of time marked by the presence or influence of a dominant figure: the
> Elizabethan Age.
>
> Semantics a game played when at a loss for words.

Well, obviously you want to suggest that there is a lot of lattitude in the definition of an age. I understand that, but that is also why many of us are trying to get more precise and look at it (age cycle) in reference to precession movement, like year/day cycles are also related to specific cyclic movements...

> if we are in Decline societal wise, its because people no longer try to learn, nor care
> to learn, they parrot what they hear, right or wrong, accept fantasy over fact and only
> believe what suits their world view....

Whatever! That is just nonsense!!!

> " violence has no place in the world, people are peaceful by nature, just talk it over
> with you enemy they will understand. Religion is worthless and a crutch for weak minds,
> Science is false and a tool of Satan. Aliens built everything in the past becuase
> people back then were stupid."

LOL!!!

> Society is changing, for better or worse who knows, society always changes.
> sometimes they fall, sometimes they change so much they seem to dissappear.
> but change happens. its not the end of the world.

It is the end of an age. No one said it was the end of the world...

Please note that Earth has survived many Age and Era changes in the past, but what History also shows is that all prior civilizations have become extinct. Only the species has survived, probably in much smaller groups...

Now, you can try to deny, ignore, twist, spin and/or dismiss this real [u} evidence [/u] but it still fully supports my position...

All prior civilizations have died (100% of them) therefore, using straight and forward logic, so will this present one...and, therefore, there is absolutely nothing that you can do to change this fact...

--wirelessguru1
Subject Author Posted

Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Paul H. September 12, 2005 11:39AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

tanya September 12, 2005 12:19PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Stephanie September 12, 2005 12:45PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 12, 2005 02:11PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Peski September 12, 2005 02:38PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Stephanie September 12, 2005 03:52PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Peski September 12, 2005 04:21PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Stephanie September 12, 2005 04:37PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 12, 2005 07:54PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Peski September 13, 2005 12:52PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 13, 2005 04:34PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Peski September 13, 2005 05:28PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 13, 2005 06:55PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Jon K September 13, 2005 02:20PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 13, 2005 04:54PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Pacal September 13, 2005 08:44PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 13, 2005 09:00PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Pacal September 14, 2005 08:20AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 14, 2005 11:31AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Pacal September 15, 2005 10:12AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

bernard September 27, 2005 07:41PM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Pete Clarke September 14, 2005 08:54AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

wirelessguru1 September 14, 2005 11:38AM

Re: Why Bad Science Pervades "Journalism"

Pete Clarke September 16, 2005 03:25AM

Re: Why Over-Reactions Do Not Convince

Dusty September 13, 2005 03:22PM

Re: Why Over-Reactions Do Not Convince

Pete Clarke September 14, 2005 03:08AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login