Friday, October 17, 2008

Economy, Prime Directive & Creationism

I'm no economist, but it doesn't require one to discern the need for a new economy. What we need is a whole new standard of the American dollar (assuming, rightly or wrongly, there will be any money in the next paradigm). Since money (at least as we know it) is entirely an illusion, printed out of thin air with nothing backing it, we need to erase all debt and begin with something infinitely more real. We obviously need to abolish the "Federal" Reserve. Civilized enough people don't allow a private banking oligarchy/cartel, or any other, to make policies.

I can't emphasize enough the concept of forgiveness and clean slates; simply love.

On a completely different note, nothing spectacular happened on 10/14 (which unfortunately is my birthday) for the same reason nothing as such has happened throughout known history: Yep, the ol' Prime Directive 'tis. Trust me that I will be vindicated for that "crazy" idea one day. Or if there's ever any overt intervention by advanced (enough) beings, it will almost certainly be only when things are decidedly worse than they are now. Either that or they're waiting for us to make real progress on our before they'd show up... I admit everything is looking more precarious now than ever before.

For those unfamiliar with the Blossom Goodchild Internet craze, well, you haven't been to sites like ATS and UM. (See earlier entries). There allegedly was to be an arrival of nonhumans (in a huge spacecraft) according to either channeled or "channeled" information received by Ms. G. Naturally I wanted to be more in the spirit of the thing, but there was that nagging little problem of everything coming out like bad science fiction.

To speak of a very different kind of airhead, the thought of Sarah Palin as President (or just VP) of the US is one of the more terrifying ones in history. Yet the notion somehow got me thinking about something rather unexpected: Is it possible that Earth somehow really is 6000-7000 years old? Could all the technology and methodology of dating objects be faulty, illusory? I very seriously doubt it, of course. The age of our planet is virtually certainly much closer to what evolutionists believe than what creationists espouse.

Even if certain religious (monotheistic) people are right about Earth Creation itself happening just a few thousand years ago, that can't possibly mean they're the favorites of the (alleged) Creator. They do and/or enable far too much pathology (evil) to ever receive any significant Brownie Points from God. He, She or It would surely dismiss them with something like, "Aw, you folks just got lucky with the age of Earth, but you're otherwise some sick, nature and freedom-hating dweebs." (10/17)

Need to be clear that my desire is the exact opposite of the PD, and I very much hope to be proven wrong about it. I'd rather see (the right kind of) nonhuman, or perhaps (sociologically advanced) extraplanetary human, intervention now, before major shit hits fans, and I (rightly or wrongly) don't believe humanity (as a whole) can make enough morally intelligent progress on its own, or in a timely enough way (before ecological disasters happen), to invite their presence in the gentle, strictly friendly neighbor way. Does anyone doubt that the mere appearance of an undeniably extraterrestrial craft, with nothing else but merely showing up, will or would be automatically viewed as a hostile act by too many human beings? How many of us have a true grasp of the indescribably staggering extent to which this paradigm is utterly ruled by primitive, paranoid, fear-and-hatred-based (pathological) people?

Btw, I'm a skeptic in the original, true sense; not the currently popular connotation of being synonymous with reactionary doubt. That's pseudoskepticism. I'd say at least 90% of those who refer to themselves as skeptics today are really pseudoskeptics.

The real issue, as I'm convinced history will prove, isn't that there's no proof (of the nonhuman presence), it's in too many people's unwillingness to begin the proof process. (That's not saying it's possible to unravel every mystery there is, but we could have a whopping heck of a lot more knowledge than we have now if enough people really wanted it). The real issue is too many people's great comfort level with secrecy-based government(s). So-called "skeptics" (pseudoskeptics) are first, foremost and primarily brainwashed into believing psychopathic insanity like the very existence of the National "Security" State is normal.

The 10/14 nonsense is but a symptom of the much larger disease of rule by secrecy in general. (10/19)

No comments: