• If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread
  • Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year.
  • The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

Part 2 of World corruption, lying politicians and the tragedy of 9/11.

I think there's no higher deity in your "world" than the possibilities of technology. Considering what technology is capable of being used for, I find that quite frightening.

I see technology as tools. Simply items to be used to make ones life better. One doesn't worship tools.

Myriads
 
Myriads said:
I think there's no higher deity in your "world" than the possibilities of technology. Considering what technology is capable of being used for, I find that quite frightening.

I see technology as tools. Simply items to be used to make ones life better. One doesn't worship tools.

Myriads

I realise that Myr, I was being tongue-in-cheek. Obviously you don't "worship" tools, but I was saying that technology is the closest thing you have to a deity. 😀 The quote from the film 'Contact' was made in the same spirit.

Can I ask you a favour Myr? Can you now and again, peek out from behind the 'Terminator' facade? I'm suprised you often don't answer questions with "affirmative" or "negative".

P.S. I know your speciality is I.T. but do you know anything about quantum physics or anything related?
 
I realise that Myr, I was being tongue-in-cheek. Obviously you don't "worship" tools, but I was saying that technology is the closest thing you have to a deity. The quote from the film 'Contact' was made in the same spirit.

Actually the closest thing to a deity that exists in my framework is the mindful soverign individual.

Can I ask you a favour Myr? Can you now and again, peek out from behind the 'Terminator' facade? I'm suprised you often don't answer questions with "affirmative" or "negative".

Few questions can be definitivly answered definitivly with a negative or affirmitive. Most of my world is gray. Thus these replies are the exceptions not the rules.

P.S. I know your speciality is I.T. but do you know anything about quantum physics or anything related?

I have some reading in quantum physics, enough to understand the basics, but wouldn't consider myself any form of expert on the topic. The math involved is solidly beyond me. I can look at it and get the idea that is being attempted, but not construct or do it. Most of my recent science reading and study has been in the fields of nanotechnology and biotech relating to recombinate DNA work, and viral gene splicing.

Myriads
 
That's more like it Myr!

Myriads said:
Few questions can be definitivly answered definitivly with a negative or affirmitive. Most of my world is gray. Thus these replies are the exceptions not the rules.

:blaugh: :blaugh: :blaugh: :veryhappy :veryhappy :blaugh: :veryhappy

Holy shit, but you could'nt have made it funnier if you'd said "I want your clothes, your boots and your floppy feather". 😀

Finally after all this time, I get your sense of humour you old bugger! I must be getting more mature. 😉 (Unlikely though that may seem!😛)
 
Last edited:
Myriads said:
I have some reading in quantum physics, enough to understand the basics, but wouldn't consider myself any form of expert on the topic. The math involved is solidly beyond me. I can look at it and get the idea that is being attempted, but not construct or do it. Most of my recent science reading and study has been in the fields of nanotechnology and biotech relating to recombinate DNA work, and viral gene splicing.

Myriads

How much on quantum physics have you read to have any theories about alternate wavelengths, dimensions and vibrational frequencies of existence?

P.S. Can you reccomend some authors for info about nanotechnology and neural connections between biological material and computer chips? I need more background on this myself.
 
BigJim said:
P.S. Can you reccomend some authors for info about nanotechnology and neural connections between biological material and computer chips? I need more background on this myself.
Ok Poindexter...relax.

I believe a "Where's Waldo" adventure is more in order.

Cheers.😀

P.M.S. Myriads, you're a boob.😛
 
HisDivineShadow said:
Poindexter is a stereotypical name for a geek. (Which Moses must think you are for asking that.)


Yup, for a 6'4'' 240lb godling with the body of an Adonis, (Ha! Who the hell do I think I'm kidding?) I do have my geeky moments. 😉
 
Holy shit, but you could'nt have made it funnier if you'd said "I want your clothes, your boots and your floppy feather".

Finally after all this time, I get your sense of humour you old bugger! I must be getting more mature. (Unlikely though that may seem!)


I am pleased that my response has provided you with amusement. That is a positive thing.

Regarding the material you want, none of what I think you are asking for is basic stuff. I can point you at sites that will let you begin to get a start on how Nanotech works, and such. But the basics are simple. Find a way to build on the molecular level and all sorts of fun things from superstrong materials, to downloadable objects, to immortality become possible. I can fill you in on just about any aspect of this if you have specific quesations.

As for human/machine interface stuff thats a very complicated area that I've not spent much time in outside of basic curiosity (experiements to replace eye sight and hearing with mechanical implants and such) this material gets into pretty deep medical stuff fast. Right now they are basically figuring out how to decode the brains/nervous systems output signals, and how to send input that has meaning back into it. Some progress made in sight and hearing, a touch in muscle control. Surprisingly there is a lot of psychology involved also, as they have found that the brain can construct meaningful images/understanding from new input sorces that provide different stimuli then the traditional body parts.

The quantum physics is simpler, there was a thread floating about here a week or three back that talked about alternate universes and was based on an article in Scientific American. That was an excellent primer on the math, and implications. It should cover your questions. But again if there is a specific aspect I'm more then willing to take a pop at it or find the proper place to help.

Mostly it's a matter of your question for what you want to be a bit too big. Not unlike asking to be pointed to a book on, say, woodworking. So much to cover.. more specifics needed. Ask and I might be able to help.

Myriads
 
Myriads said:
I am pleased that my response has provided you with amusement. That is a positive thing.

All I can say is, that I feel like St. Paul after his sight was restored. I must have been the dumbest bugger alive.
 
Myriads said:


Regarding the material you want, none of what I think you are asking for is basic stuff. I can point you at sites that will let you begin to get a start on how Nanotech works, and such. But the basics are simple. Find a way to build on the molecular level and all sorts of fun things from superstrong materials, to downloadable objects, to immortality become possible. I can fill you in on just about any aspect of this if you have specific quesations.
The basic sites would be a good start. I'd like to see some info on the techniques required for building machines measured in micrometers. (Why the hell one wonders is it called "nano"technology when it should be micro-technology?) I'd also like to know how it could prevent the DNA caps from "unscrewing" and beginning the decline into old age. There's not enough material on this on paper sadly. At least, not that I can find.

Myriads said:

As for human/machine interface stuff thats a very complicated area that I've not spent much time in outside of basic curiosity (experiements to replace eye sight and hearing with mechanical implants and such) this material gets into pretty deep medical stuff fast. Right now they are basically figuring out how to decode the brains/nervous systems output signals, and how to send input that has meaning back into it. Some progress made in sight and hearing, a touch in muscle control. Surprisingly there is a lot of psychology involved also, as they have found that the brain can construct meaningful images/understanding from new input sorces that provide different stimuli then the traditional body parts.
My main interest isn't so much cybernetic implants, but information transfer. I'm thinking mainly of the personal microchip here, because I want to find out more than I know about the possibilities of the network sending information into the body, as opposed to the other way round; which is what most people imagine. The bit about the mind finding whole new ways of extrapolating the "picture data" from a mechanical eye or sound from an ear, is something I'd give extraneous parts of my anatomy to read more of.

Myriads said:

The quantum physics is simpler, there was a thread floating about here a week or three back that talked about alternate universes and was based on an article in Scientific American. That was an excellent primer on the math, and implications. It should cover your questions. But again if there is a specific aspect I'm more then willing to take a pop at it or find the proper place to help.
I know a fair amount about the dimensional theory, but I'm numero-dyslexic, so the maths fuck me over totally. I can comprehend the equation of plus-lightspeed travel, but I can't write it down. Frustrating.:disgust: I could really use the figures for handy reference sometime. Does Scientific American have a web-site?

Myriads said:

Mostly it's a matter of your question for what you want to be a bit too big. Not unlike asking to be pointed to a book on, say, woodworking. So much to cover.. more specifics needed. Ask and I might be able to help.
Is there enough above to be going on with?
 
The basic sites would be a good start. I'd like to see some info on the techniques required for building machines measured in micrometers. (Why the hell one wonders is it called "nano"technology when it should be micro-technology?) I'd also like to know how it could prevent the DNA caps from "unscrewing" and beginning the decline into old age. There's not enough material on this on paper sadly. At least, not that I can find.

Let's start with this one part. It will keep you busy for a good amount of time.


go here. That should provide the basics.

Nanotechnology is the proper term for the science of building with atomic precison. Microtechnology is the interm step above it, that we will pass through to reach nanotech. Micro is 10x bigger then Nano.

Life extension is VERY complicated. Fixing the telemers on the ends of DNA is only one thing that is needful to stop it. There are several more factors involving free radical removal, and other genetic damage correction. And they think there is a TON more to it. It may well turn out that full cell repair will be the only way.

But the way it would work on that aspect is that the nanotech would literly be introduced into a persons body to rebuild the DNA caps atom by atom in all cells. On site repair. Amazingly high science. But solidly theoretically possible.

Myriads
 
Last edited:
The Age of Spiritual Machines, by Kurzweil (sp?)

A remarkable book on the advance of sentient life to the abiotic stage.

We are fast approaching the day when all human needs can be met by technology. Indeed, I'd argue that today we already have the requisite technology advances and resources, and the powerful elite are hanging onto a disproportionate share of the wealth out of simple greed... which is to be fully expected in an economic system founded on the premise that the accumulation of material wealth is inherently good for it's own sake, as capitalism is.

So long as we give away free cars to contestents in game shows while millions starve for want of a 15 cent meal, capitalism isn't just not working - it's downright evil.

That's murder, folks. And it's days are numbered. 😉
 
I don't think capitalism is evil per se', because the idea of having a system where the rewards are commeasureate to the efforts of the participant, is nice and logical too.

I do think the blatant profiteering is bad though. In fact, it's sickening. The most evil example of that is banks who cripple third world countries with debts on money that never existed to start with. They created the money as nothing more than numbers on a monitor or figures on paper, but millions of people died and suffered for it. Governments should create money, not privately owned banks; because they could do it comparativley interest free.

The latest evil scam from the banking sector is to offer third world countries "forgiveness" of their debt in return for the permenant handing over of all their land. Ugh! :disgust:
 
I found this article and thought I would post it here. It was from the Toronto Star and was penned by Michele Landsberg. It gives a lot of facts about some of the things I've been writing about, so I thought it would be relavent here.

--------------------------------

Published on Sunday, May 11, 2003 by the Toronto Star
Conspiracy Crusader Doubts Official 9/11 Version
by Michele Landsberg

Barrie Zwicker gazes calmly into the camera, hands clasped, voice clear and resonant, looking the quintessential Canadian progressive: a colorful knitted vest over an open-collared shirt, a neat little beard, a personality that radiates boyish, almost naive friendliness.

Not a shard of irony, not a sliver of petulant, up-to-date narcissism.

Perfect. You couldn't possibly be more agreeable or less threatening.

Then, of course, he ruins it all by asking questions. They are questions that 99 per cent of Canadian journalists have not dared or deigned to ask, and that most Canadians would prefer not to hear.

In these strange times, asking direct and probing questions about 9/11 will get you instant put-downs.

Zwicker grins as he mimics the upward eye-roll and patronizing hand-flap that go along with the phrase "conspiracy theorist."

As Vision TV's media critic for the past 15 years, and as a journalist with a long list of solid credentials (he's worked at The Globe and Mail and The Toronto Star, taught at Ryerson University, and was awarded a Southam Fellowship at the University of Toronto), Zwicker should be safely out of the line of fire. It's a measure of his determination to challenge conventional wisdom that he has willingly kept his head up, instead of down, and tried to look facts right in the eye.

"You know, the people who just shrug off these questions with the `conspiracy theorist' epithet should be asked what they stand for. Unquestioning acceptance of the official narrative? Sure, there are outlandish theories out there — aliens, Atlantis — but there have also been real and huge conspiracies," Zwicker told me in an interview in his home office.

I knew about some of those conspiracies. Last January, I wrote a column about American declassified documents that verify a long history of top-level conspiracies. The U.S. government, its military and its secret service have plotted to justify wars and impose their control on other countries through intricate secret schemes of drug-running, gun smuggling and assassination. They even considered rigging fake terrorist attacks that would cost American lives in order to stir the public to war-ready outrage.

Immediately, I was deluged with hundreds upon hundreds of approving e-mails from American citizens. Some of them praised the TV work of Barrie Zwicker — a Globe and Mail colleague of my youth.

I sat down, with a fair degree of skepticism, to watch Zwicker's video, The Great Deception, which challenges the U.S. government's account of what really happened on 9/11. Slowly, a frightening chill came over me. These were the very questions I had asked myself on 9/11 and for several weeks after. Failing to find easy answers, I had locked the subject away.

Why did the United States Air Force fail to scramble interceptor jets — in defiance of all long-standing rules and well-established practice — for almost two hours after it was known that an unprecedented four planes had been hijacked?

How could the world's most powerful military fail to react throughout a prolonged, horrifying attack on the financial and political capitals of the nation?

How did the FBI know the exact identities of the hijackers within 24 hours of the attacks? If their files were so readily to hand, why hadn't they been apprehended earlier? After all, several conscientious FBI agents had raised the alarm about a number of known Al Qaeda sympathizers at U.S. flight schools, and had been ignored.

Why did Donald Rumsfeld call for a war on Iraq (not Afghanistan) the morning after the Saudi hijackers had accomplished their attack?

Why did the two squadrons of fighter jets at Andrews Air Force base, 19 kilometers from Washington, not zoom into action to defend the White House, one of their primary tasks?

Why did George Bush sit for half an hour in a Florida classroom, listening to a girl talk about her pet goat, after his chief of staff told him about the second plane? For that matter, why did he pretend that he first learned of the attacks in that classroom, when he had actually been briefed as he left his hotel that morning?

Why has there been no public investigation into the billions of dollars "earned" by insider trading of United and American Airlines stock before 9/11?

I went to interview Zwicker because I was fascinated by his courage in raising these unpopular questions and wanted to know what made him persist. I saw the answer for myself. At nearly 69, Zwicker has boundless energy, intellectual as well as physical. (This is an environmentalist who gave up cars in 1966 and who bicycles thousands of kilometers across country for fun).

He has a restless scientific curiosity, coupled with humanistic principles absorbed from his United Church minister father. At age 12, as a fledgling skeptic growing up in Swan River, Manitoba, Zwicker couldn't merely accept the common schoolboy belief that Coca-Cola contained acid powerful enough to dissolve a penny. Into five bottles of Coke he dropped a penny, a nail, a piece of leather, a strip of cloth and a cube of bread. Next morning, he found all intact.

In his teens, anguished at his loss of faith, he turned to his father. "Out there in his garden, near the sweet peas, he put his arm around my shoulder and said `Barrie, follow the truth, wherever it leads you.'"

Zwicker and his wife Jean (they've been married 40 years and have a grown son and daughter) are avid gardeners and theatre fanatics with subscriptions to nearly every series in town.

His energy seems equaled only by his good humor and relentless pursuit of honest fact.

You can catch Zwicker's Eye Opener media critique on the current affairs show, 360 Vision, Thursdays at 8 p.m. on VisionTV. He has sold more than 1,000 of his Great Deception videos at near-cost. You can order one for $38 (that includes shipping) by calling 416-651-5588.

And if you call him a conspiracy theorist, call me one, too, because I agree with Zwicker when he says, "I don't know exactly what happened, but something smells very fishy." Even more rank-smelling is the refusal of most Canadian journalists to ask embarrassingly uncool questions about one of the worst catastrophes of our time.

Michele Landsberg's column usually appears in the Star Saturday and Sunday.
 
but jim rewards are not commensurate with work in capitalism. most capitalists are born into wealth and do horrible things to preserve it and keep stealing more
 
august spies said:
but jim rewards are not commensurate with work in capitalism. most capitalists are born into wealth and do horrible things to preserve it and keep stealing more

Most capitalists are not born into wealth.
Those that are are beneficiaries of the capitalist system.

Horrible things ? You can probably spew a few examples, but there's millions of us.

A few against millions is not a quorum.
 
the only benificiares are the capitalist system are large corporate firms and government elites who do their bidding, especially war, torture and fascism.

you have 2 billion people living on 2 dollars a day or less, i think your outnumbered. in el salvador 14 families control the entire country. china has a billion people alone, most consider themselves anti capitalist, though it would be hard to argue they had a real progressive socialist system just as most of the "millions" of people in first world countries who consider themselves to be capitalist probably have about as much of a grip on the reality of capitalism as a chinese government supporter has on socialism
 
august spies said:
the only benificiares are the capitalist system are large corporate firms and government elites who do their bidding, especially war, torture and fascism.

you have 2 billion people living on 2 dollars a day or less, i think your outnumbered. in el salvador 14 families control the entire country. china has a billion people alone, most consider themselves anti capitalist, though it would be hard to argue they had a real progressive socialist system just as most of the "millions" of people in first world countries who consider themselves to be capitalist probably have about as much of a grip on the reality of capitalism as a chinese government supporter has on socialism


" the only benificiares are the capitalist system are large corporate firms and government elites who do their bidding, especially war, torture and fascism. "

Oh ?

Sorry, that makes no sense whatsoever to me.
 
august spies said:
but jim rewards are not commensurate with work in capitalism. most capitalists are born into wealth and do horrible things to preserve it and keep stealing more

That isn't true AS. The chief ones are certainly, but not most. But the real gist of it, is that we're getting into the difference between pure philosophy and reality.

Capitalism in it's most pure-motiveated state is a good thing. So is communism. The character of Jesus Christ was a communist. Remember that bit about wealth being the fastest way to evil and all men being brothers? Of course he's probably the only true communist in any example available, because Russia and China are dictatorships masquerading as freedom and equality.

The purest form of capitalism would be a system where everyone who puts in directed effort is rewarded commeasureatly, rather than being frced to stay in the anonymous splat of "the people". That is a good thing to live under if you're a driven person. Like communism though, it gets exploited.
 
Thanks very much Myr. Much appreciated.🙂 Now we know where Luke Skywalker got his from. 😉


Thought provoking stuff.
 
just my thoughts...

capitalism and communism. two divergent and mutually exclusive forms of monetary consumption and economic direction by any said government or state.

i personally find that Communism and Capitalism have a large problem, not in their inherent ideology (both have realists and idealists) but instead in peoples perception of them. what happens is a case of a strictly economic theory becoming corrupted to fit a political framework. Americanism is not Capitalism. the preexistent values of the puritans migrating from england to america were subsumed into the Capitalist framework. likewise communism. people like lenin and stalin and Mao kept attempting to apply to a political framework what Marx originally intended as merely a socio-economic solution to inequality.

to redress your theory which many have dubbed as conspiracy. all i will say is that it can have no claim to be a scientific theory (and by this i include political science). it is self-sealing, irrefutable, appeals to myth and history, uses exegesis, etc. under these conditions a scientific basis for your revelations cannot exist. the problem with video evidence is that it can be faked, as can documents, so they are indistinguishable from reality. this does not deny the veracity of your theory. i found your points on the Illuminati intruiging. the problem i see is that if the Illuminati have been going on so long, it must point to something very wrong with our society that such a thing could flourish. there must be conditions which are beneficial to such an entity's growth. which brings me to my next subject, order.
 
My personal contention AM, is that the "I-word" invented our society more or less. Given that, i'd be hard for it not to flourish. (IF it exists of course.)
 
What's New

1/13/2025
Visit Clips4Sale, the webs largest one-stop fetish clip location!
Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top