The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[Leon]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Don’t get too fixed on the idea of Males = Outflow and Females = Inflow just because that is the outward appearance of the sex act. The very essence of female and femininity includes nuturing and mothering – and these are HUGE ouflows. And an almost defining part of maleness is that they go out and get from the environment huge inflows of the where-withall to survive. Even today it is generally accepted that the more money and toys you have acquired (i.e. inflowed) in life the more successful you are as a man.

Both flows exist hugely in both sexes. It is only in a culture where it is demanded of you that you dramatise the superficial aspects of your body’s gender that the stuck, stereotypical roles develop. As our western society has matured by an extra tiny inch or so in the last few decades it has relaxed these stereotyped roles and now allows individuals to explore and become comfortable with the other flows that make up their complete humanoid selves. This is progress for all of us as a species.

This change was driven – in my view – by the same tendency which developed in hominids in pre-history sometime, and which became genetically inherent in the human genome – whereby, as they matured through their teenage years as individuals, they rejected the solutions and way of life that their parents had and set out to create new solutions to old problems. An ant or bird today behaves exactly as the ant or bird of ten million years ago precisely because they lack this inborn tendency. The rebellion of youth, which they all hopefully pass through in their growing-up years, is the greatest survival factor that humans have and it is this – and not our opposable thumbs - which provided the impetus for the growth in brain-quality that we allegedly have over others on this planet. And it is this which propelled us into the feminist movement and towards greater tolerance of “alternate” possibilites and opportunities for individuals.

Each generation naturally consideders itself to be the absolute peak of human evolution and development – and so it is too – and the older generations usually decry the younger as being decadent and headed for damnation. From this comes the nonsensical attitude that many have that it is crazy and irresponsible to bring a child into a world such as this one. Two salient facts here are: 1) for the last many thousands of years life in this world has steadily become better and better and better and better for all, (there may well be pockets of worse off or short periods of it over larger areas, but overall and globally seen, the world has been improving steadily for all) and 2) the new generation can be relied on to find some sort of workable solution for the problems of the world they find themselves in – solutions which we older ones have not even thought of yet.

 

[Terril park]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Don’t get too fixed on the idea of Males = Outflow and Females = Inflow just because that is the outward appearance of the sex act. The very essence of female and femininity includes nuturing and mothering – and these are HUGE ouflows. And an almost defining part of maleness is that they go out and get from the environment huge inflows of the where-withall to survive. Even today it is generally accepted that the more money and toys you have acquired (i.e. inflowed) in life the more successful you are as a man.

Both flows exist hugely in both sexes. It is only in a culture where it is demanded of you that you dramatise the superficial aspects of your body’s gender that the stuck, stereotypical roles develop. As our western society has matured by an extra tiny inch or so in the last few decades it has relaxed these stereotyped roles and now allows individuals to explore and become comfortable with the other flows that make up their complete humanoid selves. This is progress for all of us as a species.

This change was driven – in my view – by the same tendency which developed in hominids in pre-history sometime, and which became genetically inherent in the human genome – whereby, as they matured through their teenage years as individuals, they rejected the solutions and way of life that their parents had and set out to create new solutions to old problems. An ant or bird today behaves exactly as the ant or bird of ten million years ago precisely because they lack this inborn tendency. The rebellion of youth, which they all hopefully pass through in their growing-up years, is the greatest survival factor that humans have and it is this – and not our opposable thumbs - which provided the impetus for the growth in brain-quality that we allegedly have over others on this planet. And it is this which propelled us into the feminist movement and towards greater tolerance of “alternate” possibilites and opportunities for individuals.

Each generation naturally consideders itself to be the absolute peak of human evolution and development – and so it is too – and the older generations usually decry the younger as being decadent and headed for damnation. From this comes the nonsensical attitude that many have that it is crazy and irresponsible to bring a child into a world such as this one. Two salient facts here are: 1) for the last many thousands of years life in this world has steadily become better and better and better and better for all, (there may well be pockets of worse off or short periods of it over larger areas, but overall and globally seen, the world has been improving steadily for all) and 2) the new generation can be relied on to find some sort of workable solution for the problems of the world they find themselves in – solutions which we older ones have not even thought of yet.

I'm a purist. Lol! This below is all that matters here.


Axiom 1 Life is basically a static.

DEFINITION: A life static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive.

Axiom 2 The static is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions.

Axiom 3 Space, energy, objects, form and time are the result of considerations made and/or agreed upon by the static and are perceived solely because the static considers that it can perceive them.

 

[Gottabrain]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Don’t get too fixed on the idea of Males = Outflow and Females = Inflow just because that is the outward appearance of the sex act.

Both flows exist hugely in both sexes.

Noice.

An ant or bird today behaves exactly as the ant or bird of ten million years ago precisely because they lack this inborn tendency.

This part is a fallacy, though a very commonly held old-wives tale. The truth is that many animals, especially birds and larger mammals, have changed their behaviours dramatically in the last 50 years in a desperate attempt to survive the wholesale destruction of their habitats and excessive hunting by man.

Many bird species that were previously enemies are now found grouping together as allies for survival, utilizing each species' unique natural skills for protection and to seek food sources. Wildlife animals like raccoons, wolves and possums , as well as other species have learned how to live and thrive in man's cities from garbage and leftovers. In the parrot world, those that communicate best with man are given high leader status in flocks, as they can beg for food.

The rebellion of youth, which they all hopefully pass through in their growing-up years, is the greatest survival factor that humans have and it is this – and not our opposable thumbs - which provided the impetus for the growth in brain-quality that we allegedly have over others on this planet.

This is not unique to mankind. Many animal species send their youth out to explore new areas as food sources and their young are not allowed to feed at the same area as the adults. As for opposable thumbs - big deal. Parrots, crows, raccoons, apes, bears and others have the dexterity in their claws and paws to open and close things and use tools regularly. They've become far more adept at this in recent years, too.

for the last many thousands of years life in this world has steadily become better and better and better and better for all.

?????? Leon, world resources and wildlife are being wiped out - the destruction in just a couple of hundred years is absolutely devastating. The coral reefs are 30% destroyed now - these are the breeding grounds for fish and their food sources - and the very environment of the ocean is changing to one that may not even be sustain human life in 50 years (lack of oxygen in the water, too acidic). Oceans and lakes are polluted and many of man's food sources common just 20 years ago are no longer sustainable. Even tuna is becoming unsustainable. Wildlife areas such as rainforests are being destroyed on a daily basis - the smaller animals, without a place to hide, are quickly consumed as food by predators. Hundreds of previously common animal species are going extinct or already have - such as the beloved New Zealand Tasmanian Devil, and even our beloved Australian Koala bear.

This is not "better". This is the irresponsible ravaging of the planet that is the very source of life for man and the many plants, animals and species he and the ecosystem depend upon.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

... This is not "better". This is the irresponsible ravaging of the planet that is the very source of life for man and the many plants, animals and species he and the ecosystem depend upon.

Since god is obviously a laissez faire capitalist it is clearly all for the best in this best of all possible worlds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPClzIsYxvA


Mark A. Baker

 

[Gottabrain]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

^^^ Lol, Mark.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

^^^ Lol, Mark.

Mark A. Baker

 

[Gottabrain]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Since god is obviously a laissez faire capitalist it is clearly all for the best in this best of all possible worlds.

Mark A. Baker

Not the work of God.

The planet will survive - it has survived a massive flood and a temporary rip of the atmosphere when the dinosaurs froze. Life has been destroyed before and it has been taken down to almost nothing and come back again over centuries.

It just won't be able to sustain much, if any, human life when it undergoes the centuries required to rebuild. I guess it's a matter of view, then, if that makes it "better and better and better". If one hates mankind, then it's a good thing to destroy the ecosystems that support human life as the environment turns to favour a very non-human sustaining new ecosystem (right Leon?)

Check out this article: http://www.globalissues.org/article/173/coral-reefs

The cockroaches will survive. They always do. If we use survival as the test of the greatness of species, that makes them the greatest species of all. It just keeps getting SO MUCH BETTER!

ADDED: And for those of you who believe in past lives - how many times do we have to go through this and start over again before we learn?

 

[Leon]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

What's better for the coral reefs and nature at large is that over the recent eyeblink of time in evolution mankind has become aware of the need to preserve their lives as well as his own. This has never been so before in mankind's existence. Primitive peoples (yes, primitive) have never done anything but plunder and exploit; we have learned to manage. And so now we are beginning to do something about their living conditions in a way that they themselves have never been able to do.

That is betterment.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

... Primitive peoples (yes, primitive) have never done anything but plunder and exploit; we have learned to manage. ...

Primitive peoples never had the technical capacity nor population sizes to do much damage beyond a purely local ecosystem. They certainly did not have the power to disrupt regional or global ecosystems. There is certainly archaeological evidence of habitat destruction by human populations, but the actual regions affected were limited and typically took hundreds of years if not millenia to achieve total devastation.

That no longer true. Human population growth and technology levels are such as to allow massive habitat destruction in a period of decades or even years. It is a part of the fabric of modern human activity. When humans act now they do so on a massive scale devastating entire ecosystems through their processes of resource accumulation and waste disposal. Moreover, most people are more concerned with the effect on their individual lifestyle than on the lives impacted by their economic activities.

Actual awareness of the real scope of impact of human activity is still in its infancy and is overwhelmed by traditional & out-dated human preconceptions and moral systems.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Leon]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

The indigenous Australian abbos wiped out the mammals of that region completely soon after they arrived. The local Moaris got rid of all the big Moas.

In other regions it is the fact of small population sizes - due primarily to internecine wars - that saved the eco-systems. There was never any thought of preserving anything until very recent times and then only in western peoples.

 

[Gottabrain]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

The indigenous Australian abbos wiped out the mammals of that region completely soon after they arrived.

That is only a recent hypothesis proposed by a single author, Tim Flannery. There is no actual evidence of this and considering other factors, such as the size of Australia (as big as the continental US) v. the size of the aboriginal population even at its known peak (318,000-750,000), that seems pretty ridiculous to me. The hypothesis is that fires by the aborigine wiped out all the large mammals. Considering the many fire-resistant flora and fauna of Australia, its deserts and vastly different terrains and the number of bushfires that go on every year (often set by arsonists), it's not very believable. Other scientists consider this concept extremely lacking in concrete evidence as well. http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/990/aborigines-blamed-big-mammal-extinction

There is a big difference between an IDEA and a FACT. You have just stated an IDEA as if it were a fact. Try to stay with facts.

The local Moaris got rid of all the big Moas.

This is far more substantiated and probably true.

In other regions it is the fact of small population sizes - due primarily to internecine wars - that saved the eco-systems.

YES! Small population size made a huge difference.

There was never any thought of preserving anything until very recent times and then only in western peoples.

That's not true. Many native peoples have preserved and revered nature and worked to uphold a balance (American Indians such as the Mayans and Hopi for example) and made it their religion to use every possible part of an animal or plant, return natural items to the earth and to develop agriculture to grow their own foods and raise their own stock, but generally not nomadic peoples like the aborigine.

The only reason people are thinking of it now is because resources are becoming scarcer and scarcer.

So it's a race of time whether the common sense and intelligence of man will overcome his own shortfallings and stupidity. Seems to me this may have happened many, many times before and man has failed over and over again.

When we learn that we are all connected and behave that way, with respect for the animal and plant life of ecosystems and consider all life forms equally important, a new day will dawn for man.

Or it won't and man will be a complete fail - and some other animal will become dominant that has more sense than selfishness.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

The indigenous Australian abbos wiped out the mammals of that region completely soon after they arrived. The local Moaris got rid of all the big Moas.

Patently false on its face as marsupials are mammals. Moreover, those mammal species wiped out took several centuries to be eradicated completely. Rapid in geologic terms, not in terms of the lifetime of small populations of indigenous cultures.

The ancient greeks deforested the islands of the eastern mediterranean producing the quaint rocky islets reknown around the world for their 'picturesque barren charm'. The europeans generally have transformed the natural forests of europe. The ancient semitic peoples are largely responsible for much of the desert wastes of the middle east. Due to the smaller populations & more primitive technologies it took these people millenia to achieve these effects.

Thanks to modern demographics & technology, humanity is far more destructive now. I suppose that counts as 'progress'.

... In other regions it is the fact of small population sizes - due primarily to internecine wars - that saved the eco-systems. There was never any thought of preserving anything until very recent times and then only in western peoples.

Human population size is the primary driver, both for economic activity & environmental impact.

The west is the first to realize the impact of human economic activity on the environment, at least on an institutional basis and as a matter of policy. In fact it was the 'effete intellectual types' who are always questioning traditional wisdom, values, & culture glorified by their peoples who recognized and demonstrated the pattern.

The west is also the prime offender in destruction due to its rapid expansion over the last few centuries and increasing dependence on an elevated technological level heavily dependent on natural resource consumption and its associated disposal of toxic waste materials.

The vast majority of the western population are still far more concerned about maintaining their personal lifestyle and expanding their families traditional access to commodities than the impact that their lifestyle has on the planet.


Mark A. Baker

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Casey Kasem's birthday

dropping one spot from last year's birthday, from the 79 spot down to number 80, it's Casey Kasem

 

[Hatshepsut]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

http://www.oocities.org/casey488/

 

[FoTi]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Here's something I found interesting and entertaining.....I thought if anyone hadn't already seen this, they might find it interesting too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y5bXdx5UrE&feature=related

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Great discussion going on above by several of our top posters!! I have nothing to contribute at this point and am just avidly reading it.

After all these years that I have been out of C of S, about 10 years now, it looks like I might have finally been declared suppressive by C of S. Since 2005 I have been reading and posting on the internet, saying some pretty harsh things about C of S, expecting to be declared but only now does it look like it's happened.

At the time of leaving around 2002 (just decided to stop going in and routed off on a medical leave without officially quitting), None of my business associates were Scientologists and my ex wife and I only had 2 Scientology couples who were our friends.

One of these couples recently divorced after over 40 years of marriage. The husband is on Facebook and saw my facebook account. He lives only about 5 miles from me and sent me a message on Facebook wanting to meet for lunch. I had not seen this particular individual for about 8 years and don't particularly like him though I think very highly of his wife and their kids. This guy is the one who reported me to ethics for not disconnecting from my brother back in 1984. He wrote up a KR that my brother was declared suppressive and that I was still talking with him. Because of his KR, I was ordered by the MAA at ASHO to disconnect from my brother or I would also be declared.

Well, I responded to his email and total him that I had left C of S in 2002, that I did not agree with current management and that I was writing on the Internet against C of S on a regular basis. I said that I would be willing to go to lunch with him but I doubted if he would want to go to lunch with me and I said, "It's your choice!" He responded that I had already made my choice and that he was reporting me to Int Justice Chief or some such title and that he was disconnecting from me. He gave me an address for the justice person to contact if I wished to get back in good standing. Of course, I contacted no one after that, including him.

Yesterday, I was notified that I had been declared an SP. There is no Goldenrod written but it just came over on an email from a friend of mine who still has a foothold in C of S.

AT LAST, A WAY TO STOP RECEIVING SCIENTOLOGY JUNK MAIL!!
At first I didn't believe it but then I had a major realization having to do with my email. Up until recently, every day I was flooded with Scientology Emails from dozens of "terminals" having to do with coming in for briefings, donating to Super Power, donating to Ideal Orgs, attending events, buying books and CD's and all manner of things. Just recently, all of this stopped comming. It has been completely cut off.

I don't know when it stopped coming. It seems like it's been a matter of weeks or maybe a couple of months. I checked my old mail and my deleted mail and found no C of S stuff at all after late November, 2011.

DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW THIS WORKS?
I looked on the internet and could find no mention of me being declared. One site says that C of S is no longer sending out Goldenrod Declares because they can be used by the person being declared as Libelous documents and are very effective when used that way for wining monetary settlements against C of S.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Great discussion going on above by several of our top posters!! I have nothing to contribute at this point and am just avidly reading it.

After all these years that I have been out of C of S, about 10 years now, it looks like I might have finally been declared suppressive by C of S. Since 2005 I have been reading and posting on the internet, saying some pretty harsh things about C of S, expecting to be declared but only now does it look like it's happened.

At the time of leaving around 2002 (just decided to stop going in and routed off on a medical leave without officially quitting), None of my business associates were Scientologists and my ex wife and I only had 2 Scientology couples who were our friends.

One of these couples recently divorced after over 40 years of marriage. The husband is on Facebook and saw my facebook account. He lives only about 5 miles from me and sent me a message on Facebook wanting to meet for lunch. I had not seen this particular individual for about 8 years and don't particularly like him though I think very highly of his wife and their kids. This guy is the one who reported me to ethics for not disconnecting from my brother back in 1984. He wrote up a KR that my brother was declared suppressive and that I was still talking with him. Because of his KR, I was ordered by the MAA at ASHO to disconnect from my brother or I would also be declared.

Well, I responded to his email and total him that I had left C of S in 2002, that I did not agree with current management and that I was writing on the Internet against C of S on a regular basis. I said that I would be willing to go to lunch with him but I doubted if he would want to go to lunch with me and I said, "It's your choice!" He responded that I had already made my choice and that he was reporting me to Int Justice Chief or some such title and that he was disconnecting from me. He gave me an address for the justice person to contact if I wished to get back in good standing. Of course, I contacted no one after that, including him.

Yesterday, I was notified that I had been declared an SP. There is no Goldenrod written but it just came over on an email from a friend of mine who still has a foothold in C of S.

AT LAST, A WAY TO STOP RECEIVING SCIENTOLOGY JUNK MAIL!!
At first I didn't believe it but then I had a major realization having to do with my email. Up until recently, every day I was flooded with Scientology Emails from dozens of "terminals" having to do with coming in for briefings, donating to Super Power, donating to Ideal Orgs, attending events, buying books and CD's and all manner of things. Just recently, all of this stopped comming. It has been completely cut off.

I don't know when it stopped coming. It seems like it's been a matter of weeks or maybe a couple of months. I checked my old mail and my deleted mail and found no C of S stuff at all after late November, 2011.

DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW THIS WORKS?
I looked on the internet and could find no mention of me being declared. One site says that C of S is no longer sending out Goldenrod Declares because they can be used by the person being declared as Libelous documents and are very effective when used that way for wining monetary settlements against C of S.
Lakey

fascinating. (as Spock would say)

by causing a break up in your family, he's a Co$ "good guy" not a suppressive , as defined by the list of anti social attributes.

by your communicating (communication being the universal solvent, when in doubt, communicate, etc), you are an SP

he is a master of ambiguity at the least.


whatever you do, don't call him and tell him that you know me.

I, for one, don't want my eternity threatened.

 

[Lone Star]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Patently false on its face as marsupials are mammals. Moreover, those mammal species wiped out took several centuries to be eradicated completely. Rapid in geologic terms, not in terms of the lifetime of small populations of indigenous cultures.

The ancient greeks deforested the islands of the eastern mediterranean producing the quaint rocky islets reknown around the world for their 'picturesque barren charm'. The europeans generally have transformed the natural forests of europe. The ancient semitic peoples are largely responsible for much of the desert wastes of the middle east. Due to the smaller populations & more primitive technologies it took these people millenia to achieve these effects.

Thanks to modern demographics & technology, humanity is far more destructive now. I suppose that counts as 'progress'.




Human population size is the primary driver, both for economic activity & environmental impact.

The west is the first to realize the impact of human economic activity on the environment, at least on an institutional basis and as a matter of policy. In fact it was the 'effete intellectual types' who are always questioning traditional wisdom, values, & culture glorified by their peoples who recognized and demonstrated the pattern.

The west is also the prime offender in destruction due to its rapid expansion over the last few centuries and increasing dependence on an elevated technological level heavily dependent on natural resource consumption and its associated disposal of toxic waste materials.

The vast majority of the western population are still far more concerned about maintaining their personal lifestyle and expanding their families traditional access to commodities than the impact that their lifestyle has on the planet.


Mark A. Baker

Yes. Totally agree, especially with the last paragraph. Due to the economic downturn over the past few years, and will continue for at least a few more IMO, we have an opportunity to make some fundamental changes in both our national and worldwide economic system that will have a lesser impact on the planet. My hopes are not high that this will happen though. And some may be thinking, "Well what does he mean...Communism!?". No. I am a Conservative...root word being 'conserve'. What we have now, and have had for the last 30 to 40 years hasn't been true conservativism. It's been global corporate fascism (neo-conservatism) coupled with a bunch of other BS that keeps the masses hypnotized. "Yeeeessssss......gay marriage is evil....birth control pills are of the devil....the environment will clean itself in time....to be environmentally focused kills jobs forever....we must fight terror....GMO foods will help us feed more people, screw the bees....there's a war on Christianity....help us save Christmas....yeeesssss....belieeeeve....listen to Rush....he knows all."

 

[Ted]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

[...]

Yesterday, I was notified that I had been declared an SP. There is no Goldenrod written but it just came over on an email from a friend of mine who still has a foothold in C of S.

[...]
Lakey

Congratulations!

To paraphrase an old song, "You're no body until somebody declares you."

Get back to your "terminal." Tell it, "If it isn't written it isn't true." Get your goldenrod.

As for me, I am holding out for "expulsion for infinity." I know a couple of people who achieve that distinction, and I feel slighted.

But then maybe I have that already, just no paper on it. Lord knows I have been working hard at getting noticed having posted all over the internet for years.

 

[uniquemand]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I have a similar feeling, Ted, which is evoked when Catholic priests sexually molest little boys. They never molested me!!! Why? What's wrong with my ass?