Posts by Frank Allen70

Joseph Bailey41 said:That’s such a bummer; I was really hoping you'd track it down. The worst part is, I know exactly who has my copy, but I have absolutely zero desire to deal with that person, not even on an astral plane. 😁

Check your inbox; I sent over an email. If anyone else is looking for one, just shoot me a private message.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I had the physical copy, but someone actually swiped it from me in the meantime. You might want to try looking on those sites we aren't supposed to mention publicly. Just be careful about the author's name—there's another book out there with practically the same title (just without the exclamation point), and I don't know anything about that one, so I can't really vouch for it.

The one I had was actually pretty good; it stuck to practical advice without all that weird occultist nonsense.

It seems to be nowhere to be found except on Amazon. I'm looking at that other one now, and honestly, it doesn't look half bad either.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I really wanted to be an "indigo" myself, but I just couldn't pull it off. I was way too much of a mix. It actually reminded me of another book I read right after that one... it was in English, and I honestly don't know how I ever tracked it down:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...u_Are_Psychic_

I kept hoping I'd learn how to see auras, but it turns out I'm totally blind to that kind of thing. Turns out my "superpowers" are much more about being an auditory and kinesthetic person. 🙂

Could you send that over via PM, or perhaps just drop a link somewhere here?

Joseph Bailey41 said:Go right ahead.

Honestly, at this rate, I suspect the entire forum will be nothing but quotes before we know it—lol.

Quincy:

rapidmason1 As I was saying: We don't need to lean on sacred texts or pour our energy into prayers—not when we can simply place our absolute faith in science. So, science. It has been established from every conceivable angle that there was a specific moment—I can't even begin to wrap my head around the scale of it—billions of years ago, when... Imagine a state of absolute nothingness—not just a void, but a total absence of everything we understand to be real. I’m talking about a moment before time had even begun to tick, before matter existed to occupy any space, and before energy could even flicker into life. There was no spatial dimension to speak of, no vacuum to fill, and certainly no laws of physics to govern existence. In that profound stillness, there wasn't even "nothing" in the way we conceptualize it today; there was simply... nothing. And then came the Big Bang—that singular, monumental explosion—and from that instant, time and space were forged. Out of that chaos, matter, energy, and entire galaxies began to coalesce, eventually giving rise to our own planet... and finally, time itself began its relentless flow. The real question—the one that truly keeps us up at night—is how anyone can actually prove that specific moment when everything suddenly went "boom" didn't just spring into existence out of thin air. How do we demonstrate that this entire cosmic explosion started from absolutely nothing? Isn't it simply logical to conclude that there had to be a supernatural entity existing prior to everything else? I mean, think about it—before all this, nature itself didn't exist, nor did space or time. There had to be something beyond those constraints that set everything in motion and dictated exactly how it would all unfold. Nothing can truly emerge from nothingness—it is a fundamental impossibility.Everything in this existence requires a cause—there’s just no way around it. If you trace any chain of events back to its starting point, you eventually hit that ultimate origin: someone who exists before nature itself and precedes all of creation, whom we call God. Well, here we go— Science has finally reached what we might call that proverbial "zero point"—that absolute baseline where everything we thought we knew begins to unravel. It’s quite fascinating, really—if you think about it—how we spend centuries building these massive, intricate structures of logic and empirical data, only to find ourselves standing at the edge of an abyss where the old rules simply cease to apply. It reminds me a bit of how architects might design a skyscraper with perfect mathematical precision, only to realize the very ground they’re building on is shifting in ways their blueprints never accounted for. We’ve pushed our instruments and our theories to the absolute limit, and now, instead of finding more answers, we’ve arrived at this singular, quiet threshold where the fundamental nature of reality seems to demand a completely different kind of understanding.But she won't be able to catch up—it’s simply impossible—because once you cross that threshold, everything starts operating under entirely different natural laws, rules that just didn't exist before you hit that point. It seems she has finally validated that profound passage from the Bible: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He existed before everything else—truly the primary cause behind all that is. It really comes down to how you choose to view the world—whether you're looking through the lens of the Bible or through the lens of modern science.

This hasn't been proven in any sane context—honestly, any physicist worth their salt would tell you exactly the same thing. If you're still clinging to the idea that something can spring from absolutely nothing, I’d strongly suggest you take a deep dive into vacuum energy theory instead. It changes the whole conversation.

Regarding the question of what the universe actually looked like in its earliest stages—well, I think we really ought to pause and ask ourselves just how certain we can be that time functions as a linear progression. Specifically, can we truly claim that a millennium lasted exactly as long immediately following the birth of the cosmos as it does in our current era? It all boils down to a fundamental problem: it is an impossibility to measure a reference system from within itself. We are essentially trapped inside the experiment. Consequently, we cannot know with any degree of certainty how time exerts its influence on everything else. At most, we are merely theorizing—playing a high-stakes game of educated guesswork. To present absolute theories based solely on empirical data is, quite frankly, irresponsible. Empirical evidence can only reach as far as the collective conscious memory of humanity; anything preceding that threshold becomes increasingly impossible to quantify through such methods.

What you're seeing in the media lately is nothing more than—well, let's call it what it is—purely superficial noise. It’s all surface-level chatter designed to grab headlines, lacking any real substance or depth. (unconscious) The academic community often falls into a cycle of propaganda—not necessarily because they are all dishonest thieves, mind you, but because the funding structures dictate their survival. It’s a simple matter of economics: if a research project doesn't promise something practically applicable or commercially viable, the grant money simply isn't there. Consequently, to secure their livelihood, researchers are often forced to frame their theories as if they were the absolute, singular truth. Everyone is essentially just protecting their own turf within this system. Because of this, when someone actually manages to speak a hard truth amidst all that manufactured noise, it's incredibly difficult for a complacent consciousness to truly grasp it—aside from perhaps a fleeting moment of inspiration upon hearing it. Realizing the truth requires more than just listening; you need the proper tools to process it. And in this life, the only tool we truly possess is ourselves.

hollowpuma762 said:Actually, it doesn't say "Word." It says Logos.

http://biblehub.com/text/john/1-1.htm

Calling it a "Word" is just an interpretation. One of many, anyway.

Let’s consider the tool I am discussing—it is hidden within the very essence of the word Logos. If we examine the term itself (λόγος) written in the Greek alphabet and simply strip away the vowels, what remains is λγς. What do we actually see here if we view these letters as images rather than mere instruments for recording sound? (Visualization has always been the primary function of consonants—vowels are different, serving more to facilitate pronunciation—but again... that is a science unto itself and certainly not the focus here. I can only say that the way we study linguistics today emphasizes the function of speech rather than the function of symbols).

We see up, we see down, and we see the serpent. We see a direction that moves in both ways simultaneously. We see a flow coursing through the human crown. We see the manner in which the spinning top, the country, and the sun rotate within the galaxy and upon themselves. We see direction in all directions inscribed within a single direction. We are seeing a living paradox. However, to perceive everything I am describing, one must possess a highly developed personal toolkit—one's own body, one's own consciousness, one's own method of visualization, and one's own mind. In short—one's own first four spiritual bodies (physical, etheric, astral, mental). Everything I have mentioned is merely phenomenology—by following a logical syllogism to its simplest conclusion, the reality is that a person perceives only as much as their own energy permits them to (here, "energy" refers to the flow of consciousness through oneself... if we view the human body as electrons, energy is their form when those electrons move—the resulting phenomenon is electrical energy) . Developing the spiritual bodies and opening the chakras essentially boils down to making certain forms accessible to the energy of the same being, thereby bringing them into that being's domain, into their control. A person conquers themselves. How? Through gnosis! And gnosis is always internal—therefore, man is his own tool. 😁

Steven Stewart3 said:I'm not really a fan of writing in generalizations like "this is the hardest" or "this is the most common," etc.
But in my opinion—and I really want to emphasize this—there is no harder path than Jnana Yoga. It’s that classic paradox: it’s the most grueling way to go, but also the fastest. On this path, you’re stripped of everything. You face solitude, zero friends, none of that easygoing small talk over a latte, no traveling, no healthy social life... even your career (even though you might have all the right credentials, the drive, and the ambition) feels totally different.
You end up with a razor-sharp intellect because you’ve sacrificed so much to get there—though usually, it’s not even conscious at first. You don't realize what's coming until you finally pick up a book on yoga and it all clicks.
By then, you’ve been through the wringer in life. You’ve been tested so many times that everything a "normal" person finds attractive or pleasurable starts to feel hollow. It’s not that those things aren't enjoyable, it's just that you finally see exactly where they lead. To get there, you have to grind through intense concentration, deep meditation, diving into astrology, seeking out mentors, working with seasoned spiritual teachers, and all that good stuff.
There are tons of little nuances too, like how you frame your thoughts—for example, avoiding certain phrases or mental loops.

People on the other side are out there partying, drinking, and living it up, so their path feels way easier 😁. But obviously, that's a dangerous road to walk.

Beautifully stated—though if I may add my own perspective based on experience, no path is truly "hard" or "easy." A path is simply what it was designed to be, because every journey begins within ourselves. It almost doesn't matter which direction you choose—the ultimate destination remains the same. Your choice of path really just depends on your specific temperament and character. Just as a seed cannot sprout in any soil under any sun, every seed will eventually bear fruit in its own right.

I follow your logic, but you’re really just getting bogged down in the minutiae of phenomenology. This whole concept of "left" versus "right" exists entirely within your own mind. If you were to step back and look at things objectively from an outside perspective, "left" and "right" would simply be labels we assign to opposing directions.

You might try to argue that if we just swapped the names, the underlying substance would remain unchanged—but my point is this: if even a minor shift in perspective (think of a 180-degree rotation on a single axis) results in a fundamental change to the very concepts you take as your foundation (since you're treating "left" and "right" as if they are absolute truths and using them as concrete examples), then perhaps there is a chance you'll realize that all these divisions are arbitrary, born purely from perception. Perception is essentially the Apple of our existence—but once you master how to perceive, you'll find yourself forced to first learn the exact opposite of your initial perception, and then eventually grasp that which is truly ineffable: the paradox where both sides exist simultaneously. Navigating that requires an immense amount of mental energy, which is why people say that any path is a good one, provided it remains your own. Your journey feeds your energy, and whatever you choose to do, it's perfectly fine as long as you aren't infringing upon the free will of others. Just don't mistake any single viewpoint for the final truth, because nothing is ever truly final. Do you honestly believe the goal of life is to stagnate in a permanent state of identical realizations, clinging to a single side like a drunkard?

One can be a master of energy management and possess incredible sensory abilities, but that alone doesn't make a person spiritual or complete. It is certainly a useful skill, though, provided it isn't weaponized against the autonomy of others.

Neither this post nor my previous ones were intended to strip you of your agency—I simply felt an internal compulsion to share my vision of these two paths, as I saw them after reaching one of many summits via several different routes. When you reach a peak, you can look back and see every single trail that leads to that summit, and they all share a commonality: they are all paths upward. Some might be steep and littered with jagged rocks, while others offer breathtaking vistas—each is unique in its own way, and if you've already committed to a path, there’s no sense in backtracking just to change the route. But once you finally stand atop that mountain, you'll realize that they are all essentially the same thing. And then, based on your experience climbing toward that peak, you will have the insight necessary to choose your path toward the next one.

Both paths lead in the same direction, a truth that Buddha voiced long ago. When he finally returned home after years spent beneath that tree, he told his wife that he never should have left—that everything he was seeking had been right there in front of him all along (much like how a guitar string makes no sound when it's slack, yet snaps when it's overstretched... and perhaps he was simply an exhausted man in his early years who needed to experience stillness... or perhaps the reverse; in the end, it hardly matters, because he experienced everything possible under the sky he knew). Buddha fled from reality only to return to it. He grasped it with both hands. Only then did he begin to teach, because he understood both paths and knew exactly what to offer to everyone traveling those trails.

Let’s clear the air here, because I see a lot of people throwing around all sorts of theories. I’m going to use certain concepts that I hope are broad enough to be easily grasped.

The path of the left hand is the path of materialism.
The path of the right hand is the path of spirituality.

A materialist will eventually realize that even after they have "sold their soul to the devil," they still possess a sense of self—allowing them to translate all those material events into a different form, thereby catching the thread of spirituality and constructing their own reality.

On the other hand, a spiritual seeker will come to view their creative capacity as their sole function. Yet, at some point, they too must "sell their soul to the devil"—in the sense that they must find the courage to actually start living that material life they desire, rather than constantly renouncing it in favor of mere mental projections.

Both paths are distinct, yet both lead in the same direction, expressed by the koan: "God's right hand knows not what the left hand is doing." One hand represents power (regardless of how much an ascetic or a non-materialist might try to flatter themselves), but together, the two hands represent potential—the potential to realize oneself without movement, to know the self without a mirror. Both hands are simply two sides of the same mirror. In fact, there is no mirror at all. Anyone who fails to transcend this paradox through direct experience will be destroyed by the very power that initially seemed so uniquely theirs. Whether it is a slow decline or a sudden end, destruction is inevitable because such a person serves no purpose, and nature loves to recycle—because only nature holds true power. A human being can merely be a part of it; to imagine one could rule over it is simply foolish. In nature, there is no government and no regulation. There is only choice and intention. Everything else is simply whatever nature dictates. Every act of defiance carries its own consequence—one must weigh every action carefully and never dismiss either hand.

To understand both paths is to be enlightened. To walk both paths is to truly live. This isn't something you grasp through reading; it is something realized only through experience. Those who are not enlightened will never be able to recognize one who is. To the blind, both the light and the darkness are the same—to a blind man, nothing possesses brilliance. What I am writing here is just one description among many. The goal of all such descriptions is to halt division—both internal and external.

briskbison55 said:Are you being serious right now? These people are literally typing out that science and medicine are just slaves to big corporations, and that we should avoid them because everything can be cured using 'their' specific methods. Everything from vaccines to raw food to Chemtrails.

Look, it’s pretty obvious to me that you're getting fed nonsense by the Alternative crowd, so I guess I feel a little 🤷 about you being a moderator for this PDF... I mean, I try to imagine astrology being led by someone who follows horoscopes on Facebook, or pet moderation being handled by someone who wouldn't even let an animal in their house...

And when did "Alternative" become such a crazy term for just mindless babbling without any actual basis? These aren't "alternative" thinkers; they're just people denying reality. You tell them that vaccines almost wiped out diseases that were lethal until very recently, and they—in their "alternative" way—ask where you got those claims, even though official statistics from every major organization have stated it a million times over.

northernpilot2, this weirdo won't stop bringing me up, and honestly, the way he writes here is exactly how he is in the Alternative group—zero substance, just endless litanies about people he disagrees with. It's all twisting words, planting ideas, blatant lies, and just repeating what others said to others like some kind of broken record. And this "constructiveness" he's whining about basically boils down to his eternal question: why are you asking me questions instead of proving me wrong with arguments? That is the textbook definition of trolling and destroying any meaningful communication, which he would totally ignore if his mouth wasn't so full of me and my posts all the time.

My dear friend, you were busy spamming the raw food thread—where, I might add, there isn't even a single mention of vaccines. If you have such an issue with shots, then by all means, go over to that specific discussion and hold your own. What on earth does raw food have to do with vaccines? It’s a non sequitur. And just because the same group of people happens to be posting across multiple threads, why do you feel the need to play contrarian everywhere they go? Where is that sense of "balance" you were preaching about back in the raw food section? Go to those respective topics and try to engage in a civilized debate. Bananas, seed varieties, cocoa—clearly none of that brings you any joy, so please, just let us enthusiasts enjoy our chocolate in peace! You should focus on finding your own equilibrium between your meat and vegetables, and we can all live happily ever after. Honestly, you write as if you’re trying to save us from some impending nuclear meltdown. We all have to go eventually—personally, I’d much rather go out from an apple than from a pork chop. So, where is the actual problem here? I simply cannot stand watching you or these constant naysayers anymore; they’ve run out of intelligent things to say to you, so now they’re just digging up old, dead arguments to throw at your head. Just let the dead stay buried and give them some rest, for heaven's sake.

Sending you nothing but peace, love, and pure happiness—just a little bit of love, briskbison55. A few of us from the thread are going to send some local student DJ mixes your way, along with a little lemon to help settle those nerves. 😁

briskbison55 As stated by:
Personally, I’ve come to the conclusion that it is far better to simply ignore the whole situation—and there are quite a few reasons why—one of which is... This one.As you can see, the internet is an absolute melting pot of conflicting perspectives—it’s truly fascinating how some people operate under the assumption that their specific viewpoint is the only one with any actual merit, while dismissing everything else as mere trolling or personal insults.

This is an absolutely stellar link—honestly, I’m kicking myself for not noticing you had posted this sooner. I have been personally observing just how fascinating chocolate can be as a substance lately. Just yesterday, I picked up some crushed cacao nibs, and after giving them a thorough chew—which was actually my first time consuming them in that specific form—I have to say, I felt a bit of a psychoactive buzz. It left me wondering, quite seriously, exactly what the appropriate dosage should be for someone looking to enjoy these effects without overdoing it.

briskbison55, I am absolutely certain you have some valuable insights to contribute to this discussion. Don't go thinking the weight of this falls solely on your shoulders—honestly, everyone else seems just as unhinged. And then there’s Elizabeth Jackson; even though we share many of the same views—which usually means we're on the same page—she tends to dissect your posts with the cold, clinical precision of a high-level government bureaucrat. Personally, I think we all need to take a collective breath, slow things down just a touch, and try to find some calm.

Gary Cox2 said:What are you even aiming at here? The vaccination thread?
Vaccinations are mandatory in the US, and that topic should be handled as such. Sure, you can have an opinion, but calling for people to skip their shots should be treated like calling for someone to break the law. That needs to be sanctioned immediately, right from the jump..

But I’m definitely not backing the constant spamming of topics like raw food, sunbathing, or liver cleanses (lol).. Who does that actually hurt? Society? The whole damn country? Some random guy on this forum? If someone wants to live on raw food, stare at the sun, and eventually wreck their own health, fine, let them. Who cares..
It’s not like we hold debates or write entire manifestos on how smoking is bad in the cigarette threads, regardless of all the "proven facts and logic"—even though it is. Instead, people just swap stories about which brand of tobacco is smoother or which one to buy..

Look, it's obvious that you "alternative" types are posting total nonsense, so I'm feeling a bit 🤷 about you being a moderator for this PDF.. I'm trying to imagine an astrology group run by someone who falls for Facebook horoscope scams, or a pet forum moderated by someone who wouldn't even let an animal through their front door..

That is precisely the point—except there is an overwhelming amount of evidence suggesting that raw food actually helps a massive number of people. The issue arises when people with absolutely zero personal experience wander into those threads and start typing with such authority you’d think they were Ivy League professors. I have nothing against this type of diet being researched and tested—in fact, I welcome it—but you simply cannot write thirty pages regarding proteins and meat without grasping the fundamental difference between a protein and an amino acid, for instance. I am not suggesting we should deplatform anyone just because they believe meat consumption is essential; however, once we start discussing specific dietary regimens, we are stepping firmly into the realm of medicine. Since none of us are licensed physicians—and therefore aren't legally liable for malpractice—I believe there is a collective moral obligation for all participants to approach these topics with caution and responsibility. We must realize that the person reading that thread might be someone for whom this specific diet is their absolute last resort. If that person isn't an active participant here and has no idea who to trust, how on earth are they supposed to distinguish between arrogant youngsters writing as if they hold a PhD in molecular biology, and regular people who may lack formal training but can offer invaluable, firsthand testimony regarding the benefits of such nutrition? The core issue isn't merely trolling or insults (which, IMHO, is just part of being human); the real problem is that we aren't talking about a thread for animal pictures—we are discussing matters that, if misunderstood, could lead to devastating health consequences.

Here is a little something for those who enjoy a bit of whimsy:

Scientists might argue that the odds of something this blatantly ridiculous actually happening are millions to one.
But ask any stage magician, and they’ll tell you those "million-to-one" shots seem to pop up nine times out of ten.
-Stephen King.

🤣

Benjamin Taylor6 said:And how exactly does one "stare into the unknown"?

Is it through a social media post, a prayer, meditation, deep contemplation, shamanic drumming, or maybe some tantric sex??

So many people have been persistent about it, yet they haven't glimpsed a single thing. 😁

As for science—well, plenty of people have tried their hand at that too, but they can never seem to bump those probabilities up to anything resembling certainty. For now, it’s all just: now you see me, now you don't.

She could go find some lowlife to hang out with, drown her sorrows in a bottle, or just jump in front of a Greyhound bus... there are ways. 😁 You can't just be persistent with your mind alone; you really have to put your whole self—your entire physical being—on the line. 😁

bluemason3 said:I took a quick look since I'm short on time. Is the watermelon supposed to be a sharpness test? You could probably do that with a totally dull blade.

The spear is way too flexible—just pure physics at work, transferring the pressure.

He starts to rise before the strike hits his back; clearly choreographed, and it adds nothing but dramatic flair.

Honestly, I don't even know what to say. 😁 I feel like a religious fundamentalist when we get into these kinds of debates. I won't bother trying to prove my point; eventually, you'll experience it for yourself (you've already started down that path, after all, and we all end up there—usually starting with a laugh at how foolish we were once we see the truth).

bluemason3 said:What’s the joke here? The lower abdomen isn't exactly a sensitive spot; you can take a hit there and train through it, so it's a pretty poor target for a strike. It would have been much more interesting if they had aimed for the solar plexus, the liver, or even just the head.

As it stands, this is just overcomplicating basic physics.

But what about this part


?

bluemason3 said:

Here's my dad training some iron body chi kung 😳

Never satisfied, always cynical 😁 You actually remind me of a friend of mine—someone who struggles immensely because they're terrified of everything, including themselves and what they might actually be capable of. I truly hope to see you again in a year or two with a bit more of an open mind; honestly, I don't see how staying stuck like this could ever benefit you. Perhaps you should try exploring things on your own terms—just step away from the scientists, the academics, and everyone else's lived experiences for a moment and see what happens?

darkjackal7 said:Pain can actually be eliminated if you simply deny its existence in the moment—essentially, you deny the very event that caused it. It sounds crazy, but it works when you stub your toe or burn yourself. I use this trick all the time when hot oil splashes on my fingers while I'm cooking. The pain vanishes instantly, and the burn never even happens. It's a highly effective little hack; I strongly suggest you try it out.

+1