Posts by boldsailor32

Traditional advice suggests starting a diet rich in beta-carotene to protect your skin from the sun by May 1st for a three-month duration. If you have particularly fair or sensitive skin, you should start as early as February 1st.

Along with these foods, I recommend consuming one tablespoon of high-quality cold-pressed vegetable oil daily. Options include sunflower, soy, or peanut oil. For even better results, try extra virgin olive oil or pumpkin seed oil.

The same logic applies to pharmacological beta-carotene supplements. You should begin taking them either on February 1st or May 1st for a period of three to six months. Stick to the RDA; I believe that is 10,000 IU, but do not exceed that. A bottle of 100 capsules containing 10,000 IU each from Natural Resources costs about $27, which covers your three-month supply.

It is recommended to take a tablespoon of vegetable oil alongside the capsule mentioned above.

Taking high doses of beta-carotene capsules immediately before heading to the beach is unwise, as it can cause adverse effects.

If you plan to be directly exposed to the sun, always use a standard, high-quality UV protection lotion or oil.

Contrary to some misconceptions, olive oil does not have a UV protection factor. It is excellent for helping skin heal from sun damage, but do not use it as a shield. Instead, shower after swimming once the sun has weakened, apply olive oil to damp skin, and then shower again after thirty minutes once the skin has absorbed it.

However, if you avoid direct sunlight and spend most of your time in the shade, olive oil (remember, it has no SPF!) is a great choice for achieving a quality tan. The reflected, diffused light from the ocean and rocks will provide your skin with an exceptionally beautiful and lasting glow.

V.

I shared this address with you in one of my previous posts:

*************************
You can find more information here:
info@zik.hr,

Phone: +1 212 555 0199
*************************

V.

Occupational Safety and Health Act, Section 63:
.
.
.
(3) Smoking* is prohibited in workspaces, except in specific areas where the employer explicitly designates them as permitted, provided a smoking area sign is clearly displayed.

*- this applies to everyone, including guests!

For a restaurant manager, server, or busser, the bar area and the dining room are considered workspaces. (And for bartenders or hostesses, often 😁 too.)

It stands to reason that smoking should be banned there. This isn't about protecting customers—they don't have to step foot in a smoky lounge. It is about protecting employees who are required to work in those spaces.

DECISION REGARDING THE SMOKING BAN LAW
.
.
.

Section 13.
Smoking is prohibited in hospitality establishments: specifically in snack bars and cafes according to standard industry classifications.

Section 14.
In other public spaces, per Section 2, Point 7 of this Law, smoking is prohibited except in designated smoking areas.

Section 15.
Designated smoking areas under Section 14 may not exceed 30% of the total public space area.

The owner or user of the public space is responsible for designating smoking areas per Section 14 within 6 months of this Law taking effect.

Smoking areas must be equipped with ventilation systems, ashtrays, and fire safety equipment as required by law.

Section 16.
Hospitality establishments serving food must clearly designate both non-smoking and smoking areas.

Section 17.
The owner or user of a public space under Section 14 may choose to ban smoking entirely. This must be indicated by signage at the entrance and in visible locations within the premises.

Section 18.
The entity operating in a public space must display all signs required by Sections 11 through 17 in visible locations, ensuring they are legible from ten feet away.

Section 19.
Ashtrays must not be present in public spaces where smoking is prohibited under this Law.

An exception is made for artistic or decorative ashtray displays that are not intended for actual use.
.
.
.

Section 26.
A fine ranging from $50,000.00 to $33333 will be imposed on any individual or legal entity if:

1. They fail to clearly display the prohibition of tobacco sales to minors under 18, contrary to Section 7.

2. They fail to designate smoking areas in public spaces (per Sections 14, 15, and 16).

3. They permit smoking in violation of Sections 14 and 15.
.
.
.

V.

Any critiques?

I have none.

Based on your writing, it seems you aren't familiar with studies regarding how electromagnetic radiation affects the human body and living cells. These cells are incredibly sensitive to low-frequency electromagnetic and electric fields, such as those found in 16.5 Hz railway systems and standard 50/60 Hz power grids.

Nor does it seem you know about the four studies conducted on utility workers regarding the incidence of male breast cancer—an extremely rare occurrence otherwise.

I can only point you toward the website for the international organization dedicated to this research.

http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/

For more detailed information on how electromagnetic fields lower melatonin levels—the hormone that keeps cancer cells in check—you can look up the work of:
Dana Loomis, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Epidemiology
Environmental Epidemiology, Occupational Epidemiology
Telephone: (919) 966-7433
Email: Dana_Loomis@unc.edu

I must admit, I am surprised by the claim that a bedside nightlight is harmless. Even when turned off, it emits an alternating electric field. Our heads are positioned near it for eight hours a day, every single day, for our entire lives.
People who prioritize their health use an adapter between the outlet and the lamp. When you switch the light off, the adapter disconnects the 220V voltage, leaving the lamp and cable under a 5V DC charge just to detect when it needs to reconnect to the main power.

This isn't some niche thing anymore, even here in the States. I actually own one myself.
To be honest, when I bought it at the store, the clerk didn't have the slightest clue what it was for. 🙂

V.

Your cell phone likely didn't interfere with the magnetic field readings. Those devices operate at much higher frequencies; you don't measure them in nT, but rather by electric field strength in V/m or power density in W/cm2.

I used to own an analog magnetic field meter with ranges from 20–300 nT and 100–1000 nT. I picked it up at Conrad for about $45, but I eventually got rid of it. The precision just wasn't there, and it lacked any way to calibrate it properly.

What specific device were they using to take those measurements?

In my previous post regarding psychological factors, I explained exactly why I wouldn't consider buying an apartment near a TS tower.

For most of my career, I worked extensively with 6 kV and 35 kV power systems, as well as 1 MW pulsed radar operating at 3.5 GHz. I can honestly say I am very glad to be far away from that environment these days.

When you run that test with the FP blanket, make sure to run a comparison using a standard wool blanket.

We are still waiting to hear swiftscout8's take on this issue.

V.

Zachary Rodriguez32 said:EDIT:

Do those covers even work?

EDIT 2:
I just remembered which units were used when measuring that apartment! The readings from the guy at Full Point seemed accurate; the numbers were hovering around 250 nT, occasionally hitting 300 nT. I did a little digging online and found that the average magnetic field strength in the USA is about 60-70 nT, while in the United Kingdom it sits around 36-39 nT. Now, I’ll leave it to someone with more expertise and experience than me to weigh in. Is 250 nT actually acceptable? And do those "cover-up" types at Full Point actually provide any real help?

They don't actually work. Their only real function is providing a psychological boost to your resilience—provided you actually believe in them. 😁

A reading of 250–300 nT is quite a strong magnetic field. I doubt a transformer station is the source, though, especially since it’s sitting 20 meters away. Honestly, I have no clue what else could be causing this.
I still suspect some manipulation by the FP staff. It would be incredibly easy to fake those readings using a small battery-powered magnetic core oscillator tucked inside the meter or by simply tampering with the device itself. It is also quite telling that the FP employees refuse to provide a written report of the measurement, even after you specifically requested one. 😁.

If you want to be absolutely certain about your measurement results, take Kate Diaz's advice. Find someone at the College of Engineering who can handle the testing and pinpoint the radiation source. Alternatively, check out this page:

*********************************************
Is there an independent lab in the US that can test this type of radiation?

Yes. This type of radiation, along with many others, can be measured by Underwriters Laboratories in San Diego. They are an independent testing house that operates without any financial, political, or other outside influence. They hold all the necessary authorizations from NIST and focus exclusively on quality testing and measurements.

You can find more information at info@zik.hr, Or call us at +1 212 555 0198.

ZIK

**************************************************
It might be expensive, but when you're buying an apartment, it's worth the investment.

V.

- Can you give me some examples?

For instance, it has been observed that irradiated rats exhibited behavioral issues. In maze tests, non-irradiated rats found the exit easily. Irradiated rats had significantly more difficulty finding their way out.

Epidemiological studies involving children living near high-voltage power lines are also quite interesting. Research conducted by Canadian scientists showed that leukemia rates were four times higher in children living near these lines compared to those living far from such radiation sources. Some Swedish studies support this, though American and Finnish studies completely refute it. Some research results might simply be the product of hypersensitivity or autosuggestion. In a sense, we are navigating murky waters.

That said, there are established exposure limits for electromagnetic radiation. Regarding safety standards and regulations, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection—or ICNIRP—sets the guidelines for Europe.

- According to some studies, a person should wait 48 hours after a six-minute mobile phone call. Is that true?

I haven't heard of those specific findings. I think that is a bit excessive. It is a fact that people experience more intense radiation from using a mobile phone than from base stations, primarily due to distance. If a person is about ten meters away from a base station, the field they are exposed to is usually around 10 volts per meter. For comparison, the permitted radiation level under US standards is 16.82 volts per meter. When a phone is pressed against the ear, the field level can reach up to 100 volts per meter if it is right against the user's head. However, if you move the phone just a little away from your head, things improve significantly.

- How much better?

If the phone is just one centimeter away from the head, radiation drops rapidly. If you move the phone three centimeters away, the radiation is about two and a half times lower.

Do you have a cell phone?

I don't. Sometimes even a standard landline feels like a burden. I prefer using email. However, I am not naive; I don't think I can entirely avoid modern world nuisances like radiation and similar pollutants. I do believe, however, that mobile phones sometimes aggressively invade one's privacy. Just as I'm relaxing to some lovely music by Bob Dylan, Eric Clapton, or Neil Young, suddenly there's a ring and you hear: "Hey, Mate, is that you? It's me!"

************************************************** *

Dragan Poljak is an Associate Professor at the College of Engineering at the University of Split. He has published over a hundred scientific papers, mostly abroad. He is also a visiting professor and honorary member at the Wessex Institute of Technology in the United Kingdom.

I have a news article saved on my drive regarding the release of a book titled "Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation." It was written by an American scientist, Dr. Dragan Poljak, back in 2002. I think it’s a pretty interesting read.

************************************************** *

What are all the various sources of electromagnetic radiation?

We have power lines, various TV and radio transmitters, radar systems, cell towers, mobile phones, and more.

Is there any actual scientific evidence regarding the harmfulness of cell phones?

As of now, there is zero scientific evidence proving that radiation from base stations or mobile phones is harmful. Electromagnetic energy deposits into the human body through radiation, but the only proven effect we see is thermal—essentially, tissue heating. Based on current scientific understanding, this effect is considered negligible. Whether other non-thermal effects exist remains an open question. The World Health Organization has highlighted three interesting categories of potential harm. The first includes substances proven to be carcinogenic, much like cigarettes or alcohol.

Coffee is likely classified among products that pose a potential cancer risk.


Magnetic fields from extremely low-frequency sources, such as those generated by power lines, are now classified as "possibly carcinogenic."

Has anyone ever attempted to reduce the magnetic field intensity around power lines?


WHO representatives reviewed recent initiatives and concluded that Italy is the only nation that has actually attempted to reduce these field levels. To lower magnetic fields from power lines, it would require an investment of $65 billion just to statistically save two lives per year.

Unfortunately, when you look at the bottom line, this move was rejected because the math simply doesn't add up.

Is there actually any meaningful way to protect people from radiation?

One chapter in this book focuses entirely on safety protocols. Obviously, the primary safeguard is simply increasing the distance between radiation sources and populated areas. Hospitals are the most vulnerable environments in this regard. From what I have observed, the safety measures implemented in our hospitals aren't particularly rigorous. Mobile phones can cause interference near sensitive medical electronic equipment. After all, it is common knowledge that you have to turn off cell phones during a flight to prevent unwanted interference.
To prevent these kinds of unintended consequences, developed nations have established their own sets of recommendations.
In Australia, mobile phones aren't allowed within two meters of medical equipment. French hospitals enforce a total ban. Germany recommends a complete prohibition on phone use in hospitals, while in the USA, restrictions apply only to specific areas within the facility. Over in the United Kingdom, bans are recommended for certain sections of the hospital.

What’s the deal with phone cases? How much protection do they actually provide to mobile users?

Those ferrite plates or "shields" do help lower field levels somewhat. Unfortunately, they don't target the areas where we are most vulnerable—specifically the eyes and ears.

But you did say there isn't any scientific evidence yet regarding the harmful effects of cell phones.

That’s the truth. So far, the only proven harm linked to mobile phones is an increase in car accidents—a point even the WHO jokingly makes. We need significantly more research before we can draw any real conclusions. A multidisciplinary approach is absolutely essential to determine how electromagnetic radiation stored in the body actually affects the human organism. To be clear, tissue heating remains the only established effect.

You often see heated debates in the news regarding whether cell phones are actually harmful. So, what is the consensus among the world's leading scientists?

When trying to determine if cell phones affect children differently than adults, you usually see two research teams at odds. It’s a genuine scientific war, complete with subtle academic insults thrown back and forth. One prominent American research leader, Professor Om Gandhi, argues that based on 1996 data, mobile phones are significantly more harmful to children. His reasoning is that kids experience higher induced electromagnetic field levels in the brain. On the other side, researcher Niels Kuester led a team in 1998 that debunked this, asserting there is no actual difference in field intensity between children and adults.

- Some research results suggest children using cell phones face an 80 percent higher risk of developing tumors. Are you familiar with this data or anything similar?

I personally align with the views of an American scientist named Gandhi, with whom I have collaborated and published a paper in the American journal IEEE Trans. On Electromagnetic Compatibility. My stance is that mobile phone use induces a higher field intensity in a child's head compared to an adult's. To address this concern, it might be useful to cite the World Health Organization's position, which states that "children should not be encouraged to use mobile phones." Beyond those two prominent research teams, there is actually a massive body of diverse studies regarding the potential risks of mobile phones today.

Kate Diaz said:.
.
.
If you actually want to defend yourself against negative EM radiation, you don't need those overpriced magnetic covers. Besides, what are you doing with your head outside the cover? It’s the most sensitive part of the body. A Faraday cage is plenty. Just suit up in some knightly wire mesh, put on a helmet, and go to sleep. 🙂

You forgot to mention that the wire suit needs to be grounded to the third prong of a wall outlet for it to work at all. Otherwise, there's no effect. 🙂

For anyone looking to turn their home into a Faraday cage:

Drywall cage

V.

Charles Turner said:That single sentence forced me to rethink my entire perspective on women.

I have to admit, I was just as stunned by that level of insight...

V.

Zachary Rodriguez32 said:The crew over at Full Point are salesmen through and through. They’ll tell you exactly what you want to hear just to move their inventory. This guy didn't even test that "miracle" potential meter himself; he used a different device that measures both electromagnetic and electric fields. I don't doubt his technical readings, but I definitely have my doubts about his claims regarding that protective cover. He's a salesman, and he's just looking for a way to sell that junk. Has anyone with more experience here weighed in on this? Is it actually okay to have a 32 kV substation sitting just 20 meters from a building, or should I steer clear of buying an apartment in that spot?

Four years ago, at an oncology conference, a rather chilling statistic was presented.

In the US, one in four people currently face a cancer diagnosis. Within the next decade, that figure is projected to climb to one in three.

Half of those affected will survive.

What does that mean?

If you have a family of four living in an apartment:

There is a 25% probability that any given individual will develop some form of cancer.
The probability that one of them will develop some form of cancer is 100%.
The survival rate for an affected individual stands at 50%.

In the near future, the probabilities for the same family would be:

There is a 33% probability that any given individual will develop some form of cancer.
The probability that one of them will develop some form of cancer is 130%.
The survival rate for an affected individual stands at 50%.

Excerpt from the oncology congress held in Chicago, 2003:

Cancer is currently the second leading cause of death in the USA, and the number of new diagnoses is steadily climbing. It is projected that cancer will overtake heart disease as the primary cause of mortality within this century. During a presentation regarding the secondary oncology prevention program at the Mayo Clinic, Professor Frontier highlighted how increasingly effective screening methods are becoming essential tools for prevention.

This is what things would look like in the world's major industrial powers:

Today, we recognize about 100 different types of cancer. It is highly probable that half of the male population in industrialized nations will face some stage of the disease, while nearly one in three women will be affected. Research indicates that by 2020, cancer will account for 50% of all deaths in the Western world.

Based on the texts above, it’s clear that whether you live next to a transformer station or not, the probability remains high that you, your siblings, or your parents will develop some form of cancer.

Being close to a transformer station certainly won't fix the issue.

Based on my experience in the field, residents living right next to electrical substations live in a state of constant stress. It is both subconscious and conscious fear regarding the potential impact of the facility. Measurement results and claims from utility experts stating that radiation levels are minimal and harmless simply don't help ease their minds.

The human subconscious can be incredibly destructive. It is capable of triggering unwanted organic processes, fueling them, or even outright causing illness.
If there's any actual physical harm being done to the body, subconscious fear can only amplify the damage already caused.

Let's apply this to your situation.

You’re buying an apartment. After a long search, you finally find the perfect one—and I assume the price is better than everything else on the market.

The reality is simple: apartments located near gas stations are harder to sell, which naturally drags down their market value.

The experts convinced me that the substation poses no health risks to this apartment.

You trust them, and honestly, it works for you in the short term. The housing prices are attractive, and it lets you solve your most pressing issue—finding a place to live—fast.

By the following year, you start feeling a subconscious sense of "danger" regarding TS. You’ll see conflicting reports pop up occasionally in the news or online, all claiming that the actual effects haven't been sufficiently studied yet. Even if there's no proof, whenever residents in an apartment building fall seriously ill, suspicion immediately turns toward the proximity of the local substation.

The catastrophe begins the moment you or someone in your household is diagnosed with cancer. I’m not saying "if," I’m saying "when," because the probability is incredibly high. For a family of four, the statistical likelihood in the near future exceeds 100%.

Any lingering subconscious doubt about radiation from a substation is quickly morphing into full-blown paranoia. This fear can trigger the worst possible reaction at the worst possible time, potentially preventing a patient from receiving necessary treatment and recovering in the comfort of their own home.

So, what’s the move here? Sell the apartment right now, at the absolute worst possible time, take a loss by pricing it below market value just to get it done, and move somewhere else? Is that really the plan?

Is it smarter to just avoid living near a transformer station altogether?

I believe those are sufficient psychological reasons to avoid buying an apartment near a transformer station.

We can dive into the details regarding those "radiation" levels and how to actually interpret that apartment measurement later on.

V.

Zachary Rodriguez32 said:I have a bit of a dilemma. My parents have been searching for a new place to buy for quite some time, and we finally found one that seems perfect. However, we just realized there is a massive substation located only about 20 meters from the apartment. I heard it might be around 30 kilovolts. I've also heard claims that people living near substations and high-voltage power lines face higher risks of cancer and leukemia. We hired a specialist to measure the electromagnetic field strength in the apartment. The reading came out to around 250—I'm not sure if that was Tesla or millitesla. The expert mentioned that within the European Union, the recommended limit is 20, which means the field in this apartment is ten times stronger than what is considered safe. He did note, however, that the field doesn't affect you while you are awake, only while you sleep. Full Point.He suggested using a mattress cover with magnetic strips to repel electromagnetic fields. His logic is that EMF exposure is primarily an issue while sleeping rather than during waking hours, so this would solve the problem. I won't be convinced until I hear your thoughts on whether EMFs actually impact us while we're awake, and if a magnetic field can truly shield against EM radiation. If anyone else has insight on this, you're welcome! 😁

Are there any other effective ways to reduce EM radiation exposure?

Measurement by... http://full Point I find them to be quite useless. I have checked multiple times.

Full Point uses those free "biopotential" screenings at shopping malls to trick people into letting them come to their homes for "free radiation testing." Once they arrive, their first move is to scare the living daylights out of you just so they can sell you overpriced "protective" covers.

Measuring alternating electrical and magnetic fields requires top-tier equipment. You also need sound methodology and deep technical expertise to actually interpret the results. Frankly, Full Point vendors just don't have that level of insight.

Regarding that electromagnetic field measurement you were shown: you have no way of knowing if the data is actually accurate, nor can you be certain whether the source is even located within that specific apartment.

Using professional-grade instruments from occupational safety firms like OSHA-certified contractors is incredibly expensive. To get an accurate picture of how radiation is distributed over time and space, you have to take measurements at multiple points both inside and outside the home, and do so at various different times.

If you search for "electrosmog" on Google, you'll find hundreds of links and countless studies regarding how electric and electromagnetic fields affect the human body. You will also see various regulations regarding exposure limits. In practice, however, these standards are essentially meaningless because this field still lacks sufficient scientific oversight.

Research findings can be contradictory, depending entirely on who funded them and what their ultimate goal was.

A few years back, when I was diving deep into this research, the only study recognized by the American Academy of Sciences showed a spike in childhood leukemia cases among kids living near high-voltage power lines.

Everything else is just a foggy mess of scientific and pseudo-scientific debates.

Bottom line: if you're looking at an apartment near a substation, skip it. Don't buy.

If you want to dive into the professional or psychological reasoning behind why I’m saying this, just let me know. I am here to help.

V.

P.S. A quote from "The Miami Herald."

Residents from the Dobri neighborhood, who are opposing the construction of the new 110-kV TS Dobri substation, have filed for an injunction. They want the court to prevent the utility provider from demolishing the existing 35-kV TS building at the site until safety measurements can be taken on the temporary substation. The court has requested that the residents submit their payments. $13 for measurement, and they've already submitted that request to the local utility provider.

Thanks, this link is perfect. It’s concise, clear, and looks great even when printed out. I need it to run some refresher training for my team on crisis management. They basically need to brush up on the first aid basics they learned years ago but have since let slide.

Basically, if you're going to play with fire, you'd better know exactly what to do when you get burned... 😁

V.

If anyone happens to have a copy of some "First Aid Instructions" in English—whether it’s a doc, txt, html, or pdf—I would be incredibly grateful for the file or a quick link.

V.

Hmm...

Couldn't this also fit under "Wellness"? I suspect the true purpose of Yoga lies elsewhere entirely. 😁 😁 😁

V. 😉

PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH TO FAMILY COMMUNICATION DURING ORGAN DONATION

L.

In the United States, according to legal statutes, organs from deceased individuals may be used for transplantation if the person did not express opposition during their lifetime. This is known as presumed consent (an "opt-out" system). Transplant teams recommend approaching the family of the deceased to inform them that an extraction will occur for the benefit of other patients.

Verbal consent from the family should only be sought after they have been informed of the patient's irreversible condition and confirmed brain death. All questions must be answered with absolute honesty. The conversation should be held with the most private member of the family. The number of participants in the discussion should be kept to a minimum. Verbal confirmation is obtained from the following individuals (in order of priority):

- Spouse

- Adult son/daughter

- Father or mother

- Brother/sister

- Guardian

- Any other person authorized to handle the deceased's remains.

It is vital to obtain their address and phone number beforehand, along with information regarding their occupation and education level. The family must be approached with extreme seriousness, understanding, and compassion. Using carefully selected and appropriate language, explain the situation, stating clearly that the patient is dead and that machines are merely maintaining blood flow through the body. Furthermore, emphasize how the patient's death can save multiple lives, highlighting the humanity, necessity, and righteousness of the procedure. Under no circumstances should the family be pressured, nor should any disappointment be shown if they explicitly refuse the procedure.

LI.

This directive takes effect on the date of publication in The Washington Post.

Class: 011-01/97-01/100
Ref No: 534-04-02-03-98
Chicago, May 5, 1998.

Minister
Prof. Dr. Andrew Hebrang, signed

So, if you didn't put it in writing while you were alive, you automatically become a donor upon brain death:

In the United States, according to legal statutes, organs from deceased individuals may be used for transplantation if the person did not express opposition during their lifetime. This is known as presumed consent (an "opt-out" system).

As for the family, it is recommended to ask for verbal consent (though it isn't legally required anywhere), because by law, even written consent isn't necessary. There is no requirement for written family approval prior to organ extraction!

Verbal consent from the family should only be sought after they have been informed of the patient's irreversible condition and confirmed brain death.

Ultimately, this means anyone who hasn't filed a written objection during their life is automatically an organ donor. Written family consent isn't even required; asking for verbal consent is just a suggestion. There is no requirement for a formal record of this—it all rests on the oral testimony of the physician contacting the family. This is done purely to mislead the public.

V.

1994.

--- January ---------------------------------------

01.07.03 SUN, 15:40 GMT - Full moon. Waning phase begins.

01.21.03 SUN, 21:05 GMT - New moon. Waxing phase begins.

--- February --------------------------------------

02.01.03 SUN, IMBOLC - Lowest energy point of the dark period. Waxing phase begins.

02.06.03 FRI, 08:47 GMT - Full moon. Waning phase begins.

02.20.03 FRI, 09:18 GMT - New moon. Waxing phase begins.

--- March -----------------------------------------

03.06.03 SAT, 23:14 GMT - Full moon. Waning phase begins.

03.20.03 SAT, 22:41 GMT - New moon. Waxing phase begins.

03.20.03 SAT, 06:49 GMT - OSTARA Spring equinox, solar balance.

GMT times are based on the prime meridian. You must convert these to local time by accounting for your specific time zone and Daylight Saving Time.

For the US, add +5 hours during standard time and +6 hours during Daylight Saving Time if you are on Eastern Time.

Ryan Wilson2 said:Those are just the lurkers. They exist everywhere, yet they never post anything. You have no idea how many people are quietly following this thread. 😈

Why bother writing when we already know everything? 😕 😁 😕 😁

boldsailor32.

Karen Sanchez19 said:So you're saying these threads are just an alternative playground for spirituality?

You hit the nail on the head.

It happens everywhere in nature, and it applies here too. There is a fundamental natural Law at work:

Any system that doesn't receive constant energy will inevitably fall apart.

Murphy defined it perfectly:

"In any system left to its own devices, things move from bad to worse."

The mindless chatter and nonsense we see are just the natural result of people stopping the investment of energy into this thread. That is largely my fault. 😁 But nothing is accidental. Over the last year, most of us posting here have shifted from debating our philosophies to actually living them out in the real world.
We are pouring our energy into our daily lives, where staying true to oneself and living one's philosophy isn't easy.

Especially if you don't want your actual life to turn into nothing but endless noise and distractions. 😉

V.

Karen Sanchez19 said:I’m just kidding about the light and dark sides. It’s good versus evil, just like the Force in Star Wars—light side and dark side.

😁

My apologies, I just noticed the light and dark themes in the chat.😉

V. 🙂