facts so vitally important they go without saying

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

simple facts stated simply:
"there is no such thing as god because such a thing does not need to exist. all that is can be explained without any need for a god being its creator. you are in control of your own fate more than anyone else is or should be, including any imaginary deity. all forms of government are arbitrary abstracts based on human philosophies, all are optional, none are necessary; choose wisely. rights are a legal fiction as much as are enforced laws; neither exist in nature. civilization itself is a conspiracy of agreements between war-lords, and banking (economics), church and state are smaller, overlapping conspiracies within it. the entertainment industry is also a conspiracy, but one meant to divert you away from the others. sooner or later, you are going to die. we all die. all of us will die, and earth will probably be destroyed between the end of the peak solar flare cycle in 2024 and the predicted impact of the asteroid 99942-apophis in 2029. deep underground military bases serving as bomb shelters will not preserve our species' survival. it is a good thing that life on earth should become extinct, from the point of view of the greater, universal law of entropy, because life itself poses a threat to it as life is negentropic. all life on earth evolved form the hybridization between off-world viral and terrestrial bacterial forms of cellular organization. the aliens organized into ribosomal messengers that arranged innate amino acids into complex genomic alleles. life evolved naturally and survival depends on adaption. the extra-dimension of the mind arose from life long after the origin of all matter-energy, but the mind has expanded much faster and further than the universe since the big-bang. before the big bang all matter-energy, and all 4 elemental forces, were combined in one form. this one form was a limitless quantum-foam / zero-point energy field. it was caused to collapse into a singularity by a random quantum fluctuation. this cosmic singularity only seems to expand, but is really the same size now as then. when we die, our minds can live on as toroidal souls of electromagnetic energy, and roam the cosmos, exploring other planets, black-holes, galaxies, etc. but when the last bit of matter in the cosmos is converted into zero-point energy through the final, super-super-massive black-hole at the end of time, only tachyonic spirit will remain to embody our immortal minds."
ignore or deny these facts at your own risk.

some slightly more detailed facts, stated in slightly more detail:

(warning, contains some questions that MAY have no known answers)

"it is argued in pop-culture that future time-travel lacks evidence in the form of time-travelers from our future being with us in the present. yet what are the alien greys? it is argued in pop-culture that present time-travel lacks evidence in the form of time-travelers from our present being with us in the past. yet what are the pantheon of gods? it is argued in pop-culture that past time-travel lacks evidence in the form of time-travelers from our recent past being with us in the earlier past. yet the weather-balloons used by nikola tesla fit the descriptions of the "cigar shaped" air-ships of the last decade of the preceding century. so if time travel is going on now, and has been going on all along, what about atlantis in antarctica? can we go there then from here now? would we be better to use a stationary temporal-teleportation base at the same location, or a ring-array design in near-earth orbit?"

some relatively important facts, very easily overlooked:

"the mind can live on after the death of the body in the form of a toroidal soul of electromagnetic energy, and in such a vessel, travel the cosmos, exploring space-time, teleporting anywhere and any time within the universe of matter-energy. but this form of the transition at the time of the body's death is not inherent to our beings, and instead is the result of a learned and acquired practice. Some people are born with "more soul" than others, and others with none or virtually none. The soul can (should and must) be developed while the body is alive to be preserved after its death. The mind must practice affixing its own ideas onto pre-existent lattice-structures, in order that both should be preserved in their aura, so that, when this separates from the body, the pre-existent, stronger lattices will preserve the fewer, affixed ideas. Those who do not develop their soul by study of this method - either in the form of middle-eastern QBLH (or related esotericism schools) or eastern Yoga (or related philosophies) - allow their soul to atrophy, and their mind ceases to have original ideas of its own, and they become a drone in the social hive. Such "zombie-people" can easily (and often do) become possessed by various authoritarian demons and become police or politicians. Instead of using such masses as chattel or else planning to eradicate them all to spare themselves more resources, we (modern psychics) should be advocating ways to elevate their souls to our own status, and by doing so find new ways to elevate our own souls above our present status as well. If we (psychics) do nothing, then our chance to do anything (herd, teach or kill) relative to the non-psychic "public" may pass soon due to their population growth rate. Also, people aren't wearing enough hats."

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

the alignments of the sunken cities off the shores of Cuba, Spain and Crete, and Japan triangulate to form an "equator" aligned 90° to the geographic locations of the north and south poles from 48,000 to 24,000 years ago.

the alignments of the pyramids of Giza and of Teotihuacan, and the temple of Angkor Wat, to the belt-stars of the Orion constellation also enwrap earth in an equator, oriented 90° to the locations of the axial north and south poles 24,000 years ago to 12,000 years ago, when the earliest megaliths began being built.

the alignments of Machu Pichu and Angkor Wat are in tune to the Pleiades constellation, and this may also parallel the "7 hills" and "7 flamines" of Rome. Peru, Cambodia and Italy align along an alternate modern equator with, as its 90° oriented polar axis, the next predicted location expected to be occupied following the next geographic pole shift (which has occurred twice in the last 50,000 years - around 49,000 and 25,000 years ago presumably).

48,000 -> 25,000 = 23,000 years between.

48,000 -> 24,000 = 24,000 years between.

50,000 -> 25,000 = 25,000 years between.

50,000 -> 24,000 = 26,000 years between.

date of first incident: 48,000 years ago, plus 23,000 years = 25,000 years ago.

date of first incident: 48,000 years ago, plus 24,000 years = 24,000 years ago.

date of first incident = 50,000 years ago, plus 25,000 years = 25,000 years ago.

date of first incident = 50,000 years ago, plus 26,000 years = 24,000 years ago.

date of second incident can therefore ONLY be EITHER 24,000 years ago OR 25,000 years ago; therefore earlier incident WAS EITHER 50,000 or 48,000 years ago. IF the first incident occurred 50,000 years ago, and the second 25,000 years ago, we are due. IF the first incident occurred 48,000 years ago, and the second 24,000 years ago, we are due. BUT, IF the first occurrence was 50,000 and the second 24,000, we MAY be OVERdue. Likewise, if the first was in 48,000 and the second in 25,000, we would still have one more aeon (of 2000 years) prior to the next geographical pole shift.

I suspect the coming pole-shift will occur in 3000 AD, following "1,000 years of peace" without humanity upon earth's surface, predicted by St. John of Patmos to follow the long foreseen "judgement day" when the "second coming" of the "messiah" occurs, and when the archangel Michael will cast down the devil into the pit, only that he may be "loosed again upon the world" after one millennium. There are, thus, both imminent threats to our species (2000 AD), and longer-term threats (3000 AD) to the entire planet's surface.

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

we live in a society ruled over by agreements made between war-lords to whom our own survival is irrelevant; we use imaginary money, and care about the lifetime we have in which to change this history only enough to find ways to feed ourselves; ultimately, we cannot even trust our own families, because as individuals we are in competition against all else for our very survival, a fight which, in the end, we cannot even win.

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

It is far wiser to let logical reasoning precede, motivate and govern your emotions than to let emotions precede, motivate or govern your logical reasoning.

because it is impossible to achieve "thinking without using ones emotions," or "not to have emotional influences" at all, it is irrelevant if it might seem logical; it remains an unattainable "ideal" at best, and at worst, a waste of effort to even attempt achieving. In short, though it may seem logical, it is an impossible ideal to attain "purely logical thinking." Therefore, the most logical alternative we have to this is to temper our emotions as best we can, and to let our knowledge and mental ethics guide us as much as possible, and to allow this intellectual faculty to naturally rule over our emotions, our subconscious dreams, our intuitive instincts, etc.

I "believe" (or it has been my experience) that "no question has no answer," or (stated differently) that "all questions have answers." By this criteria, I also "believe" NO substance REQUIRES any rational justification for its existence, however I also "believe" no substance nor element can ultimately escape rational explication, and ultimately even assertion of it being a "true fact" or a "fictional fantasy" (otherwise known as a "false lie").

I would define my own personal philosophical view-point as, at present, closest to "pacifistic nihilism." I do not believe ANYTHING (almost to the extent of solipsism) and I do not believe ANY activity will be beneficial, and so NONE can be rationally justified. Peace.

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

"magick" - the act of causality (even accidentally / unconsciously) by innate free-will and instinctive choice - is an excrement of consciousness as much as are shit and piss the natural waste by-products of the physical body and, like shit and piss, the surplus karma produced by "magick" (particularly unintentional acts thereof) is biodegradable within its native biosphere.

the only magick ritual known to have a 100% success rate is cursing oneself.

Let it be assumed life is temporary due to its having to struggle to survive against the greater natural force of entropy. Let it be assumed "magick" is, as described by Crowley, the act of inducing change to the environment; this can be intended as either a "good" or a "bad" change (either a "blessing" or a "curse" respectively). Thus, there are 4 types of "magick" intention that can be applied through ritual (repetitive routine OR unusual ceremony): 1. blessing oneself; 2. blessing other(s); 3. cursing oneself; 4. cursing other(s). Either form of "blessing" will be less likely to succeed than either form of "curse" due to the first assumption (re. entropy); "it is easier to tear the tower down than it is to build it up." However, even a "curse" placed on other(s) will not be effective 100% of the time, because one cannot have complete control over the outcome of their intention; the "good" luck of its intended target may outweigh the "bad" luck placed on them by the intention of the curse. Only cursing oneself can be successful 100% of the time because it meets the standards of both being "in line with nature" (the law of entropy) AND being able to be controlled from start to finish. If we gauge the "benefit" of "magick" by its success-rate in application, it has a very low rate of "beneficial" success; however, because most people only use "magick ritual" unconsciously, and by doing so "curse themselves" without even being aware they are doing so, let alone doing so successfully, the actual "use" of "ritual magick" is quite high by comparison to its "benefit."

the primary method by which people unconsciously curse themselves using magick ritual is by applying "confirmation bias" to the initial hypothesis of an "external locus of control." We are conditioned to believe in a "higher power" than ourselves from the earliest age - we are born dependent on nurture for survival. Instead of overcoming this phase in development and acquiring "self-sufficiency" in an economy defined by competition on a non-level playing field, where inequality is the norm, lack of success at such is explicable by the simple difficulty of succeeding by doing so; it is far easier to give up in a "no win situation" than it is to attempt to prevail. This inability to win through definitively unfair rules in a game one did not invent themselves can, in many cases, prolapse into evangelical "entitlement-ism," where we believe that a "higher power" is and will continue to sustain us, against the odds defined by "nature" outside of human "society." This "higher power," be it "god" or "government" is, also by definition, NOT REAL or "Imaginary Only," because it is conceived to oppose the REAL and "Natural" force of entropy; if "god is good" it is because "he" provides us with an easier survival, likewise with "government" in the eyes of its religious "statists." Belief one is benefitting from such an "external locus of control" is a "self-fulfilling prophecy" because we apply "confirmation bias" to our filtering of evidence for or against it. By BELIEVING in "god" we CAUSE this idea to "exist" - in as many minds as possible, as much as any idea can be said to "exist" - and thus we CREATE for ourselves an "external locus" in Reality that will "benefit" us in the short-term less than it will be a "detriment" to us in the long-term. If we sacrifice our willingness to compete and our belief we can succeed by doing so, we fall back on faith that an external locus of control will provide for us. This faith is founded only in short-term benefits, but, by relieving us from the calisthenic exercise of competition, it weakens us in the long-term.

I pity those who consider the paranormal "suspicious," considering there is no basis for the concept of "normalcy" outside routine.

when we take one step into the unknown, the unknown takes two steps into us. There is a saying I like, variously attributable: "the mind, once distended by a new idea, rarely returns to its original dimensions." The more we learn, the further we go away from who we were before. It's all a part of negentropic growth and progress.

the mind can project mental imagery which the body can sense as being objectively real. These images cannot be confirmed objectively by third-party observers. However, the mind can also manifest matter mentally, and these apparitions CAN be verified by other people's senses. The bridge between a "personal projection" and an "objective manifestation" comes by researching the manner the projection relates with the environment - the set and setting of the person it appears to - including (if any) mythological references to similar such sort of experiences. If what you are experiencing is "real" in an objective sense, it will have a history of appearing to others as well. Most apparitions that appear to us from the unconscious ether do so as a form of guide through a subsequent series of even more transformative perceptions. Peace!

the esoteric "sea" has its limits, and these are easily exhausted prior to the limits of the (by modern measures) average human life-span. Modern QBLHists differentiate the "scholastic" from the "mystic" schools on the study of ha QBLH such that "scholastics" only study, while "mystics" practice ecstatic rituals. I side with the "scholastics" and would posit even further that "all that can be known can be known in one lifetime," and that knowledge of this kind (being scholastic, without need for "direct experience" for validation) is superior to "mystic" knowledge gained by "direct experience." Books may lie or tell the truth, and this is determined easily enough. But the ghosts summoned from the psyche by ritual magick are, themselves, lies the mind tells itself, and so, in turn, are incapable of honesty. The "paranormal" and "supernatural" realms are not so vast, nor so scary, as past "mystics" have led their foolish followers to believe. Peace!

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

If marijuana can constitutionally be classified as a "schedule one" substance, then Face-book CAN, constitutionally, be "schedule one'd" by the Federal Government as well. Face-book meets the qualifications of being "addictive, having no proven medical value, and being unsafe to its users" that determine this class of drugs.

face-book is a dizzying zodiac of cognitive dissonances.

if it can be considered Constitutional for the Federal Government to outlaw ANYTHING it chooses to, simply by labeling it a "schedule one" substance. The question isn't whether the Constitution says anything to specifically prohibit the Federal Government from doing this, but if the Constitution says anything specifically ALLOWING and ENCOURAGING this. If the Constitution doesn't mention it, that doesn't make it "legal" by default, as many Federal Judges are quick to assume. The fact is that the power to arbitrarily label ANYTHING a "crime" corrupts anyone who wields it, and inevitably they abuse this authority, imbued on them by public respect, immorally against the masses. On the one hand, there IS an argument that CAN be made that the Constitution DOES ALLOW the Federal Government this authority; and on the other is the argument that the Constitution does NOT allow the Federal Government to do this. I mention this because recently US District Judge Kimberly Mueller of Sacramento, California, ruled that the "schedule one" classification being applied to marijuana was "Constitutional" for the Federal Government to have done. This didn't mean the ruling for it do so was "right" or "wrong," only that, according to the Federal Judge, the Federal Government was within the rights granted to it by the Constitution for it to do so. Personally, I don't think the Federal Government SHOULD be allowed to classify ANYTHING it chooses to as a "schedule one" substance and declare it "illegal." However, there are people who argue the opposite side who claim that there is usefulness and possibly fairness in the Federal Government being allowed to do so. Assuming the Federal Government saw some risk in some substance to its citizens, they would posit, it should be allowed to classify it as a "dangerous" substance and render it illegal in order to deter the people from using it. By this standard, you could outlaw chocolate or coffee, just as alcohol underwent prohibition or the British sought to embargo tea to the American colonies. Making heroin illegal, for example, is widely accepted to be a morally "good" thing, and a "fair" application of this authority empowered to the US Federal Government. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on all this, since it is a complex and many-sided issue. Peace!

[Jonathan Barlow Gee]

all telecommunications technology is a desensitization device - polarized extremes of opinion in social networks online and in t.v. and radio media cause cognitive dissonance to seem normalized. Instead of increasing our empathy, the "mirror box" only increases our apathy. radio, television and now the internet as well - these are only efficient forms of mass hypnotic mind-control. and we are all, already, the consensual slaves of robots.