Copy
Website
Blog
Facebook
Vimeo
ISSUETHIRTYSEVEN
all roads lead to mi-fu  //  our earth is purging


AUDIO NARRATIVE

INTRODUCTION // TOURS #27 // FREE LOVING // DEEP PATHOLOGY // INOCULATION // PARADIGMATIC // WHAT DID? // THE TRUTH

 

Whose will is most free, charts the destinies of worlds.

Zealotry is NOT the answer... ever.

We don’t teach from our commonalities, for what does sameness have to teach? No, we teach from our differences, and therein lies all potential for growth-- even if only the growth of tolerance and acceptance.

We are the promises of prophets long dead, their generational words come to life.

Introduction to the Phase One Terminus Newsletter

(February 2015)

 

Well, it seems this is the moment I’ve been waiting for... for the last twenty-odd years. I haven’t exactly been sitting on my hands though, so ‘waiting’ might not be exactly right. I knew that at some point there would be a palpable shift in the way I perceive the world, and I suspected that many others would share in that shift in perspective roughly simultaneously too. It’s happened.

 

Up until this point, my target audience for these seemingly endless writings has been ‘those who are not quite convinced that anything out of the ordinary is happening at all.’ I’ve tried to the best of my ability to lay down a foundation for understanding what’s been bubbling beneath the surface of world events for these past few decades. I’ve come at this idea of the Slow Apocalypse from virtually every angle I could think of, purposely steering away from the wildest and most controversial conspiracy theories along the way. Admittedly, I’ve had to touch upon more than a few conspiracy theories, but to pretend that the geopolitical stage is utterly bereft of any and all conspiracy would be naive in the extreme. It is what it is.

 

The world is now being pulled apart. This is the breakthrough, the bifurcation, the stratification of the densities, of the supportive energies. We, the populace of Earth-- the creators of this day-to-day world through our shared beliefs and subconscious agreements-- are being separated into two primary camps. The one is the traditional hierarchically-structured system of domination and control which we’ve historically called civilization, or alternatively what I’ve called the World-Devouring Machine. The other camp consists of those who are ready to move on to civilization 2.0. We’re done with unsustainable geopolitical and economic systems which have failed us and are therefore doomed to complete failure. We’re done with social conventions and conditioning which undermine our own best interests. We’re the brave ones who are prepared to roll up our sleeves and move on into a world of shared, sustainable vision founded upon a diverse unity.

 

This Movement, this Shift has largely focused upon a singular mission to this point: to try and inform others of what we believe is going on. It has been the inevitable question whenever someone new is exposed to the very idea of an apocalypse: “Okay, if what you are saying is true, what do we do about it?” So far, the standard answer has been to spread the word or wake up the others. That was Phase One-- telling the world of the coming ‘end.’

 

Phase Two moves directly into what comes after. Phase Two is the actual building of the New Earth. We can no longer be concerned who and how many believe what we’re saying. In fact, it is time now to prove to ourselves that we know what we’re talking about, by demonstrating it. We have to show that there is indeed a viable, sustainable, peaceful and loving world quite possible after the slow-motion destruction we’re witnessing right now... and it lives inside of each one of us... as it always has.

 

Prior to this moment of demarkation, the prospect of trying to implement sane and loving systems in an insane world run by psychopaths has proven to be nearly impossible. But the psychos have effectively lost their grip; it was a matter of their own prolonged survival. Their elaborate systems of domination and control had to release us now, as we’ve seen right through them. We’re free to pursue the alternative without nearly as much interference as we’ve traditionally had to deal with. The controllers and manipulators are concentrating their doomed-to-failure efforts on retaining what little support they still have among the contented sleepers. Energetically, we’re essentially outside of their system (the Matrix) now.

 

So this Newsletter is about tying up loose ends. These are the last foundational stones that needed to be set in place completing the bridge between the Old Earth and the New Earth-- all the rationalizations, philosophies, narratives and pithy phrases supporting this (bowel) Movement. Hereafter, my focus will shift from enumerating all of the tragic flaws and self-destructive tendencies inherent in the World-Devouring Machine, and will henceforth focus more exclusively on creating the New.

 

The many thousands of pages of original work I’ve penned so far can stand on their own as a lifeline-- straddling the two worlds-- to those who will yet awaken in the future, desperately seeking a way out of the horror. And I, along with many others, will exercise our loving arms in the meantime in order to offer that alternative embrace when the moment comes.

Message To/From the TOURS #27

Released from the Matrix! 

or 

The ‘Splitting of Worlds’ Explained

 

You may recall that a couple months back I was rather confused by the reawakened prospect of the ‘splitting of the world.’ Energetically, I knew that that’s what was going on, or about to transpire, but I couldn’t fathom how such a split was to actually manifest in the ‘real’ world.

Andrew Bartzis, the Galactic Historian, has called it the separating of the densities. It seems that most people who are attuned to unseen energetic fluctuations universally felt a dramatic shift right around the end of the holidays and the start of the new year. Something big had happened just outside of our direct awareness, but we couldn’t quite put our fingers on exactly what had occurred.

The Lightworkers, the Starseeds, the Crystal Kids, the Indigos, the crack-pots and nut-jobs were all released from the Matrix. All those who could no longer abide by the insane ‘rules’ of ‘civilized’ life, all the peaceful warriors and rebels were proving to be too disruptive to the hierarchical slave Matrix… so they cut us loose. We’ve been released!

We were kicked out because our unwavering persistence was threatening to shatter the entire illusion. By energetically removing us from the ensnaring net, the game could be salvaged and continue on for at least a little longer. The hope for the controllers and manipulators is to consolidate their efforts upon only those with whom the illusion still holds dominant sway. Every effort now is being made to show those who are comfortable with the hierarchy that they are indeed making the right choice in aligning themselves with the old patterns upon which this modern civilization was built.

So where does this leave the rest of us? Fair question!

Intent is a universal force in Creation. In the externalized reality, the manifestation of our intentions has to come through an energetic grid. That grid can be thought of as the collective planetary dream. The grid (or collective dream) gives specific shape and definition to all that we manifest so that it can all exist coherently as a singular, seamless reality. Except now, there’s two collective dreams running simultaneously on the planet.

The old Matrix, the energy grid we’ve known all our lives, is anchored in sacred geometry, especially through the layout of major urban centres throughout the world– as designed by Freemasons throughout history. It is further augmented by EMF pollution, chemtrails, covert scalar weaponry, etheric psionic devices and all of the visible systems of control. It has been overlaid upon the natural planetary grid known as the Ley Lines.

All our lives we were denied direct and clear access to the Ley Line grid. The Matrix always interfered energetically keeping all of us ensnared in limitation and lack. And now we’ve been released! Or at least, some of us have.

What this means moving forward has several important repercussions. The natural Ley Line grid is Mother Earth’s own dreaming. It is the natural, organic, planetary timeline– it’s energetic support system. Now is the time for us to really connect with nature, with the planet, with the Earth Mother. We have direct access to her aspirations of abundance for all; all we need to do is to actively choose to work in partnership with her. She is wise, powerful and protective. By aligning with the Earth we will have our first real opportunity to build the New world, to establish the second renaissance.

But this will also require us to turn away from the Matrix, to engage it less and less. For myself, for example, I will have to make a deliberate effort to pay far less attention (energy) to the endless news about the collapse of the old world. It literally is no longer any concern of mine. Earth Mother humbly requests that I withdraw my energy fully from the Matrix.

Our energy is needed now for the full-on creation of the New. This is how the Ascension will unfold. Those who are still comfortably snug in their place in the Matrix will NOT be persuaded by our arguments. There is simply nothing we can say anymore that has any hope of extricating them. But this is not an abandonment. We must actively seek to provide an alternative when conditions within the Matrix become so unbearable that the sleepers begin to question and wake up– from the circumstances they find themselves within, not from any of our ‘clever’ arguments.

Trust that the Matrix is fundamentally unsustainable. It WILL fall, without any further provocation from us. We are now literally occupying two different worlds here on Earth. Right now it is still possible for some to straddle both collective dreamspaces, but with each passing moment it becomes harder as the densities continue to separate.

As we align with the natural Earth grid, we will evolve, raising our collective frequency. Yes, we will effectively be pulling away from our beloved sleepers as they either stay mired where they are or slip further down the frequency ladder. Please accept that there’s nothing more that we can do about that– directly. Conditions within the Matrix will quickly become so bad for most who are mired therein that they will have no choice but to seriously question the reality they inhabit (something many of us have taken for granted all of our lives). When they finally lift their noses from the hierarchical grindstone, they will be ready to see for the very first time that there is, indeed, an alternative– and it’s more than viable. It is our task now to make the alternative thrive.

Everyone can only come to the New Earth through their own sovereign choice to participate. No one can be forced or dragged here. You weren’t. Trust the process. Reclaim your full mantle as creator in participatory co-creation with Earth Mother and all her awakened children. It is the way forward… and it’s beautiful!

(Just a reminder, the Treed Earth Network– TEN– is a direct access to the Ley Line grid I’m talking about. The easiest way to consistently access it is through hugging a tree. Seriously. The trees are the trustworthy guardians and gatekeepers to the Shining World. They have already established a living global grid which is directly tied into the planetary Ley Lines. Tell your intentions to the trees; give them your love and energy; they will not disappoint. Or connect to the natural Earth energy in whatever way feels right to you.)

It’s time to build!

FreeLovingWill

 

Faith:

Love is not a choice;

it is the end of choice.

Surrender.

 

Love can only Be,

and its Being is only loving,

so every choice is already made.

 

It may seem that freewill is nullified,

but if Love is our true nature,

Mightn’t it Be that our Will is loving too?

 

Every choice for an unloving journey

leads equally away from freedom

than from our inherently loving Will.

 

Unloving journeys lead to narrow,

tight,

desperate choices:

the whole world teeters upon the shaky fulcrum

of the ‘one right decision’

...over and over.

 

The ways of loving are infinite...

while unloving choices yield diminishing returns...

burning bridges...

making islands.

 

Now, I can only choose to surrender

to my own FreeLovingWill.

The Deep Pathology of Hero-Worship

 

The hero’s paradigm is fraught with paradox. As a society, collectively, we are ever in search of the latest-greatest hero who might soothe our societal ills, and yet the very structure of our societal institutions serve the function of ensuring that extraordinary heroes cannot arise. Our fostering systems, whether educational or political-- or any other-- operate on a conformity of thought, action and behaviour. At every turn, individuals are rewarded for ‘playing along,’ for following the rules, and only if you are exceptionally good at obeying the contrived system, might you eventually excel within it. Conversely, those who choose to operate outside of the system’s checks and balances, those who might wish to bring much-needed overhaul to those very systems-- through conceiving a better way-- are dutifully marginalized and ultimately outcast, their radical ideas tossed to the scrap heap. It is a situation of malaise, stagnation and impasse.

 

We are stuck searching for heroes within a matrix which promises to crucify him as soon as he raises his voice... leaving us utterly dependent upon the one thing we can never have.

 

Hero-worship has been sold to us relentlessly. In politics, religion, entertainment, even in the love quests of our personal lives, only the appropriate hero can fill our pathological need. Hero-worship is borne out of polarity. Heroes are needed to balance the inevitable rise of villains. The hero-villain dichotomy is the basis for our societal morality. Good must oppose bad; there is simply no other way-- or so we are told again and again. As such, a foundational belief underpins our entire societal structure: that all action in a civilized world is rooted in conflict and attempted conflict resolution.

 

We consequently imagine that the very best in each of us is drawn out only through competition and hardship. After all, the hero can only become a hero through impossible struggle, right? We see fighting as a necessary aspect of character-building. Our tacit acceptance of such a doctrine causes us to view the world through tinted glasses, where wild animals are seen as ferocious beasts in endless pitched battles with one another. And yet, that’s not what our (updated) sciences tell us at all; it is in fact co-operation and nurturance that are the primary driving forces of natural evolution. Our experience too consistently contradicts this notion of nature waging perpetual war. When we go for a walk in the woods, or go camping, or fishing-- we do so generally because we appreciate the deep balance and peace nature provides. Certainly, conflict arises in the cycle of predation, but its incidence is minuscule compared to the deep harmony of nature’s community. The forest’s critters do not live in a general state of fear; they do not have chronically elevated cortisol levels!

 

Nature has no heroes. Can you imagine if nature’s sublime balance relied upon the actions of heroic individuals? Evolution would not have occurred. Evolution is a product of community, but real community has always stood apart from the Hero’s Quest.

 

As individuals continually seeking out the heroic, we ever fail to recognize any need to fully take responsibility for our lives and their circumstances. In a world searching out heroes, victimization is an inevitability. The very search for heroes requires victims.

 

And the other side of the coin, when the hero is found, if he be truly worthy of the designation ‘hero,’ he then spends considerable energy battling the appellation. He insists that “Indeed, I am no hero. It’s not about me at all. It is my message and my behaviour which seem so praiseworthy; the man before you is irrelevant.” But as a society we are deaf to this brand of sanity; we place heroes upon pedestals... from which they must eventually fall, for they were indeed correct in pointing away from themselves, in telling us that we mustn’t invest our hopes in fictitious characters. We are fools.

 

And there is none more foolish than the one in love; experience bears this out. Could it be that our insistence on the quest for Hero has distorted our very conception of love, that we know not what it truly is nor where to find its everlastingness? Here, I know, I stand on dangerous ground. The ideas of soul-mates, twin-flames, and the exclusionary nature of romantic love have been sold to us at every turn. Marriage vows typically contain the phrase “to the exclusion of all others.” Is this truly love?  Is it a rare and precious thing which can only seldom occur between two extraordinarily lucky individuals, and must be defended by any means necessary from the infiltration of the unloving? Really? Do you see? Our very conception of the supposed highest love is itself undeniably unloving! We wrap our arms around our sacred beloved and declare “This is mine and mine alone; everyone else fuck off! And I mean it!” This is our typical view of our most passionate, romantic love. Does anyone else see a flaw in this?

 

And how do we view it when our sacred beloved leaves us for the love of another? They have made the ‘difficult’ decision to pursue their own happiness with someone else... and we are left crushed, devastated, betrayed and utterly stripped bare of any love we might have thought we once had. Let me reiterate: this is the inevitable result of our former lover pursuing their continued happiness, further exploring love-- a very positive thing by any objective reckoning-- and yet it destroys us! Something is very wrong here.

 

The social engineers of domination and control are quite content to let us battle it out with each other for an eternity, scrapping over this misconception of love’s true nature. We imagine that if we were to learn to extend our highest love-- that which we feel for our special beloved-- to include all others, then we are betraying and diminishing the ‘specialness’ we share. Of course, such an action can be no diminishment at all, primarily because the exclusivity of our ‘love’ is not love at all; it lies squarely within the realms of relative truth... Whereas love the transcendent, the Absolute, can only be actualized through just such an indiscriminatory  application of universal acceptance and being. When we fall in love with that special someone, that is a taste and an invitation to learn how to properly apply that feeling, that state of being, to everyone we encounter, to allow it to become the full flowering of love. It is our deep-seated need for hero-worship which distorts our greatest opportunity for learning into a self-destructive fortress of preferential treatment and regard. And it’s pathological.

 

We cannot be complete in ourselves. None of us is ever good enough. We endlessly seek out the other to fulfill all that we refuse to acknowledge and develop in ourselves. We must rely upon the special knowledge of experts in every aspect of our lives. We refuse to take responsibility for our own health and eventually we must seek out the heroic doctor who can save us from our own foolishness. We get into trouble with the law and only a heroic lawyer can save us from the ruination of our lives. The invocation of the necessity for heroes finds endless examples in our current society. Is it any wonder that we’ve become so unskilled at building community? Virtually everything we think and do stands in opposition to the very idea of loving community.

 

And finally, to answer the inevitable question: Yes, indeed, I have fallen in love before. It was undeniably the most profound experience of my life. It was a very long time ago however. And in the meantime, I have created the space in consciousness to revisit that tumultuous episode. What is undeniable now is that when I was in love I was completely insane. I was literally incapable of making rational decisions consistently. I had lost any semblance of a balanced view of reality... And at the time, I was sure that it was the most wonderful experience a human being can have! And now I see it as the basis for the mess we’re in.

 

There is a fundamental misunderstanding lying at the heart of civilization in its current incarnation. Perhaps it’s time we got past our petty jealousies and the need for someone to repair the inevitable wounds which result, hm? We are community; we already have everything we need; no heroes required. Who’s with me?

A Little Inoculation Against the Vaccine Distraction

 

The vaccine debate, like most every other controversial subject, is primarily a distraction. “A distraction from what?” you ask. A distraction from the real issue at hand. Vaccines are presumably about preventative medicine, and yet in the ongoing debate, the very idea of preventative medicine is barely mentioned or examined or explored. Vaccines are really the only tool in the modern medicine toolkit that deals specifically with prevention, and as the hysteria rages on, on both sides, the very idea that there may be other useful forms of preventative medicine, like nutrition, clean water, proper sanitation, adequate sleep and exercise and other lifestyle choices, gets routinely pushed aside.

 

It is this very ostracization of preventative strategies from our modern conception of health which forms the basis for my personal rejection of the entire allopathic paradigm. I know, I know... they don’t like it when I call it ‘allopathic.’ The preferred term among mainstream health practitioners is ‘evidence-based’ medicine, but the glaring problem with that term is that it not-so-subtly implies that all other forms or systems of medical treatment/prevention are not based on evidence... and that’s just wrong. This is a whole other subject... but one which I explore in depth in my essay The Paradigmatic Shortfalls of Mainstream Medicine.

 

I have been drawn into the vaccine debate numerous times, despite the fact that I care very little about vaccines and who receives them and who doesn’t. Honestly, I wouldn’t give a shit at all if there wasn’t this looming spectre of a vaccine mandate hanging above the whole fray. To me, that is the only aspect of the debate worth commenting on. That vaccines remain a product of individual choice to consumers is all that matters.

 

Typically, in the froth of vaccine hysteria, anyone who expresses a reluctance to immediately submit to any and all vaccinations which may be recommended by a medical professional is instantly categorized as ‘anti-vaccine.’ I am not anti-vaccine; I am pro-choice. And there’s a huge difference. If someone who wishes to receive a vaccine is denied access to that vaccine, I will be the first one to sign a petition on their behalf demanding unfettered access. I believe very strongly that if you wish to receive all of the recommended vaccines that you should be given them. It’s your choice, and that should definitely be respected. Let natural selection prevail.

 

The crucial issue is the right to self-determination. I don’t know how else to state the importance of the right to self-determination other than to say that it is the singular most important aspect of living a life as a human being on this planet at this time. There is no other issue which supersedes it. Really, the right to self-determination underlies virtually everything I write. It is the common theme to all of my moral philosophizing.

 

Real science is compelling, never coercive. There is nothing more repugnant in my mind than the legal enforcement of medical interventions against one’s honest will. The scientific validity of the placebo effect is acknowledged and well-established within vaccine academia, therefore to inject someone with any agent which they honestly believe to cause more harm than good is commensurate with rape. State-sanctioned rape is still rape... commensurately speaking.

 

The enforcement of a vaccine mandate stems from the hypothesis of herd immunity. This is the only ‘reasonable’ justification for such an action. Herd immunity hypothesizes that if a certain relatively high percentage of a population acquires immunity, that immunity is conferred to the entirety of the herd, including the weaker members who might otherwise die in the event of exposure. This has been observed in nature, among animal populations who have acquired natural immunity to specific pathogens. Herd immunity is a real thing in nature, but applying it to vaccine-induced immunity is the hypothesis. Can it be done? Does it work?

 

I’ve been reluctant to even call herd immunity a theory at this point. A scientific theory, after collecting and collating relevant data for decades, should be able to put out publicly a detailed predictive model for exactly what level of vaccine coverage is needed to confer herd immunity for each pathogen targeted. If the predictive threshold is reached and herd immunity fails, the theory has to have some accounting for its failures. One of the primary determiners of a scientific theory’s validity is its predictive ability; the results should match to a consistently high degree with what the theory predicts, with detailed precision.

 

Herd immunity remains a hypothesis. Check the data; it is far from a proven theory, and therefore cannot be the basis for public health policy.

 

Both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated can be carriers of the disease without themselves exhibiting symptoms. For injected vaccines, the immunity conferred lies in the production of serum antibodies (in the blood). The body’s natural immune system, however, concentrates its efforts wisely at the periphery of its domain. Its main defenses are at the various mucosal membranes (from mouth to anus and a few more) where mucosal antibodies are produced. It’s a different kind of immunity, mucosal versus serum, wherein the body concentrates its efforts at allowing no pathogenic ingress at any of the body’s entrance points, preferring not to rely on the last defense, once  reaching the bloodstream, and its serum antibodies. That this may have a bearing on the efficacy of herd immunity in the vaccine paradigm-- the data certainly suggests it.

 

The eradication of smallpox is often heralded as a major vaccine accomplishment. That’s rather curious though. It certainly wasn’t achieved through herd immunity. Less than 10% of the world’s population was ever inoculated against it, and yet it completely disappeared. Vaccine proponents point out that a ‘ring strategy’ was employed, wherein the latest outbreaks were aggressively tracked and surrounded by fresh inoculants. This too is a plausible hypothesis. But again, if we have a comprehensive working vaccine theory fully explicated in scientific terms, why can’t the successes be more frequent? That is the point, isn’t it? To eradicate infectious disease. Over the many decades of widespread vaccine use, only two diseases for which vaccines were developed and employed have ever been eradicated: smallpox in 1980 and rinderpest in 2011. I wonder what the natural rate of pathogen decline and extinction is in epidemiology? Two a century seems reasonable, especially when the pathogens’ host species begins en masse to refrain from living in its own filth. Yes, that’s right, pathogens naturally die out, especially when you take away their favourite breeding grounds. Bubonic plague anyone?

 

A viable scientific theory centered around the deployment of vaccines has got to do better, consistently. All of its claimed successes are questionable; science has to answer those questions satisfactorily.

 

Where can I find the detailed thesis on how exactly vaccines work in modern populations and the specific strategies that should be employed to further eradicate dangerous diseases therein? In science, you don’t get to pretend that you have a theory; you actually have to write it out comprehensively and concisely, so that it may be scrutinized, understood and tested by others.

 

I am willing to stipulate that vaccines confer some benefit for some recipients. (The placebo effect alone has got me covered on that one.) But to many people, the risk-to-benefit ratio on vaccines is way too high, especially for those who are aware of dozens of immune-boosting choices they can make everyday to increase their overall immunity to all pathogens, not just the ones specifically targeted in the vaccine industry’s micro-management of some disease. Those individual risk-to-benefit assessments should be respected.

 

If vaccines work, then the status of the unvaccinated is irrelevant to the health of the vaccinated. Your vaccine either works or it doesn’t, and the unscientific blame-game has no place in public health policy. If the eradication of diseases must rely upon 100% vaccination, it is unachievable, but even if it were, why wasn’t that the case in either of the claimed historic success stories? (Not even close!) Scientific theories need to be consistent; that’s not really optional.

 

If vaccines are to be central to public health, then a coherent plan, based in rigorous science, which answers all of the public’s concerns satisfactorily is all it would take. A legal mandate wouldn’t be necessary. To demand a detailed strategy and the expected results according to all of the data compiled so far is a perfectly reasonable and completely scientific request. Convince me with more than Facebook memes and lame demonstrations by oddball magicians. Lay out the science, all of it, concisely in one place; that’s what other sciences do. And please show directly, and in no uncertain terms, the clear link between vaccine science and the public health policy derived therefrom. All I’ve ever wanted was clear, explicated science. I have the right to understand the full rationality of it, and have all of my questions and concerns answered to my satisfaction, if public health policy actually claims to be based in science.

 

“Getting your flu shot is the single best thing you can do to prevent the flu,” said the tv add paid for by my government health agency. Bullshit. Optimizing your serum vitamin D level kicks the flu shot’s ass! But rather than support the case for vitamin D here-- this is about vaccines, after all-- let’s take a peek at the conclusion reached by the Cochrane Review’s 2010 meta-study, the largest one undertaken to date on the efficacy of flu vaccines. In the words of Tom Jefferson, the lead medical researcher: “In other words, we report that no effect of the influenza vaccines was detectable on influenza and its complications such as death.” Got that? Flu shot: no effect... largest study of its kind. Yet, my government sees fit to inform the public that the flu shot is the best we can do. Really? Something that confers no detectable benefit is the best we can do? Irresponsible. There are many, many things we can do to prevent the flu. (Please see my Independently Healthy: A Quick Reference Guide for a few suggestions.)

 

And for the record, my dog has all of her shots. I’m not convinced that they are necessarily the very best thing for her, but according to my research and experience, dogs tolerate vaccines generally well, and a dog’s vaccine schedule is far more reasonable than a human’s. I risked it; see, I’m really not anti-vaccine.

 

Now let the hysteria resume!

The Paradigmatic Shortfalls of Mainstream Medicine

 

Whatever I may lament in the words which follow, it is my own lament. There is no medical advice intended or implied.

 

The first thing that needs to be stipulated is that acute trauma emergency care in our modern mainstream hospitals is generally topnotch. The people who put back together all variety of accident victims are doing excellent work. I am sincerely grateful for their presence and expertise.

 

As for the rest of the modern mainstream medical establishment, it’s not for me.

 

About twenty years ago I noticed something. People, relatively young people, people I knew... were getting cancer and dying, some of them in their early fifties. Of course there was nothing new there, just the fact that I suddenly noticed it, once it actually impinged on the periphery of my own life. And another horrifying fact became immediately clear too: the treatment was often worse than the disease. The answer to the relentless scourge of cancer was immediately obvious to me; prevention was the only reasonable answer. It was this conclusion which inevitably led me away from conventional medicine... and into everything else. Health became an adventurous exploration; I honestly wanted to know exactly what was best for me.

 

I am responsible for my own health; that is the basic foundation of my health. It makes no sense to take responsibility for one’s own health only when health has already been compromised; by then, it’s largely too late... The opportunity for prevention has obviously already passed.

 

If I wish to be effective in my preventative strategies, I have to engage in a dialogue with my body, its innate and superb intelligence. I trust my immune system to function impeccably if it’s consistently provided all that it needs. In order to know what those needs are, I’ve honed my intuition through relentless practice and a great deal of experimentation and trial-and-error. But it’s really very simple: when symptoms arise-- especially those mysterious ones with no discernible physical cause-- I understand that some aspect of my lifestyle needs adjustment. I’ve learned over time that it’s best to address symptoms as soon as they’re detected, rather than waiting for them to get more serious before making lifestyle adjustments-- ranging from nutritional tinkering to new meditation protocols.

 

Modern doctoring, at best, ignores the conversation I may be having with my body’s innate intelligence, and at the worst, denies that such a conversation is even possible. The diagnose-and-drug-’em paradigm can only rudely interrupt that conversation and further disrupt and corrupt the very language employed. Unpredictable side-effects are like gibberish infecting the internal dialogue.

 

As an adult (I’m nearly 49), I have never had a prescription... for anything. As a child, I once had an 8-day course of penicillin for an ear infection and a prescription skin cream for severe dryness, at the end of my 8 years of competitive swimming. That’s my medical history as far as modern medical history is concerned.

 

“Ah Niels, you must have very good genes then.” Be that as it may, it is of very limited relevance. Decades ago, geneticists led the public to believe that genetics were a powerful determiner for physical expression, but that’s not quite how it turned out. The newer science of epigenetics has since taught us that only 5% of our physical expression is pre-determined; the other 95% is a result of our responses to our environmental conditions. Our choices in everyday life are what determine which specific proteins the genes are coded to produce, selecting from among as many as 20,000 coded proteins for a single gene. There is such a variety of expression! And that expression relies directly on the choices we make for dealing (or not) with every stressor in our environment, inside and out.

 

From my vantage, drugs, surgery and radiation look a lot like a box of hammers. In simply trying to respect my body, and taking full responsibility for my own wellbeing, I have come to appreciate my health and clarity in a way that is immeasurably beyond merely being disease-free. In this internal conversation, I have come alive. My body tells me everyday of new ways to become more alive; they’re subtle, but cumulative. I have to invest my belief into something; I believe in the relationship between myself and my body’s innate intelligence above anything a pharmaceutically-based paradigm can offer.

 

With the products for sale in the modern medical marketplace, I am forced to ask repeatedly “But is that really the best we can do?”

 

How much effort and funding-- honestly-- really goes into research and education for preventative medicine? And then compare that to the money propping up drugs as the answer.

 

My health relates very little to the convenience of market concerns.

 

I believe in root causes, and those causes can be physical/chemical, emotional, spiritual or other, or any combination of those. Pharmaceutical use is based primarily upon statistics, and typically ignores or circumvents root causes. “Here, let’s try you out on this,” says the doctor, scribbling in his prescription pad. “We’ve had the most success with this brand in treating your condition, but if it doesn’t work for you, or the side-effects are intolerable, there’s still plenty of other brands we can try.” From a health perspective, I find that particular conversation rather absurd.

 

I so much prefer being proactive with my health. Some say I’m just lucky, but honestly, I’ve never understood the science of luck; please enlighten me.

___________________________________________

 

And for your amusement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQZ2UeOTO3I John Oliver has a bit of a go at Big Pharma.

What Did I Do to Deserve This?

An Open Letter to the Universe

 

Dear Universe,

 

I have heard that “life is hard,” that “no one ever said that life was fair,” and that “to live is to suffer.” I suppose it’s true that I have suffered, but I’ve been so unable to focus on the suffering that I can’t honestly attribute much significance to it other than as a facilitator of all that is now wonderful in my life. Please don’t get me wrong; I don’t particularly like suffering any more than the next guy, but I understand, I accept, I embrace its necessity in bringing about all that comes after... as I allow.

 

As a retrospective creature, I have looked back upon my life many, many times, to all the immature dreams of my youth. Being also an imaginative sort, I can easily envision the alternate courses my life might’ve taken had my wishes been met as a young man. What a dreadfully wasteful life that would have been! If that part of me which aspires toward a life of comfort and ease had been given ample reward through wishes granted while a woefully undeveloped character still stood at the helm of my being, what a ruin this life might’ve been.

 

Dreams and aspirations require honing, just as surely does one’s character. My many, many mistakes are the whetstone upon which I have sharpened the edge of my special madness which has inexplicably come to love and to cherish this life. Just a few years ago I would have been utterly incapable of writing-- let alone even conceiving-- a little thank you note such as this. But truly, thank you.

 

Thank you universe, soul, spirit... for knowing me far better than I ever have, and for consistently honouring the totality of my being above the pettiness of ill-conceived wishes. These are tremendously exciting times, and their challenges only look insurmountable to those who remain lost in their own suffering. I thank you equally for the experiences which brought my suffering as I do for the experience of growing beyond them. Thank you for trusting me!

 

I look forward to a grander partnership.

 

Love,

Niels.

‘The Truth’ Is a Red Herring

or

What the Apocalypse Is Really All About!

 

Seven billion truths knocking about, and most tacitly claiming to be the real one... or at least a superior one-- I’m sick of it! Hey, all you science types who love to enforce your relative truths upon others, it’s time to upgrade your operating systems. Jump ahead a hundred years and join the rest of us who actually espouse a modern scientific viewpoint!

 

‘The truth’ does not exist! Or to be more precise, ‘the truth’ presents differently to every observer/participant, hence the term ‘relative truth.’ It was Einstein who demonstrated this about a hundred years ago with a famous thought experiment which has become a staple in physics textbooks ever since. The experiment is called Relativity of Simultaneity. The undeniable and universally agreed-upon conclusion of this thought experiment is that the sequence of events for any occurrence is dependent upon and unique to the relative motion of individual observers. In simplest terms, ‘the truth’ is relative to the circumstances of one’s observation; there is no singular objective truth to be found... anywhere... so stop looking... and stop insisting that your red herring stinks any less than my red herring!

 

(For a full-- but brief-- description of the Relativity of Simultaneity thought experiment, you may wish to consult my previous essay Once (More) and for All (Time). That essay deals extensively with the quantum mechanical implications for ‘objectivity’ and consciousness.)

 

Ego is the aspect of consciousness we utilize to operate within the realm of relative truth. Within that realm of human experience, ego is perfectly necessary. Ego’s chronic tendency, however, is to overstep or overstate its own significance, and to misapply its discoveries (relative truths) upon All That Is. The irony of this oft-repeated ‘mistake’ is that whatever relative truth is being promulgated is exactly correct and true for the ego espousing it in that moment... but only for that ego’s unique perspective in that moment. It can’t necessarily be applied to anyone else, or their unique circumstance.

 

What ego has such difficulty understanding is that we don’t live in a universe of events of which we are the perceivers. Instead, we live in universes of experiences in which we participate. Experiences are the basic building blocks of reality, not the events associated with matter and energy interacting in time and space. Those ‘events’ only exist as unique and individual experiences. No experiencer = no event. The only ‘place’ in which any events occur-- ever-- is in mind/perception. They don’t occur ‘out there’ because, quite simply, there is no ‘out there.’

 

Objective reality is an abstraction, or an illusion, if you prefer. In many, many instances, in the course of regular life, it is a very useful abstraction, and quite regularly we should make full use of it. An obvious example of this is forensics. As long as we engage a crime-and-punishment model, forensic science is indispensable. The ‘objective’ reality it appears to investigate, however, is merely a useful abstraction. The only ‘place’ the crime exists is in the experiences of those involved. We can study the evidence, the artifacts, of the experiences in question... and they will suggest to us a story, and the only ‘place’ that story will exist is in the minds of all those who have come to know of the crime... and each person will have a slightly different interpretation of the story suggested.

 

What we so casually perceive as this ‘objective’ reality is a consensus. We agree (subconsciously) on certain parameters of shared experience in order to give consistent context for our experiential explorations... together... but each one’s experience is unique. This is the realm of relative truths-- our current experience here.

 

There is no end to relative truths, and there is no linear depiction that can represent them all in any meaningful way. Science embraces its role when it actively shapes the consensus of relative truths we-- collectively as a world-- accept, according to the stories the evidence suggests.

 

I hope you will agree that there cannot be a linear depiction of ‘falling in love’ that might ever be equivalent to the actual experience of falling in love. Only the actual experience can live up to the actual experience, and it’s not linear, rational or logical; and it can’t be faked. Only experiences are real, and we create virtual worlds of text and context, man and soul, to further our explorations, understandings. But the worlds are not real-- they’re not out there; all the worlds are abstractions of our minds.

 

Events occur only in consciousness, and nowhere else; all else is pretense.

 

We can use the abstraction to deepen our understanding, or, if we’re forgetful, we can fall into pretense, and the pretense can be used to befuddle our understanding. If we place too much of our attention on the world, we’re pouring energy into an abstraction. Instead, we should place our attention directly on our experience of the abstraction, for that, and that alone, is real... and amendable. We can change our experience, always, as a matter of choice. But we cannot change the world directly... only how we experience it.

 

The world (the consensus) responds to the growth in/of our experience. Experience here is gathering relative truths, or belief systems-- if you will. But once a significant portion of the world’s populace begins to see through the ultimate futility of amassing relative truths, the consensus necessarily breaks down. The exploration of that type of experience comes to a natural close. The Big Shift is the new consensus we will reach: what sort of New Earth will we create? But before we can get there, there’s the little shift first. We have to stop giving precedence to the world itself over our sacred experience of the world. Less focus on the abstraction... more energy vitalizing the experience-- the actual scientific reality.

 

So go ahead and slog it out over these relative truths about the world, our consensus. And when you’re done arguing, just ask yourself quite simply “Is that really the experience I want?” And that’s it, you’ve made the little shift. You now are ready to allow your experience to be the vehicle for Truth to come into Being, not the gathered truths from amongst the shared abstraction, the world, from which you’d stitched the quilt of ego.

 

Your experience lies in the seventh direction: inward. Your heart is your journey’s guide through experience. (The mind navigates abstractions-- outwardly.)

 

Your heart desires love; it knows the experience, and promises to deliver it... to the extent that you will venture in.

 

And all I’ve given you here is one more linear depiction, another relative truth, I know. But that’s the difference-- I know! I promise not to tackle you and try to cram my latest relative truth down your throat; I know that you can only come to it... in your own time, in your own way, once you’re honestly done with the realm of relative truths. This promises to be the last one.

 

So there’s not one that stands for them all, but there is One Truth which transcends them all... and It’s always available, no matter where you are.

__________________________________________

 

The search for finite truth goes on forever...

 

END PHASE ONE

 

The Rationale for Faith

 

Upon every new understanding gleaned,

At the threshold of new horizons seen,

We are revealed to be an ever-deepening mystery.

 

Human experience cannot be rationally met, alone;

Love lacks explanations in the vernacular of the known,

And Beauty finds itself in tow to the very fact I cannot know.

 

So where is my faith in rational science,

When all my experience stands in defiance?

All the worth which value grants stands upon a second chance.

 

To fly the chasms that remain unbridged,

While caught in the fractures understandings give,

Only faith may leap at freedom’s gift to finally heal the cosmic rift.

_____________________________________________

 

BEGIN PHASE TWO...


Copyright © 2015 Niels Kunze, the author., All rights reserved.