Control Over Civilization
The four are as follows:
I didn't realize that this level of control existed as a focused entity. Previously, I had understood these elements to be disconnected and random influences in civilization. Thanks to others on the 'net, I am convinced that an organized bunch of plotters are at work in a comical attempt to take over the entire planet. Wow! It's really pitiful that a bunch of teenybopper rich kids can accumulate so much money that they can hire actual physical thugs to carry out their irrational orders. These people are primarily individuals who have acquired their wealth by inheritance. They feel that they are "special" by birth.
Here we're going back to the divine right of kings ... to "it's in the blood" ... i.e. your genes determine your status in life. Of course, this has been proven to be false a thousand times over in the past few centuries. But the group they belong to is older than that and goes back centuries as well ... these are the Free Mason Cults. I just watched a video in which their god is named "Jahbulon" ... and there are demons and two headed dogs and shit ... aarrrrgghhhh. Good grief! These people are going to take over the Earth and make all of us slaves. That's their goal. It's real embarrassing. I hope no aliens land soon else I'll have to hide behind a Bush! ;o)
Their fuel source is the banking system ... particularly the Federal Reserve System ... wherein the US government borrows money (that it could have printed on its own ... and pays the private central bank interest on that "national debt"). Thomas Edison, among many other prominent people said ... why can't the government just print the money itself? ... indeed. Instead of inflating its currency and answering for it at the poles, the bank inflates the money supply and charges interest on it as well. A mosquito sucks your blood out and instead of swatting him ... you have to give him a tip???!!!
Anyway, this level of control is anachronistic in the extreme and can be gotten rid of by the simple expedient of nationalizing the banking industry. There should be only one government bank and absolutely no private bank. The original repugnance of the American people a couple centuries ago to the thought of men gaining wealth by manipulating money was entirely justified. People should only be allowed to acquire wealth by doing something objective that contributes to the maintenance and furtherance of civilization ... and ... they should not be able to pass on vast stores of wealth to their offspring thus creating a dynasty of people who never did anything at all except inherit money and thereafter manipulate it.
The insurance industry needs to be nationalized as well for the same reasons. They've done great harm to civilization and they don't do anything objective. They just manipulate money ... shovel it around and take a cut on every transaction .. and smoke cigars. We just need a reasonably rational government that responds to the voters. All this can be done publicly ... in the full light of day ... by bureaucrats ... that we can get rid of at the poles ... at least to some reasonable extent.
A Personal God
This is a very tricky subject. There is "something" there. It hasn't been ID'd successfully by any religion and I formally condemn them all uniformly. They're just a different form of slaver ... "Do as you are told, not what you think is right" ... and ... "We will tell you what's right" ... and ... "Lay down on that rack and we'll help you so see the light".
The question to be resolved is whether this entity is within each person as a different unit or whether it's using part of your brain in concert with the brain parts of others to make a holistic entity by the distributed computing method. This means that "God" is a composite of the unused computer cycles within all human brains tied together like Project Seti (where you download a program and when your computer isn't busy, it works on parts of Seti's search for extraterrestrials). Do you get it?
I know from experience that something else exists within me because it apparently "leaks" information into my conscious mind that I shouldn't possess. I've had examples of expression or suppression events numbering maybe two dozen over the span of my 59 years. I'll give my most tantalizing example again here.
I was watching a women's softball game ... leaning on a fence near third base in foul territory. Suddenly, I realized (knew) for no apparent reason that the next pitch would result in the ball being hit by the present batter directly to me. So, I put out my right hand where it was going to go so that I could catch it. Then ... the pitcher pitched the ball (underhand, fairly slow pitch) and the batter hit it. It was a limp liner that went in the general direction of third base but curving foul and it came right to me. I had to move my hand about 12 inches diagonally to the right and up. I caught the ball and threw it back to the pitcher.
How could I have obtained this information prior to the pitch? It's impossible from any present understanding of the brain. And it wasn't a coincidence. If I had a notion of what was going to happen next very often and most were wrong ... I'd tend to think of the exception as coincidence. But I don't have such revelations often ... just once in a great while ... and ... they always come true. The are all inconsequential except for a couple examples of "suppression" wherein I encounter a genuine fork in the road of life and I'm not permitted to see the fork until my ship has sailed. That is, I understand there was a door open to me for just a few minutes and I fail to go through the door because I failed to recognize that door. I just go on by. Once the moment is over, the suppression is obvious and I get to think something like, "Damn, I coulda' had a V8!".
But there is a twist to the baseball incident ... I wondered why ... if this is some kind of clairvoyance ... why did I have to move my hand 12 inches? Then I realized that the ball was very fuzzy. It wasn't an average softball ... it was very used and soft. This caused it to grip the bat when hit and develop excess spin and interacted with the air much more than average so as to result in a high curvature flight path to my hand (and it spun like a buzz saw in my hand). This accounted for the extra 12 inches. What had happened is that I could not ... in principle ... detect the extra fuzziness of the ball from the distance I was from the ball at the time of "knowing" it would come to me. It was beyond the resolution of my one-eyed vision. So, the entire event is consistent with a probabilistic calculation within my own mind. i.e. something is in me which is not me ... or ... is some aspect of me about which I have no conscious knowledge.
Because I must take myself as "typical", all of us must have such a part ... unknown to our conscious mind. What is it? How was the intention of the batter and pitcher transmitted to me prior to the pitch? Since the spin information must have been transmitted visually, my conjecture is that any information transmitted between beings is accomplished in the standard manner ... not by telepathy (which cannot be demonstrated by experiment) ... but rather by visual and auditory clues which are incredibly subtle and may be picked up by the subconscious (that unknown part). Now, if all the unknown parts are talking to each other ... they may constitute a genuine separate being. If so, this being determines what goes down as far as broad historical events are concerned. That is ... God has a plan for man that is not subject to individual alterations. If you fight it, you will transmit your intentions to the distributed program through your words and gestures and it will be thwarted or augmented as per the overall plan.
This is a truly personal God ... I see no other way to generate such a being. I'm yet to be convinced ... but there it is.
Here are the highest physically present overseers. What they want and what they might do is an unknown. We must suspect that since they have done nothing overt up to now (other than some "show & tell"), they must have some formal aversion to interfering in the development of "new planets" ... some sort of non-interference" agenda. This is fairly obvious to anyone who believes that "they" are here. Hence, this was featured as the "prime directive" on the Star Trek television series, i.e. anybody ... even sci-fi writers can figure that one out.
My best guess is that they are waiting for the play to finish. There is a general path taken by planets that bring forth indigenous life and "they" do not intend to interfere with that overall plan. Perhaps they have interfered in the past elsewhere to disastrous result and now simply sit back and relax and enjoy the show ... logging the variations for our particularly planet. In any case, don't expect any salvation from the stars ... you are on your own. If we go into another dark age ... they will watch dispassionately. If we succeed and begin to produce a high quality civilization ... they will watch that dispassionately as well. But if an asteroid is headed in our direction and they think it will end the present development which is perhaps millions of years in progress ... with them watching (dispassionately) ... they just might nudge that asteroid out of the way for us without our knowledge. Thanks. But don't count on that either ... nobody knows for sure. They've never done anything in the past so our best guess is that they will do nothing in the near future but flit around and make a few abductions here & there.
They have theirs ... and now we must get ours ... on our own.
There could be several dozen civilizations monitoring our planet right now. Some may be a few billion years old and others only a few million ... but all are way older than us. I'm sure they don't look down on us as inferior any more than a father and mother look upon their infant as inferior. We're just a ball of potential with no actual at the moment. If I could ask them one question, it would be "How do you get 'round linear momentum conservation?" ... then, before they answered I'd say ... "Wait a minute! Don't tell me. I want to figure it out for myself.". That's why I'm sure they won't interfere in earth politics, etc.
The Big God
Associated with the universe as a whole must be some sort of overall consciousness. Observe yourself. You are conscious are you not? And ... you are in the universe, are you not? Then the universe has some sort of overall consciousness parameter associated with it. Perhaps this form of consciousness is not self aware except through us as we are part of that consciousness. I personally think that the universe of inanimate matter is congruent with a "consciousness potential" ... and that any suitably coherent and integrated bundle of matter has some sort of consciousness associated with it in proportion to the level of its integration. Hence, as we are very complicated and integrated bits of wiring, we get a more sophisticated consciousness than a vending machine or washer-dryer combo.
Yet all machines must have some sort of consciousness associated with them.
To prove this, imagine some small volume of your own brain. Surely, it is not invested with the sum total of consciousness that is you. It must therefore possess some small part of your consciousness that contributes to the totality which is "you". Hence, this small volume which might serve to run our washer-dryer combination machine is conscious in some degree. Get it? Any physical operation which is insulated from random disrupting influences must possess some degree of consciousness no matter how primitive its function.
Our question is then only ... does the consciousness associated with the entire universe possess a "sense of self" as an indivisible entity? Or is it insufficiently integrated to support such a consciousness? If not, what invests matter with this consciousness which appears to be a logical necessity given our simple observations of ourselves? Or, is that "grand consciousness" of some sort that would be forever and entirely ... inscrutable to us.
My opinion here is that this consciousness is beyond out detection and/or understanding ... in principle. And ... that by corollary ... we have no business in this area of inquiry, i.e we can't know ... in principle ... so we should just shut up about it and go on with our "finite" dealings. Or, more bluntly ... "To Hell With Formalized Religion". Guessing what God would want us to do in this or that situation is just a lotta' hooey. If you come to a conclusion ... it's just your "humanity" speaking ... not the mind of God. You have no access here. However, it might just be the mind of the smaller personal god (of which I spoke up north of here). That just might be the real deal for us.