Messages

Hey!  Great comments!  This is why I love this place.  Well, I am not currently attending any particular dojo/gym.  My workouts are at a local gym (non-martial arts gym) and in my own garage.  When talking about the "negative people" I mean those on the televised fights.

I think the bottom line is that there is "opposition in all things."  In other words, it's all what you make of it.  All of you simply reinforced what I already felt was true, but sometimes it's nice to hear it from others.

I am most interested in staying in shape and being able to defend myself and others from dangerous people.  Personally, however, I find it hard to keep my pride in check sometimes and I sort of switch from being this very passive, loving person to a very aggressive, puff-my-chest-out kind of guy.  Blame it on my days as a football player and my dad I guess....jk!

Anyhow, it's nice to stop by again and see the place is up and running, despite the many speed bumps we've had in the past with the hosting/servers, etc.

-Daniel

Me, Carter and my wonderful wife Sarah @ Laguna Beach, CA

Hello all!

It's been quite some time since I've stopped by.  This is one of my favorite places on the internet, although it has changed SO much since its humble beginnings.  I used to frequent the forums a lot and, in fact, I was once a moderator here.  Anyhow, I have an interesting question.  As of late I have become quite interested in martial arts.  It sort of came about as I have been working out more and getting myself back into good physical condition (I havelost more than 20 lbs in the last 6 months or so).

As I have become more interested in martial arts, namely jiu-jitsu (Japanese for "the gentle art") I have also become intrigued by mixed martial arts (UFC, PRIDE, etc.)  I cannot help but wonder, however, how this might negatively affect me spiritually.  Mixed martial arts isn't that dangerous, but it is full of big egos and negative individuals. 

What do you all think?

Anyhow, it's good to be back and I pledge to stop by more often to check out what people are talking about.

-Daniel

No problem!  I don't pretened to tell people "how it is" because Frankly life is very much a subjective experience, but I think we all need to remember the fact that we are first, and foremost, spiritual beings and that much of what happens to us is spiritual in nature.

I noted the UFO topic that is currently going on in here and thought I'd share a few ideas about this issue.

What I am about to write has been said, or at least implied, in the other posts already but nevertheless I think it is worthwhile to state directly that my understanding is that many, if not all, sightings and experiences of aliens, etc. are spiritual in nature rather than manifestations on the gross, physical plane.  In other words, most abductions take place while a person is lying in bed and they are being "abducted" spiritually/mentally (whichever you prefer).  I believe this experience is avoidable and that those individuals who are abducted have some preponderance to the experience for some reason.

I don't have the time or expertise to go on regarding this subject, but I will point you toward the individual who enlightened me in regards to this subject, Dr. Gregory Little.  I read, "Grand Illusions: The Spectral Reality Underlying Sexual UFO Abductions, Crashed Saucers, Afterlife Experiences, Sacred Ancient Sites, and Other Enigmas" a few years ago and it rang true to me.  

I was led to believe that this book is now out of print (what a shame! Although I did find the link you'll see at the end of this post) in which he theorizes that energy, or more precisely electro-magnetic energy spots on earth, are often the determining factor in UFO related activity.  I don't know if that is correct or not, but the most compelling aspect of the book deals with the idea that what we're dealing with is energy and spirit, not necessarily big metal flying saucers.

Check out the synopsis of the book below.

Grand Illusions: The Spectral Reality Underlying Sexual UFO Abductions, Crashed Saucers, Afterlife Experiences, Sacred Ancient Sites, and Other Enigmas
by Gregory L. Little
White Buffalo Books, Inc., Memphis, Tennessee, 1994, 271 pp.,

Grand Illusions is the culmination of a trilogy of works by one of America's most freethinking ufologists. More blunt but no less provocative than his previous books, this is Gregory Little's finest work to date. Grand Illusions , following People of the Web (1990) and The Archetype Experience (1984), fine-tunes Little's thesis that was ignited by Carl Jung and John Keel--namely that archetypes are intelligent energy forms within the electromagnetic spectrum which can physicalize and account for virtually every anomalous event in ufology.

Little has theorized that there is indeed a mystery, or grand illusion, behind UFOs and related phenomena. He also suggests that many ufologists also harbor their own illusions concerning these phenomena. Words are not minced and punches are not pulled. Little calls for the death of the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) and, acting like the criminal justice psychologist that he is, points a finger at the rampant hoaxing and paranoia within the ufological fold.

This is strong stuff. For many involved in ufology, the aspect that first got them interested was the tales of real alien beings piloting the saucers (e.g., The Humanoids, Flying Saucer Occupants). A similar sense of interest (and pleasure) is attained, ironically, from reading Little's analysis, and rejection of, these same aliens. Ultimately, we all want to get at "the truth." The proffering of the alien-UFO motif in the media has made alternatives to the ETH all the more rare, especially for American ufology. Thus, the release of any non-extraterrestrial UFO book has become a major event. And a book that can explain the concomitant baggage that has glommed onto ufology is that much more of a treasure.

Little mentions the oft-repeated notion that the evidence for crashed saucers (notably the Roswell case) would prevail in a court of law, and states unequivocally that the case would not win. In this, his thrust is valid; however, what I feel he means to say is that the evidence for crashed saucers is not the "experimental" (scientific) proof required for its veracity. Legal proof is of a different nature, and the case for crashed saucers could probably be "proven" in court. Under the microscope of experimental proof, which requires more tangible evidence, no crashed saucer story holds up.

But even experimental proof is problematic. The scientific method, while powerfully effective, is composed of two elements that are fallible (i.e., both sense data and pure reason can be deceptive). In other words, our perceptions, liable to being erroneous, cannot lead us to conclusions with absolute certitude. This seems to aim at the heart of fortean philosophy, in that the best that can be said in reaching a conclusion is that it is the most accurate possible approximation.

What seems striking in its absence, noting that Little's background is in counseling psychology, is that no mention is made of the benefit to be gained through knowing the mechanism of abduction. If the process is known (do people "tune-in" the grays with the magnetite in their brains?), then the trigger of the experience can be reversed or halted, abductions can be stopped, and the true healing of the abduction syndrome can begin.

Still somewhat mystifying is the process by which the archetype and the percipient attune themselves to each other to "create" a UFO experience or abduction encounter. Specifically, how do these psychoid energy forms adapt their physical shape and behavior to the culture and expectations of the percipient? How, and from where, does this energy gain the knowledge to accomplish this feat?

These are minor quibbles. What is important is that Little has plunged ahead, forging his thought from what he has encountered, rather than ramming the data into preconceived beliefs.

You should add this instant classic to your UFO bookshelf.

http://www.strangemag.com/reviews/grandillusions.html

What I am about to write has been said, or at least implied, already but nevertheless I think it is worthwhile to state directly that many, if not all, sightings and experiences of aliens, etc. are spiritual in nature rather than manifestations on the gross, physical plane.  In other words, most abductions take place while a person is lying in bed and they are being "abducted" spiritually/mentally (whichever you prefer).  

I don't have the time or expertise to go on regarding this subject, but I will point you toward the man that enlightened me in regards to this subject, Dr. Gregory Little.  I read, "Grand Illusions: The Spectral Reality Underlying Sexual UFO Abductions, Crashed Saucers, Afterlife Experiences, Sacred Ancient Sites, and Other Enigmas" which is now out of print (what a shame! Although I did find the link you'll see at the end of this post) in which he theorizes that energy, or more precisely electro-magnetic energy spots on earth, are often the determining factor in UFO related activity.  I don't know if that is correct or not, but the most compelling aspect of the book deals with the idea that what we're dealing with is energy and spirit, not necessarily big metal flying saucers.

Grand Illusions: The Spectral Reality Underlying Sexual UFO Abductions, Crashed Saucers, Afterlife Experiences, Sacred Ancient Sites, and Other Enigmas
by Gregory L. Little
White Buffalo Books, Inc., Memphis, Tennessee, 1994, 271 pp., paperback, $19.95.

Grand Illusions is the culmination of a trilogy of works by one of America's most freethinking ufologists. More blunt but no less provocative than his previous books, this is Gregory Little's finest work to date. Grand Illusions , following People of the Web (1990) and The Archetype Experience (1984), fine-tunes Little's thesis that was ignited by Carl Jung and John Keel--namely that archetypes are intelligent energy forms within the electromagnetic spectrum which can physicalize and account for virtually every anomalous event in ufology.

Little has theorized that there is indeed a mystery, or grand illusion, behind UFOs and related phenomena. He also suggests that many ufologists also harbor their own illusions concerning these phenomena. Words are not minced and punches are not pulled. Little calls for the death of the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) and, acting like the criminal justice psychologist that he is, points a finger at the rampant hoaxing and paranoia within the ufological fold.

This is strong stuff. For many involved in ufology, the aspect that first got them interested was the tales of real alien beings piloting the saucers (e.g., The Humanoids, Flying Saucer Occupants). A similar sense of interest (and pleasure) is attained, ironically, from reading Little's analysis, and rejection of, these same aliens. Ultimately, we all want to get at "the truth." The proffering of the alien-UFO motif in the media has made alternatives to the ETH all the more rare, especially for American ufology. Thus, the release of any non-extraterrestrial UFO book has become a major event. And a book that can explain the concomitant baggage that has glommed onto ufology is that much more of a treasure.

Little mentions the oft-repeated notion that the evidence for crashed saucers (notably the Roswell case) would prevail in a court of law, and states unequivocally that the case would not win. In this, his thrust is valid; however, what I feel he means to say is that the evidence for crashed saucers is not the "experimental" (scientific) proof required for its veracity. Legal proof is of a different nature, and the case for crashed saucers could probably be "proven" in court. Under the microscope of experimental proof, which requires more tangible evidence, no crashed saucer story holds up.

But even experimental proof is problematic. The scientific method, while powerfully effective, is composed of two elements that are fallible (i.e., both sense data and pure reason can be deceptive). In other words, our perceptions, liable to being erroneous, cannot lead us to conclusions with absolute certitude. This seems to aim at the heart of fortean philosophy, in that the best that can be said in reaching a conclusion is that it is the most accurate possible approximation.

What seems striking in its absence, noting that Little's background is in counseling psychology, is that no mention is made of the benefit to be gained through knowing the mechanism of abduction. If the process is known (do people "tune-in" the grays with the magnetite in their brains?), then the trigger of the experience can be reversed or halted, abductions can be stopped, and the true healing of the abduction syndrome can begin.

Still somewhat mystifying is the process by which the archetype and the percipient attune themselves to each other to "create" a UFO experience or abduction encounter. Specifically, how do these psychoid energy forms adapt their physical shape and behavior to the culture and expectations of the percipient? How, and from where, does this energy gain the knowledge to accomplish this feat?

These are minor quibbles. What is important is that Little has plunged ahead, forging his thought from what he has encountered, rather than ramming the data into preconceived beliefs.

You should add this instant classic to your UFO bookshelf.

http://www.strangemag.com/reviews/grandillusions.html

I believe the never ending wave of "Favorite Lyrics" posts is a testament to the power of poetry, namely lyrical poetry.  People have said poetry is a dying art form.  Wrong.  It has simply shifted and evolved.

Hi all,
You may remember me from the past, although I am sure the inevitable ebb and flow has pushed out many of the original members and brought in many new ones.  Anyhow, I retired as a moderator due to my hectic professional and personal schedule, but I do pop in occassionally to say hello.




www.myspace.com/dannytodd
www.mrtoddsclass.com

Rob-
I'm glad we see eye to eye on this.  I'm also content that my satire came through.

Addiction is a sticky wicket.  Once an addict, always an addict...even if you're not using, which is where I'm at...and although I'm happier now that I'm "clean," there's always a part of me that thinks, "Hmmm, I bet if I called what's his name right now..."  As with you, marijuana was my achilles heal.  I was/am a psychological addict.

Setting goals, big or small, is what gets us through life...that's the main thing Donal needs to realize.

I don't have time to dedicate myself to this post right now, but I think I'll drop a few lines.  Now, I know I must take your first post with a grain of salt for obvious reasons, but I am still going to approach it in a more literal and serious way.

I used to have a drug problem, nothing very serious.  Mostly marijuana and alcohol, but I did use psychadelics and meth occassionally.  Then I realized how addiction works, and I worked my way out of it.

I am now happily married and have two degrees.  I am a successful educator and am learning web design.  I have a beautiful son and I enjoy my life immensely.

That feeling of wanting to escape the "worries" of day to day living, such as improving one's physical body, paying rent, etc. is very NEGATIVE.  When I stopped abusing drugs, I faced these worries head on.  I lost 40 lbs, I have enough money that I don't worry about rent,in fact I bought my own home (and now I worry about paying the mortgage...and I'm in Southern California, so let me tell you, my mortgage is ridiculous, at least in respect to how big my house is...in other words, lots of $$ for a small house).

Anyway, face yourself, stop getting high, lose some damned weight, and watch your happiness go up...OH, the the girl friend thing, I guaran-freakin-tee she'll appear.

Peace,
DT

It's interesting what was said by Inugma about trying to balance one's self out.  That makes sense.  I think moderation is a key principle in life.  If someone is just way too extroverted, they come off as, well, way too extroverted which is generally a very negative thing, and vice-versa.  

Very cool to think about, and even cooler to achieve.  I think I am going to go get a cool beverage.

If/when you post your results, also cute and paste some of the text that describes your personality type, it's more fun and informative that way.

Cool reponse...I don't have time to read it all right now, nor the mental energy since you kind of spill forth, but it seems like you've given this plenty of thought.  Also, cool avatar pic!  See you later in the forums.

Dan

It seems to me the Muldoon has a much different kind of experience...as if he projects more into the real-time sphere and less into the "higher" (for lack of a better term) planes.  Interesting contrasts though...

Posting for the sake of getting more posts (which is what most of you are doing) is honestly a bit pathetic, but the nice thing is that it makes it easier to see who to take serious and who not to.  

I still love these forums, but I recall the original days when it was just a few of us talking about our ideas and experiences passionately, with Robert Bruce chiming in occassionally.  

Oh how things have changed!

Greetings one and all!

I am an old timer here, albeit one who doesn't haunt these halls as oft as I once did or as I'd like.  Anyhow, I recently took the Jung Typology Test (personality test) and found that I am an ENFP (Extraverted iNtuitive Feeling Perceiving).  One of the hallmarks of the ENFP is the following:

"The physical world, both geos and kosmos, is the ENFP's primary source of information. Rather than sensing things as they are, dominant intuition is sensitive to things as they might be. These extraverted intuitives are most adept with patterns and connections. Their natural inclination is toward relationships, especially among people or living things."

From:  http://typelogic.com/enfp.html

I am interested to see what you all are.  Check out this email I recently sent to friends and family, use the links to find your way to the test and the various info portals about this kind of test, and then please post your results back here.  It'll be a great study for all of us.

-Daniel (PeacefulWarrior)

To save you from reading my whole email (below), here's the link to the test:

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
--------------------------------------
Hey, I am working, or supposed to be working, but I got on the personality type thing again, it's so fascinating.  I am an ENFP (I added the text about my personality type, the 'Champion Idealist" below, to give an idea of how this works).  I'd like to see what everyone is again.  Take the test below when you get the chance, if you want that is.  It's pretty cool.  Apparently some people base their management and even who they marry on this.  I also added the link to the Wiki definition of this type of test if you want to read more about it.  If you take it, email me with your personality type (4 letter acronym).

Also, I've added links to sites where you can read more about your type once you get it since sometimes the test site only gives a general description.

Here's the test:
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

Once you have your results, compare yourself to your spouse (now this is more just for fun):
http://www.humanmetrics.com/infomate/InfoMatepass.asp

Read more about your personality type:
http://typelogic.com/



Here's what I am.  I think I know myself pretty well and I thought this was more or less a very accurate assessment of my craziness:

My HUMANMETRICS Type is ENFP, or Extroverted Intuitive Feeling Perceiving, otherwise known as Champion Idealists.

The Champion Idealists are abstract in thought and speech, cooperative in accomplishing their aims, and informative and extraverted when relating with others. For Champions, nothing occurs which does not have some deep ethical significance, and this, coupled with their uncanny sense of the motivations of others, gives them a talent for seeing life as an exciting drama, pregnant with possibilities for both good and evil. This type is found in only about 3 percent of the general population, but they have great influence because of their extraordinary impact on others. Champions are inclined to go everywhere and look into everything that has to do with the advance of good and the retreat of evil in the world. They can't bear to miss out on what is going on around them; they must experience, first hand, all the significant social events that affect our lives. And then they are eager to relate the stories they've uncovered, hoping to disclose the "truth" of people and issues, and to advocate causes. This strong drive to unveil current events can make them tireless in conversing with others, like fountains that bubble and splash, spilling over their own words to get it all out.

Champions consider intense emotional experiences as being vital to a full life, although they can never quite shake the feeling that a part of themselves is split off, uninvolved in the experience. Thus, while they strive for emotional congruency, they often see themselves in some danger of losing touch with their real feelings, which Champions possess in a wide range and variety. In the same vein, Champions strive toward a kind of spontaneous personal authenticity, and this intention always to "be themselves" is usually communicated nonverbally to others, who find it quite attractive. All too often, however, Champions fall short in their efforts to be authentic, and they tend to heap coals of fire on themselves, berating themselves for the slightest self-conscious role-playing.
[/url]

Wow, thanks for the information.  I was too busy/lazy to find it myself.  I think I'll use Lulu.com as a starting point to generate interest.

Hi Nick!

I have a few more now, many of which are very sophmoric:
www.stupidvideos.com

Check out the bear trampline video (type it into the search bar)

Why is everything about bears with me lately??

Although it may seem strange that I am asking people about a film that I have seen, I was very aware of the omission of my own opinion.  I did not want to color the perceptions of others by giving my own views on the film.  As an educator, I have found that when one asks a question with the desire to receive a sincere, unbiased answer, one cannot simultaneously give his or her opinion.  

But what the heck, here I go anyway (briefly, since it's my bed time):

First of all, the film is a spectacle, in the sense that it is both visually stunning as well as shocking.  Some of the footage of the bears, and the country side, is breathtaking.

Treadwell, in my opinion, is the primary focus of the film, not the bears nor what he was able to stir up back home.  This is not a film about bears, nor is it really a film about the fight to protect bears; it is not even a film about a man trying to get closer to animals or nature, in my opinion, although many will no doubt see it that way.  It is more a film about one man's anguished soul, and the refuge from the "civilized" world and his own alcoholism that he finds in Alaska.

The film treats the subject matter fairly objectively, showing both sides of the issue.  In the end, poor Timothy's heart was really into what he was doing, but his head wasn't.

There are many possibilies really: a dream, an OBE, an OBE into the astral realm in which you created the surroundings and the things which occurred yourself or the negative energy either from yourself or your friends created the experience, etc. etc.

Who knows?

The important thing is to confront your feelings, and friends, in the "real," waking world and make sure you have peace and resolution in all of your dealings.

Boom...out of the blue here I am again, posting after months of being away.

Anyhow, I am working on a novel and am beginning to wonder about copyright.  Since it's no where near complete, I am a bit ahead of myself, but what's new?

I have checked out lulu.com which "publishes" books electronically and then puts them up for distribution.  My question is this: if I upload my book and have them format it for me, and then later decided to get it published by a "real" publisher, do I have the right to do that?  I am pretty sure I do, but when I tried to read the fine print on their page, I did not take the time to delve into specifics.  

Any info?

Many of you may have heard of Timothy Treadwell, a self-described advocate for bears who was mauled to death last year along with his girl friend.  I just finished watching the documentary about his life, much of it compoased of the footage he shot during the 13 summers he spent in the Alaskan wilderness.

If you saw it, what did you think?  Just curious.

In a word, YES.

I believe that if you want to know if something is true, pray and ask God.  Many people in your life will tell you many things about God...but the one thing you should know is that there is a God.  Everyone understands what God is in different ways, and that's fine.  I believe you can ask God if something is true and then you will feel or sense if it is true in both your heart and your mind.  By heart, of course, I mean that something will be communicated to your spirit, or that which you truly are.

Not to take anything away from the astralpulse forums, for I love it here and I think Adrian does a wonderful job and is very approachable, but I do remember a time, perhaps the first 6-8 months, when this place was golden.  It was new, so things were fresh and it was like everyone was just showing up because of their interest in Bruce and his original PDF treatsie so we were like, "Hi!  You've had these expereinces too?"  Then it became "found" and the noobs (no offense for aren't we all at some point?) just started flooding in.  

It's like anything (music for example), you find it, you feel like part of small group, and then it becomes "pop."  I don't, however, believe that something really "sells out," it just becames more mainstream.  In the case of info regarding one's spiritual self and the phenom of OBE, how can that be a bad thing?  It just made the site much different than it was when it was nascent.