Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jon Stuen-Parker on July 5, 2012 at 12:20am

Dear Jeff and Sondra,

I feel slightly ashamed for attacking your words. This is the first time writing on a blog. As a fighter I know: "The best defense is an offense." The best way to protect yourself is to attack. I feel very grateful being part of the WEANetwork. Let me be the first to give you some important news. Yesterday scientists announced they have found the long-sought Higgs boson. The below writing is from my journal. It mentions: "surrounding reservoir of love." This reservoir of love is an unseen dimension. The Higgs boson particle travels between that dimension and our reality (our dimension). This message is also for Candace.

“Today spoke to 40ish physicist about ‘higher power.’ Explained my theory of ‘golden light’ evolving from love. Told him, ‘Part of your brain lights up when praying. This energy cannot be destroyed only transformed. The Earth's magnetic force pulls on electrical energy. Unlike the random combination of material objects producing man, electrical energy has infinite number of permutations for combination.’

Physicist smiled. Told him, ‘Surrounding electrical engine only knows love. Lack of solar winds allows it to survive.’ Finally asked, ‘Is it possible?’ Physicist, hand on chin, responded, ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘Someday a magazine will publish an equation that correlates magnetic force to ‘higher power.’ That equation will estimate increasing magnetic force this much (opened fingers little), would increase ‘higher power’ that much (opened fingers wide).’ Physicist's chin dropped to chest.”

“Monday enjoyed speaking with Professor Lynn Miller. Described my conversation with Australian physicist. Explained ‘surrounding reservoir of love,’ ‘specific area of brain activated when praying,’ ‘electrical force having infinite number of permutations for combination’ and ‘pull of magnetic force (~.5 gauss) combining electrical force (love) for evolution of ‘higher power.’ Lynn seemed to agree. Told Lynn, ‘Once there's a second nuclear terrorist attack, they're turning anti-terrorist technology inward. Once that happens, there's no turning back.’ Swung open hand to indicate surrounding campus, adding, ‘There's no more Jon Parkers. No more ex-cons coming to Hampshire College.’ Lynn returned serious look.”  

 

Permalink Reply by Sondra Sneed on July 5, 2012 at 8:20am

Hi Jon,

No need for shame! Thanks for your honesty.  

Since you are new at this, allow me to give a few pointers about contributing to a blog, which help you gain the trust of other participants. Also gives you a better chance at getting people to actually read your posts.

1.  Stay on topic.  If there is something you wish to share, make sure it is relevant to the post.  If there is a new subject you wish to bring up, you can start a new post.  But make sure it's something with which you wish to engage others, and not just publish your writing without cause.  You'll get your chance to plug your work, just do it with some discretion if you can, we are all here to publish.

2.  Keep it as short as possible.  We are all writers, so writing is something we love to do, but we are all busy, too.  So be a GOOD writer and edit your posts to one paragraph if at all possible.  If you are in an indepth discussion and providing lots of information, brevity is rarely possible.  But be kind to the readers and edit your work.

3. This boxing ring is best attended when everyone is kind a courteous to each other.  Again, that is not always easy when you get into heated debates.  But this is the aim and standard, nonetheless, of a good posting.

I hope that helps.  Please remember, Jon, we are here to support one another and there's no shame in that! :)

Permalink Reply by Jon Stuen-Parker on July 5, 2012 at 2:08am

Dear Jeff, Sondra, and Candace,

Stephen Hawking has lost $100 on a bet that Higgs boson particle did not exist. Having been proved wrong in the area in which he is a specialist and leader in his field, I wonder if he will now consider the position stated in the WEANetwork?

The below writing was taken from my journal.

"Inside third-floor reading room. New York Times Book Review, 'Many Kinds Of Universes, And None Require God' states: 'Stephen Hawking, the most revered scientist since Einstein, is a formidable mathematician and a formidable salesman. ‘I want my books sold on airport bookstalls,’ he has impishly declared, and he’s learned how to put them there.

Mr. Hawking’s new book, ‘The Grand Design,’ published on Tuesday, has already made headlines and been a trending topic on Twitter, thanks to a different sort of Godmongering. This time Mr. Hawking has, we’re told, declared God pretty much dead.

His search for an answer to the question ‘How did the universe begin?’ has led him to suggest that the creation of our universe and others simply ‘does not require the intervention of some supernatural being or god.'

'At its core ‘The Grand Design’ is an examination of a relatively new candidate for the ‘ultimate theory of everything,’ something called the M-theory itself an extension of string theory, which tries to reconcile general relatively and quantum mechanics. 'M-theory is not a theory in the usual sense,' the authors write. 'It is a whole family of different theories.' According to the M-theory 'ours is not the only universe,' the authors say. Instead M-theory predicts that a great many universes were created out of nothing. The image that comes to mind here, others have written about M-theory, is of a God blowing bubbles.'

Hawking, and co-author Mlodinow, assert ‘their creation does not require the intervention of some supernatural being or god. Rather, these multiple universes arise naturally from physical laws.'

How can 'most revered scientist since Einstein' not see obvious natural laws creating 'higher power?' Hawking must be aware Einstein believed particles could break time barrier. When publishing that theory, Einstein predicted huge energy required would keep it from being accomplished. Hawking must know two German scientists using laser and prisms moved particle at speed required to break time barrier. Hawking must also know brain emits energy when producing love.

'Higher power' knows only love. It communicates through love. That’s why Western powers killing innocent civilians abroad, although viewed as 'collateral damage' in war against terrorism, so very, very dangerous. More people praying with love, praying for destruction of forces killing civilians, means that prayer, that love seeking solution from 'higher power,' closer to becoming reality. Being able to see into future, as with Biblical prophecies, well documented in history. Today, simply pressing nuclear buttons could end civilized society. 'Higher power,' because only knowing love, could help make nuclear holocaust happen.

Hawking should communicate to world that other planets have 'higher power.' Physical explanation of 'higher power' easy enough for lay person to understand. This most 'revered scientist since Einstein,' like so many scientists, seems to believe 'higher power' doesn’t exist."

Permalink Reply by Jon Stuen-Parker on July 5, 2012 at 2:18am

Dear Jeff, Sondra, and Candace,

The below writing was taken from my journal.

"On Palace Hotel bed after relaxing shower. Spent most of day editing 'higher power' book. During breakfast, sat beside 25ish English backpacker, Chris, and heard, 'How’s the writing?' Answered, 'I’m almost done.' Chris asked, 'What’s it about?'

Gave brief description about love combining with love, part of brain lighting up when praying and Earth's magnetic force pulling love together for combination. Described physicist’s chin hitting chest when explaining 'higher power' theory. Chris, very interested, said, 'I think other planets have a God. People are narrow-minded thinking only this planet has God.'

Explained why killing civilians (collateral damage) in war against terrorism was so very dangerous. Told Chris, 'Higher power’ only knows love, people are praying with love for destruction of forces killing children, that means those prayers might be answered.' Chris nodded, saying, 'You’re right.'"

"Yesterday held precious Lila. Hard to believe human beings would kill children. Not sexually sick humans, but intelligent, caring and loving humans. All because religious extremist belief in 'God.'

Other planets have 'higher power.' Other planets, like recently discovered Gliese 581g with gravity, atmosphere and '100 percent' chance of life. Since trillions of such planets exist, much older than Earth, know there’s more advanced life.

Ingredients for 'higher power' easy to understand. Atmosphere that protects against solar winds, intelligent life emitting 'love' and magnetic force pulling love together for combination. As stated before, electrical particles, unlike material particles that evolved into life, contain infinite number of permutations for combination.

Maybe religious extremists should be taught physical theory of 'higher power,' then sent back to their homelands to educate others.

Key to making them believe - no matter what religion, no matter what background - anybody can touch 'higher power' through prayer. Anybody can touch 'higher power' through love, through rendering themselves small before such spiritual beauty, through truly believing that love is everywhere and can make their lives better."

Permalink Reply by Gatzby on July 5, 2012 at 9:55am

From my perspective, limited and quieted as it is, it seems that people are only too happy to dislike because it is the easiest of all paths. As a society we have brought apathy to remarkable levels. To care requires effort, and while it only requires a small amount of effort, it would appear that it calls for more effort than most are willing to put up with. In short, it is the easiest of all things to apply a label and dislike accordingly. To seek the true heart of any matter (or person) is work and the people's work ethic simply is not what it used to be. In my humble opinion, compassion is a dying art.

Permalink Reply by Sondra Sneed on July 5, 2012 at 12:10pm

It is definitely an exercise in conscious, isn't it.  To go beyond knee jerk responses, and preprogrammed assumptions.

Permalink Reply by jeff herman on July 5, 2012 at 11:54am

My guess is if we are taught to be critical and unaccepting of others, then that's the way we will be unless we re-teach ourselves otherwise. 

Permalink Reply by Sondra Sneed on July 5, 2012 at 12:09pm

Jeff, Do you mean in the sense that we were treated critically and unaccepted? Or that a major influence (parental or otherwise) treated others with criticism and disdain?

I grew-up in middle american small town bigotry, within my own extended family, and I fought all my life against it.   They tended to just dislike what they didn't know personally or understand, or only took racial behavior, for example, at face value.  I later found my mother (when I was 33) only to discover that while I didn't grow up with her, she was equally egalitarian in her acceptance of others.  So I wonder how much is really nature vs. nurture, or is there a genetic tie-in to our sense of territorial governance?  Or is there a spiritual journey we each cater to, and our spiritual maturity dictates our acceptance of others?   Meaning, there are not as many boundaries between you and me in a person more spiritually evolved.

Permalink Reply by jeff herman on July 5, 2012 at 12:16pm

Sondra, Though who we "really" are will often shine through no matter our circumstances, it's safe to say that both how we are treated by those who raise us, and how they feel about and treat others, places a lot of layers upon our own choices, be they good or bad. 

Permalink Reply by Sondra Sneed on July 5, 2012 at 12:25pm

okay, I can see that, and layers are perfectly analogous.  Self awareness is about peeling away those programmed layers and seeing what's left; so your assessment works for me!

Permalink Reply by Jon Stuen-Parker on July 5, 2012 at 11:45pm

Dear Sondra,

Thanks for the advice. I write because I have to write. When finding the time, I'll start a new post. But it felt nice giving WEANetwork a physical explanation for "God." Let me get back to: "WHY IS IT COMMON TO DISLIKE OTHER PEOPLE?"

Permalink Reply by Jon Stuen-Parker on July 6, 2012 at 12:18am

Dear Gatzby,

I need to write. I also need to fight. Maybe there is something wrong with that combination. But my father being a Norwegian seaman makes me understand the fighting aspect. My writing is both selfish and for others. Often I'm simply trying to get the best from a bad situation. The below writing was taken from my journal. You can understand the need to write about that woman. Maybe she will someday read that writing and realize she'd a fool. More likely, someone else will read that writing and seek to avoid such obnoxious behavior. But what I know, and what matters most, writing about that woman (first thinking about writing about her), using her for fuel to push out words, helped keep me from doing something stupid.

"Opened notebook for different reason. Today 50ish, well-dressed woman blurted, 'I'm on the board of several non-profits. I donate money to Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, World Vision, Doctor's Without Borders and my husband invents thing used by Doctor's Without Borders.' Tried responding, but cut-off. Obese woman snapped, 'Humph. I do enough!' Very pleased with herself, she triumphantly marched away. 

Instant anger. Perfect example of shallow upper-middle class snob. Big urge to run ahead of her and turn, saying, 'Your kind actually hurts the world. You're a self-righteous snob and real piece of s....' Pictured slowly saying 'real piece of s...' with repulsed expression. Of course, woman would complain to police and Save The Children charity."

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page