Feb 25, 2013
The Speed of Gravity
Alex asked a couple more questions. First he wants to know the speed of gravity in relation to the speed of light.
There are a number of theories on this. Some believe the speed of gravity is instantaneous across the universe but recent experiments indicate that Einstein was correct in that it is approximately he same speed as light.
The Chinese recently applied some tests that indicated the speed of gravity was “between 0.93 to 1.05 times the speed of light with a relative error of about 5 percent, providing the first set of strong evidence showing that gravity travels at the speed of light.” LINK
This has not convinced some that see the effects of gravity not matching up with the speed of light.
Here is an interesting article that speculates the speed of gravity is much faster than light, perhaps instantaneous. It is interesting that the argument boils down to a disagreement between the two greatest scientific minds of all time, Einstein and Newton. Newton thought that gravity traveled instantaneously and Einstein theorized it traveled at the speed of light, which he believed to be the ultimate speed allowed in the universe.
After reading both sides I wonder if the effects of gravity may be dual as are subatomic particles. Scientists couldn’t figure out if an electron was a particle or a wave and now they think it is both. Maybe certain ingredients of gravity (perhaps waves) travel at the speed of light and other effects of the field much faster or instantaneous.
Tom Van Flandern in the article noted believes gravity acts something like an anchor pulling on a buoy. The effect of the pull of the anchor is instantaneous but the waves created by the movement of the buoy take time to travel.
I don’t have a revelation on this subject but it is interesting to contemplate. I have contemplated the limitation of the speed of light and feel there is something missing from Einstein’s thinking on this but have not yet pinpointed it. I think it is possible to go faster than light without reaching infinite mass.
Next Alex quotes me: “The Aquarian Gospel was not voice channeled, but Levi entered a state of conscious meditation and read the Akashic records. I personally believe he was 90% accurate or better as he related the life of Jesus.”
Alex: May I ask how a medium is reading Akashic records. I would think that in this meditation state his brain receives input not from his senses, but from the Akashic records “tape”.
If it is the case, then I can easily understand the medium seeing the original scenes, as if it were a video and hearing everything.
But what about transcribing conversations between original personages?
a) Does the medium actually hear them speaking in Hebrew, Latin, etc, then the medium somehow “understands” what they are talking about and interprets in English?
JJ When a medium who usually works on the astral level catches a glimpse of the Akashic records he or she does not read them in sequence but catches bits and pieces. When he then puts them together in his mind they are like kaleidoscope of colored information which makes for interesting dialog but jumbled and not very accurate. This is why a medium will sometimes come up with some startling true information but then be way off the mark on other items.
It takes either a master or a dedicated initiate focusing on the records to transmit them accurately. I personally do not know of any mortal that can do this, though many claim this ability. Levi who received the Aquarian Gospel spent a lot of time in deep meditation to read the records, but today few disciples will dedicate the time necessary to do what he did.
If a person is accurately reading the records he could recall the original language but because he will be unfamiliar with it he will normally concentrate on the meaning that is being conveyed. He will then translate the impressions into his familiar language.
Feb 27, 2013
Manipulation of the Free Will
Alex asks: Is manipulation infringement on the free will or not?
Good question. In other words, if you manipulate circumstances so the outcome changes have you infringed on free will? For instance, suppose both you and Bob are up for a promotion and Bob is more qualified. Then you spread an ugly and untrue rumor about him that causes the boss to promote you instead. Have you infringed on Bob’s free will?
The answer is no. The fact is that manipulation changes circumstances and circumstances change for us almost on an hourly basis. There are dozens of things happen to each of us every day that change or manipulate our circumstances.
Even if you take out the trash you are changing the circumstances so no one else in he family is faced with the decision to take it out. If you kiss your spouse you affect his or her circumstances so now she does not decide to initiate the affections because you did it first.
Manipulation by itself is neither good or bad, positive or negative. It is neutral like money and can be used to create a good and or bad depending on the intent and the luck of the initiator.
Instead of taking away free will manipulation increases it because each manipulation presents the one manipulated with additional choices.
Let me give a couple examples.
Brad drives ten boring miles to work everyday. During the drive he is almost in a trance and nothing much happens. The drive is the same every day.
One evening a couple kids siphon most of the gas out of his car. They think it’s funny that Brad will run out of gas on the way to work. Sure enough after about five miles he does run out of gas. Because of this he has to exercise more free will than normal and make some extra decisions. Should he call his wife for help, the AAA or walk to a nearby gas station? He decides to walk to a gas station and a sexy blond sees him and offers him a ride. They hit it off and she invites him to lunch. Now, instead of a boring ride to work all kinds of decisions confront his free will.
The kids thought it was funny that they were manipulating Brad’s circumstances, but they did not alter his free will. Instead, they provided him with additional choices.
If standard manipulation does not take away free will then what does? What does take away free will is an act that attempts to take away the power of decision in a certain area. This is normally accomplished through a government or some authority figure.
Let us suppose you lived in a country where the punishment was death if you even disagreed with your dear leader. Would this interfere with your power of decision to write a letter to the editor stating what you really think?
Yes, in this case free will is restricted and fewer decisions are made.
Let us suppose the fine was $5 if you were caught not having a seat belt. Would this interfere with free will? Only slightly because you could afford to pay $5. But suppose the fine was $1000. Would this interfere?
Yes, even I would buckle up whether I wanted to or not if the fine was that great.
Suppose you were a member of a cult with a prophet leader who you believe speaks for God. He tells you that God wants him to sleep with your wife. You do not want to allow this but feel forced into it because you think it is God’s will. The prophet is using your belief system to restrict your power of choice.
People have boundaries, which, when crossed, will yield their free will. Those who push the people through these boundaries are agents in limiting free will.
March 1, 2013
Thunderbolts of the Gods
Here is an interesting video presenting a different view of how the universe works. It lasts over an hour so watch it when you have some time.
March 2, 2013
Starting a Group
My Friends, Many times readers have asked what they can do to help in the work and in response I have often sated that the best thing a person can do is to start a local group. So far we’ve only had a handful make this attempt and they have found it difficult.
Now it looks like some enterprising individuals on the web have provided a vehicle which will greatly assist in enhancing group activity. The site they created is called meetup.com. I guess it’s been around for over a decade but I just discovered it recently thanks to Lorraine. Actually, now is a good time to use it because it is well seasoned and a lot of people are aware of it.
The reason I am happy to stumble across the site at this time is I am attempting to form a local group here in Boise. We had our first meeting on Feb 20 and just a handful showed up. Since joining Meetup we are getting a lot more interest. I think it will be very helpful.
If you are an enterprising individual you can start up a study class in your area. There are plenty of writings in the archives to provide material for a long time to come. I can also supply teachers with audios of various classes I have given.
If you are interested but nervous you can get your feet wet by attending other spiritually minded classes in your area and check out how they are operating. You will find a lot of them listed at Meetup.com.
The general address for meetup is: http://www.meetup.com/
The address to check out the Keys meetings is: http://www.meetup.com/The-Keys-of-Knowledge/
In the meantime I am going to forthwith include some of my past advice on starting a group;
Now I know that many of you wish the group could be together on a physical level, but there is something within our reach which is just as good. No matter where you live there are seekers out there who are looking for knowledge that you have. When you gather a handful of them and meet on a weekly basis you’ll have as good a camaraderie as we have here. If that idea doesn’t motivate you I don’t know what will.
The great part is you do not have to be a teaching whiz. All you would have to do is throw out a few of the questions we discuss on this list and you’ll have to chase them home. Many will be hungry for more.
QUESTION: Sounds good, but how does an amateur like me get started?
Start with your friends. Most of us know at least a couple people with a metaphysical bent. Call them and tell them you are going to form a study group and study some new teachings you discovered on the Internet and see if they are interested. If you do not know anyone interested in metaphysics you probably need to get out more, but all is not lost. I am always here to support you with ideas.
First, select a place that will accommodate at least a dozen people. There is nothing wrong with starting with a home or apartment.
If your place is small it is quite possible that one of your first students will have a large comfortable home that they would be happy to share.
There are also some places that may allow you to meet on a free basis. Some libraries have rooms for meetings that are either free or very inexpensive. Also check with your bookstores. Some of them will let you have meetings there in hope of selling your group some books. Many restaurants also have free meeting rooms if most of the group order something.
If you have a little money to work with you could find a meeting room connected with a local Motel, YMCA, New Age Center, Judo Club or some other organization and rent it on a weekly basis. If you do this you will need to collect some dues from members so you will not have to bear the whole burden. Once you get ten people or so the expense will not be much of a burden on any one individual.
Once you select a definite meeting place then you must do some promotion.
First let’s cover the what you can do for free.
(1) Many newspapers have sections that are totally free where you can announce on a weekly basis details about any weekly meetings your group may have. Call then up and see what they have available.
(2) Local TV and Cable channels also have places for free announcements. Check them out.
(3) Hold a press conference. Select a place like a room at the local, library and send an announcement to all the media – Newspaper, TV, radio in your area with an announcement that you are forming a local study group based on the book The Immortal about a guy who just may have met John the Revelator. In a typical area you should be able to send out about 20 announcements and get 2-5 responses. There’s a good chance you would get on TV this way.
(4) Print up flyers (or we’ll print them for you) announcing your project and circulate them in book stores, metaphysical centers, health food stores and so on. We’ll work up a master copy for you.
(5) Newspapers love doing features that have something to do with the internet. Call the features editor and tell him or her that you have been participating with a study group on the internet and are going to extend it to the local people. Chat a while with this person and he may want to write about you.
(6) Now you have exhausted the free methods you should spend a few dollars in regular advertising. Check around and see if there are any metaphysical newsletters in your area and run a small ad there. Then run a small display ad in your local newspaper. In addition to this the classifieds in the local free give-away advertisers are often very effective depending on the area and they are often very inexpensive – sometimes just a couple dollars a week.
(7) If you are bold enough to do public speaking let me know and I will give you further advice.
You’ll need a name for the physical group. May I suggest THE SYNTHESIS GROUP (Or Keys of Knowledge).
To synthesize means to gather together various unrelated parts and to put them together into a working whole which wholeness is greater than the sum of the parts.
For instance our discussion group is a synthesis of some of the best people on the internet. http://www.freeread.com/archives/183.html
March 3, 2013
Good quote on the Dweller Ruth from: http://www.freeread.com/archives/2722.html
Let me add a couple things that may help those having problems with negative forces.
I mentioned the importance of not talking about the negative forces but this must be used with judgment. It is a good thing that Leasel shared her problems with us as she was at her wits end and had to reach out for help.
A mistake that those experiencing a negative attack often make, however, is because it is so consuming to their attention they talk about it a lot to whoever will listen. Because energy follows thought this focus of thought creates a channel for the negativity to flow with greater and greater strength. So, yes, share your problem with those who may be able to help but do not share with those who cannot help unless prompted by your soul.
The principle of energy following thought is illustrated in a story I heard in my younger days in the mission field. In one district there were a couple elders who began experiencing attacks from what seemed to be evil spirits. After this occurred they began sharing their experiences with various members of the church and other missionaries in the district. Pretty soon the attacks and phenomenon seemed to spread like a virus. Other missionaries and members soon had similar trouble. After a time all anyone could talk about were the evil spirits and the scary things they were doing.
Finally, it got so bad that it drew the attention of the mission president.He contacted the missionaries and wisely told them to cease talking about the evil spirits. He told them not to talk about them in meetings, with members or other missionaries. They obeyed and a few weeks later all attacks of the evil spirits subsided and it became as if they did not exist.
The mission president probably had never been taught the principle of energy following thought but he had the correct intuition in following it.
Another thing that can be the cause of negative attacks is guilt. Unresolved guilt can keep the door to negativity open even if you try not to talk or think about the attacks.
There are two things that must be done to resolve guilt. First resolve the problem with the person you may have hurt. If this does not apply then confess your guilt to someone you respect. This principle of confession is used in some churches and it does offer relief.
The nail in the coffin must be struck by identifying the source of guilt. Guilt is caused by allowing some mortal to take the place of the God Within. Release this outside source from having power over you and follow the inner Holy Spirit instead. The inner Spirit does not use guilt to control you but supplies guidance instead.
March 4, 2013
Dan: Seemingly “negative” things happen to everyone and one’s imagination, guilt, and/or desire to be special can make such occurrences seem more personal than they warrant.
JJ Very true. Ruth wants to know your motive with the “desire to be special” comment. I do not see any sinister motive here and do not think we should care about what your motive may be for you made a true statement. Many people take negative things that happen to them and attribute then to demons, Satan or dark brothers for the reasons you gave and more.
Indeed, some people go through sequences of bad luck and because they feel they are special beings they may feel that they are targeted by the devil himself when in reality no one of significance whether he be good or evil is paying much attention to them.
Dan: I have not experienced ANY “supernatural attacks” that I am aware of, nor I suspect have most other keysters.
JJ I think you are correct here. Real attacks are not that common. I have not met many who have given an accurate description of a supernatural attack. Now if we are talking about some type of supernatural experience, good, bad and neutral the percentage is much higher. I would guess that the majority here has had something occur which has been otherworldly.
Stephen’s account which he posted here and personally sent to me is quite interesting and he seems to have made definite supernatural contacts.
It sounds like Leasel and her family may be dealing with a dweller or possibly left over energy from earthbound spirits. Keep your thoughts and prayers headed her direction for they will help.
Dan: I’m just saying REAL attacks are uncommon and rare, thinking you MUST BE under attack (but PROBABLY are not) is most likely/commonplace.
JJ You are correct if you are referring to real attacks by the Dark Brothers toward some individual. The Dark Brothers do attack but they use key people in positions of power to manipulate the people toward their desired ends. All the steps that have been taken recently to reduce our freedoms are part of an assault by them.
On the other hand, many seekers have to deal with some type of influence coming from their Dweller. This can range from fear, guilt or just moving forward – to negativity of tremendous force that can be very nerve wracking to deal with.
The Dweller can be aroused by too much thought directed toward the negative or some type of positive action that may threaten to reduce his power.
One like yourself who has not had a definite supernatural attack may wonder if you are not significant in the work because no one has attacked you. The answer is that this should not concern you. Each seeker has a different cross to bear and different lessons to learn. No two initiates, disciples or aspirants have the same things happen to them but your soul has planned your life in such a way that your learning will have a maximum curve should you follow the lesson plan.
March 7, 2013
Here’s another letter I wrote to the Idaho Statesman. I would have liked to have said more but am limited to 200 words.
On March 6 you published a disturbing article telling us that Leftists views (approaching religious fever) on global warming will be indoctrinated into our kids minds from the eighth grade on. The weird thing is that one of the organizations promoting this, the National Center for Science Education, claims to oppose “the teaching of religious views as science.” Yet most global warming alarmists approach the subject with faith rather than science often resembling religious fanatics.
For Instance, the earth has not warmed since 1998 yet their faith still tells then the earth has been warming during this period.
Because the facts challenge their faith they changed their preaching to climate change rather than global warming. What challenges their faith though is the climate is always changing no matter what humans do.
Because the logic of skeptics disturbs their faith they have formulated a win win plan. If it gets hotter, its climate change but if it gets colder they are still right. If the weather is dryer it’s climate change but so is more moisture. There is no course the weather or climate can take that will cause them to revise their faith.
Here’s the reference to the article I mentioned; http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/03/06/2478937/climate-change-poised-to-be-par\t.html
March 7, 2013
Re: Global Warming
Nathan writes: The Web of Science is a database with articles from a little over 10,000 academic journals. Of that entire database, 13,950 articles can be found on the subject of climate change. Only 23 articles reject global warming or reject global warming as a man-made phenomenon.
JJ I’m surprised they found 23 fitting their criteria which is: “To be classified as rejecting, an article had to clearly and explicitly state that the theory of global warming is false or, as happened in a few cases, that some other process better explains the observed warming.”
Every knowledgeable skeptic including myself would have to side with the majority here. Of course, over the past century there has been warming and man made emissions has been a partial cause. The disagreement isn’t over this technicality but on how much of a cause CO2 is and whether the apocalyptic doctrines they promote are probable. Maybe we should worry more about being hit by an asteroid and concentrate more on preparing for that than global warming. After all, global warming has never destroyed most of the life on earth.
Nathan quoting me: (3) The first great surge of human produced CO2 from 1940 to 1976 mysteriously resulted in global cooling rather than warming.
Nathan: Can you really claim that CO2 correlated with this cooling you speak of, or is it just variability that I mentioned earlier which you’re citing.
JJ I didn’t say it correlated. What I am saying is that the result runs counter to what the global warming alarmists are correlating. It also runs counter to what their computer programs would have predicted.
Nathan quoting me; Since CO2 is a plant fertilizer there are benefits to CO2 emissions such as a greener more productive earth.
Nathan: That seems to be based on the false pretense that plants can absorb an indefinite amount of CO2, which they cannot. The average deciduous tree, for example, absorbs about 50 pounds (highly variable) of CO2 per year, far less than what, say, the average American puts into the atmosphere which is about 4,600 pounds per year.
JJ It is not based on the premise that plants can absorb an infinite amount of CO2. No one is saying that. Plants, as a whole though, can absorb quite a bit more than they do now or even more than in 1900.
Here are a few references for you;
…like carbon dioxide being an essential trace gas that underpins the bulk of the global food web. Estimates vary, but somewhere around 15% seems to be the common number cited for the increase in global food crop yields due to aerial fertilization with increased carbon dioxide since 1950. This increase has both helped avoid a Malthusian disaster and preserved or returned enormous tracts of marginal land as wildlife habitat that would otherwise have had to be put under the plow in an attempt to feed the growing global population. Commercial growers deliberately generate CO2 and increase its levels in agricultural greenhouses to between 700ppmv and 1,000ppmv to increase productivity and improve the water efficiency of food crops far beyond those in the somewhat carbon-starved open atmosphere. CO2 feeds the forests, grows more usable lumber in timber lots meaning there is less pressure to cut old growth or push into “natural” wildlife habitat, makes plants more water efficient helping to beat back the encroaching deserts in Africa and Asia and generally increases bio-productivity. If it’s “pollution,” then it’s pollution the natural world exploits extremely well and to great profit. Doesn’t sound too bad to us. LINK
CO2 acts like fertilizer for trees and plants and also increases their water use efficiency. All trees with more CO2 in their atmosphere are very likely to grow more rapidly. Trees like the high-altitude bristlecone pines, on the margins of both moisture and fertility, are likely to exhibit very strong responses to CO2 enrichment – which was the point of the Graybill and Idso study.atmospheric carbon the higher the concentration of CO2. Unstoppable Global Warming, Every 1,500 Years By S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Page 71-72
The Idso analysis also notes that higher CO2 levels act as fertilizer for trees and plants, and that higher CO2 levels also reduce the amount of energy needed by most plant species to conduct a process called photorespiration. So long as temperatures and CO2 are both rising, trees and plants gain vigor with which to exploit warming’s opportunities for range expansion. / The Idsos are widely published on CO2 benefits to plant growth and the phenomenon has been widely studied in dozens of countries because of its importance to crop growth. Their peer-reviewed analysis of forty-two experimental data sets collected by numerous scientists showed that the mean growth enhancement from a 300 parts-per-million increase in atmospheric CO2 rises from almost nil at 10 degrees C to doubled growth at 38 degrees C.24 At higher temperatures, the growth stimulation rises even higher.25 / The importance of CO2 as a fertilizer is endorsed by satellite observations of global vegetation from 1982 to 1999, which found an increase in global plant growth of more than 6 percent. The planet during that period featured slightly increasing rainfall and slightly rising temperatures – but the major change for plants was the rapid increase in atmospheric CO2.26 All of the regions showed positive gains in plant growth – despite the real and imagined environmental stresses that climate warming alarmists have been telling us threaten the world’s plant life. Unstoppable Global Warming, Every 1,500 Years By S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Page 83
Higher CO2 levels help all plants, in all environments. Growth increases are temporary only when the CO2 increase is temporary.
Your “source” contains a lot of “ifs” and “maybes” – truth is, all it does is raise conjectures about how growth MAY be limited in some cases.
C4 Plants – True, they have a mechanism for “fixing” carbon dioxide. But the more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the more they can “fix”. Furthermore, the vast majority of the world’s plant biomass is C3, not C4. The only crops that are C4 are corn, sorghum, sugarcane, and millet (with only corn being a major crop). C3 crops include soybeans, all small grains (wheat, barley, oats, rye), and the most important food crop in the world, rice. Additionally, even the C4 plants can be bio-engineered to be C3 plants.
Tropics – While it MAY be true that increased CO2 will be less beneficial in the tropics than in temperate regions, the vast majority of crops are grown in the temperate regions. So this is not an issue. LINK
March 7, 2013
Re: Global Warming
Judy: As JJ, says, our concerns should be elsewhere and not on global warming.
JJ Yes, there are a number of issues that deserve as much or more attention but I am not in the group that thinks we should do nothing. What I an against is taking some of the drastic steps suggested that would have little effect except the ruination of already fragile economies.
I support nuclear energy which has proven to be the most effective means of reducing greenhouse gasses. If we could get the global warming alarmists to stop the lawsuits and protests over nuclear energy we could actually help them achieve their goal of reducing greenhouse gasses.
No matter what the government does natural evolution is likely to cause us to switch to electric vehicles and alternative energy sources over the next 50 years.
Two things could stop this from happening.
(1) Weapons of mass destruction. (2) If the global waring people get their way and assist in the collapse of world economies causing us to burn whatever we can find for fuel.
March 8, 2013
Adam Wrote: I sense a very “spirit of 1776” vibe when I hear Rand Paul speak. Passionate but calm, mental, measured energy. I thought yesterday’s filibuster was intensely cool on many levels. He didn’t walk on water, but holding it for 13 hours was rather impressive, no?
JJ I’ve had a good vibe from him since the first time I saw him. I like him much better than his dad and think he will go far.
Adam …Oh, and Lindsay Graham and John McCain showed their true “establishment” colors. These career Washington fixtures just cannot handle anything un-Washingtonly-orthodox. Bunch of tired, stodgy, old mouth breathers. Can they just shut eff up? No one cares what these jackwagons have to say.
JJ Agree. The light of change rarely strikes amidst the Old Guard.
Copyright 2013 by J J Dewey
JJ’s Amazon page HERE
Join JJ’s Study class HERE