Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?

Expand Messages
  • Durward Starman
    *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the
    Message 1 of 12 , Aug 24, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
       
         The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality'. The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
       
         Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
       
         First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials---intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
       
         It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
       
         I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul.  The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
       
         So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
       
      Starman

      www.DrStarman.com


      Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How
    • carol
      Comments? Yes Durward, (is this OK with you?) The main reason I was obliged to abandon regular television viewing was to allow my soul the opportunity to
      Message 2 of 12 , Aug 25, 2008
      • 0 Attachment

         "Comments?"

        Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)

        The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.

        Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  

        The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.

        In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.

        Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.

        Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.

        Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.

        That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective'.

        note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.

        carol.


        --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
        >
        > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality'. The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
        >
        > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
        >
        > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials---intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
        >
        > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
        >
        > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
        >
        > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
        >
        > Starmanwww.DrStarman.com
        > _________________________________________________________________
        > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
        > http://www.windowslive.com/explore/messenger?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_yahoo_082008
        >

      • Durward Starman
        *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that s about it for me. Have you noticed how many young
        Message 3 of 12 , Aug 26, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that's about it for me.
           
            Have you noticed how many young people refer to fictitious characters as if they were real? How the distorted fictional peoples' behavior starts being imitated as if real people would ever behave that way? (After awhile, they DON'T anymore. I mean, real people imitate unreal people from television who never really lived and thought or acted that way, but rather were behaving the way a tiny clique of people in Hollywood script characters to act.)
           
             That's what I mean by the internet being better than the previously-existing TV & radio in that it's interactive. This is more like having a telephone conversation than listening to the radio, to draw a comparison; it's two-way communication, not just one-way. If an image is false it can be critiqued, an intelligent discussion can be had as to what the reality is, like in real life.
           
             A few years ago a survey was done about what is present, and NOT present, on "sitcoms", how they present the world. There are no babies or young children. There are no old people. No one ever sits and watches television, no one ever goes to church, and so on. Distorted fictional world. Then there's the overall cynical, flippant attitude almost everyone displays. The sound of a television being on has become so generally annoying to me that I have to shut it off. I suspect I'm not entirely alone.
           
             Similarly, the muck from the semi-conscious that spews out on most of the "communication" on the internet is pretty depressing. But just as television evolved to Masterpiece Theaters, this infant medium may generate something worthwhile. It's a reflection of what we human beings put into it... influenced by our better or worse angels, as the case may be.
           
          Durward 

          www.DrStarman.com




          To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
          From: organicethics@...
          Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:54:39 +0000
          Subject: [steiner] Re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


           "Comments?"
          Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)
          The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.
          Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  
          The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.
          In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.
          Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.
          Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.
          Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.
          That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective' .
          note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.
          carol.


          --- In steiner@yahoogroups .com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@.. .> wrote:
          >
          >
          > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
          >
          > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality' . The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
          >
          > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
          >
          > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials- --intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
          >
          > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
          >
          > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
          >
          > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
          >
          > Starmanwww.DrStarma n.com
          > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ________
          > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
          > http://www.windowsl ive.com/explore/ messenger? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ messenger_ yahoo_082008
          >




          Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share. Get Ideas Here!
        • Durward Starman
          *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that s about it for me. Have you noticed how many young
          Message 4 of 12 , Aug 26, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that's about it for me.
             
              Have you noticed how many young people refer to fictitious characters as if they were real? How the distorted fictional peoples' behavior starts being imitated as if real people would ever behave that way? (After awhile, they DON'T anymore. I mean, real people imitate unreal people from television who never really lived and thought or acted that way, but rather were behaving the way a tiny clique of people in Hollywood script characters to act.)
             
               That's what I mean by the internet being better than the previously-existing TV & radio in that it's interactive. This is more like having a telephone conversation than listening to the radio, to draw a comparison; it's two-way communication, not just one-way. If an image is false it can be critiqued, an intelligent discussion can be had as to what the reality is, like in real life.
             
               A few years ago a survey was done about what is present, and NOT present, on "sitcoms", how they present the world. There are no babies or young children. There are no old people. No one ever sits and watches television, no one ever goes to church, and so on. Distorted fictional world. Then there's the overall cynical, flippant attitude almost everyone displays. The sound of a television being on has become so generally annoying to me that I have to shut it off. I suspect I'm not entirely alone.
             
               Similarly, the muck from the semi-conscious that spews out on most of the "communication" on the internet is pretty depressing. But just as television evolved to Masterpiece Theaters, this infant medium may generate something worthwhile. It's a reflection of what we human beings put into it... influenced by our better or worse angels, as the case may be.
             
            Durward 

            www.DrStarman.com




            To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
            From: organicethics@...
            Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:54:39 +0000
            Subject: [steiner] Re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


             "Comments?"
            Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)
            The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.
            Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  
            The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.
            In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.
            Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.
            Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.
            Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.
            That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective' .
            note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.
            carol.


            --- In steiner@yahoogroups .com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@.. .> wrote:
            >
            >
            > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
            >
            > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality' . The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
            >
            > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
            >
            > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials- --intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
            >
            > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
            >
            > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
            >
            > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
            >
            > Starmanwww.DrStarma n.com
            > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ________
            > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
            > http://www.windowsl ive.com/explore/ messenger? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ messenger_ yahoo_082008
            >




            Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How
          • Robert Mason
            ... itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror!
            Message 5 of 12 , Aug 27, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              To Starman, who wrote:

              >>First, I see any technology as neutral in
              itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the
              medium anymore than complaining about your
              appearance in the mirror!<<

              Robert writes:

              I’d say that, to a large degree, “the medium is
              the message”, regardless of programming
              content. (Not to deny, of course, that this
              content very largely determines the overall
              effect.) Hoffman’s ideas about this, and the
              *Atlantic* article, were what provoked me to
              start this thread in the first place. Recall
              those who, correctly in a way, opposed the
              advent of Gutenberg’s print technology. And
              recall Nietzsche and the typewriter. -- More
              recently I again came across Steiner’s remarks
              in this vein, regarding the cinema:

              "It is quite natural that the world today
              should be confronted with impulses leading
              entirely to materialism. That cannot be
              prevented, it is connected with the deep needs
              of the age. But a counterbalance must be
              established. One very prominent means of
              driving man into materialism is the
              cinematograph. It has not been observed from
              this standpoint; but there is no better school
              for materialism than the cinema. For what one
              sees there is not reality as men see it. Only
              an age which has so little idea of reality as
              this age of ours, which worships reality as an
              idol in a material sense, could believe that
              the cinema represents reality. Any other age
              would consider whether men really walk along
              the street as seen at the cinema; people would
              ask themselves whether what they saw at such a
              performance really corresponded to reality. Ask
              yourselves frankly and honourably, what is
              really most like what you see in the street: a
              picture painted by an artist, an immobile
              picture, or the dreadful sparkling pictures of
              the cinematograph. If you put the question to
              yourselves quite honourably, you will admit
              that what the artist reproduces in a state of
              rest is much more like what you see. Hence,
              while people are sitting at the cinema, what
              they see there does not make its way into the
              ordinary faculty of perception, it enters a
              deeper, more material stratum than we usually
              employ for our perception. A man becomes
              etherically goggle-eyed at the cinema; he
              develops eyes like those of a seal, only much
              larger, I mean larger etherically. This works
              in a materialising way, not only upon what he
              has in his consciousness, but upon his deepest
              sub-consciousness. Do not think I am abusing
              the cinematograph; I should like to say once
              more that it is quite natural it should exist,
              and it will attain far greater perfection as
              time goes on. That will be the road leading to
              materialism. But a counterbalance must be
              established, and that can only be created in
              the following way. With the search for reality
              which is being developed in the cinema, with
              this descent below sense-perception, man must
              at the same time develop an ascent above it, an
              ascent into Spiritual reality. Then the cinema
              will do him no harm, and he can see it as often
              as he likes. But unless the counterbalance is
              there, people will be led by such things as
              these, not to have their proper relation to the
              earth, but to become more and more closely
              related to it, until at last, they are entirely
              shut off from the Spiritual world." (Cosmic
              and Human Metamorphoses; lecture 4)

              . . . and:

              ". . . . it is part of the natural evolution of
              humanity; we should be clear about the
              following characteristic of our age, namely,
              that if man does not strive out of inner
              activity for development and maintain it
              consciously, then with mere intellectualism at
              his twentieth year he will begin to get rusty.
              He then receives stimuli only from outside, and
              through these external stimuli keeps himself
              going. Do you think that if things were not
              like that people would flock to the cinema?
              This longing for the cinema, this longing to
              see everything externally, depends on the human
              being becoming inwardly inactive, on his no
              longer wanting inner activity. The only way to
              listen to lectures on Spiritual Science, as
              meant here, is for those present to do their
              share of the work. But today that is not to
              people's liking. They flock to lectures or
              meetings with lantern slides so that they can
              sit and do as much as possible without
              thinking. Everything just passes before them.
              They can remain perfectly passive." (Younger
              Generation: Lecture X)

              I think that we could plausibly hypothesize
              that the tendencies that RS spoke of here are
              intensified with TV and computer imaging. But
              I would assume that the computer at least
              offers the opportunity for the viewer to be
              somewhat less passive, depending on how much he
              uses it for creative work. Still, I doubt that
              this, in itself, would be the kind of
              *thinking* work that Steiner was talking about.

              Steiner does give us an outline of the
              *general* problem: inner passivity, ethereal
              goggle-eyes, materialistic effects on the soul.
              And he is no Luddite; he allows that these
              things are necessary in our times. More, he is
              not a defeatist; he gives us strong hints about
              the healthy counterbalance: inner work, the
              inner activity of real thinking, the kind he
              taught in *PoF*.

              Starman wrote:

              >>So I don't see anything negative about the
              internet in relation to people waking up, and
              in fact I see more positive in it than the
              older TV and radio. Comments?<<

              Robert writes:

              About TV: Regardless of programming, it does
              tend to hypnotize people.

              “By the way, your TV screen has a flicker rate
              that induces a hypnotic trance. No kidding.
              Read about it in The Edison Gene by Thom
              Hartmann.”
              <http://www.under-one-roof.net/life-coach/coaching-newsletters/coach-newsletter5-01-07.html>

              “If you take a person who has never watched
              television at all and you put them in front of
              a television set, it will take 45 minutes for
              their brain to enter into hypnotic wave. If you
              put that same person in front of a television
              set the next night, it will only take five
              minutes before they become hypnotized by the
              flickering light. And the following day, the
              third day, they will go into the hypnotic wave
              in five seconds. TV is the greatest thing that
              has destroyed every nation in the world because
              every show will propagandize you.”
              <http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5490>

              About radio: At least it does allow people to
              conjure up their own imagery, rather than just
              passively accept the imagery that is fed to
              them. Still, it does create an unnatural
              electromagnetic environment that people must
              live in. I think RS said something to the
              effect that this “wireless” environment is
              making people less intelligent -- but I don’t
              recall the exact words or citation.

              About the Internet: I agree that it gives
              people at least the opportunity to be less
              passive than TV, for instance. But how many
              people really take advantage of the
              opportunity, and how many just use the Internet
              as a more convenient, most personalized TV?

              But, as the *Atlantic* article suggests, even
              for those who use the Internet interactively,
              it might well be shortening their attention
              spans and making their thinking “staccato”.

              It’s true that the freedom, scope, and speed of
              the Internet make garbage “content” more
              readily available than before, and it’s a good
              question as to whether so many people will
              freely choose the garbage over the worthwhile
              content that the net effect will be to debase
              people in general. But regardless of the
              content of the media, it seems clear enough
              that the media themselves are becoming ever
              more “Ahrimanic”. Writing is more Ahrimanic
              than speech; print is more Ahrimanic than
              writing; and electronic communications are more
              Ahrimanic than print. And this is so
              inevitably; there would be no point in trying
              to hold back this “progress”.

              But the real question is how to take the
              Ahrimanic in healthy moderation and how to
              counter it “spiritual activity”, in the modern
              form brought by Steiner in Anthroposophy.

              Robert Mason
            • Durward Starman
              *******Absolutely, I agree completely. What I see as the positive --- it s one of the 6 basic exercises to look for that in all things--- is that this medium
              Message 6 of 12 , Aug 31, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                *******Absolutely, I agree completely. What I see as the positive --- it's one of the 6 basic exercises to look for that in all things--- is that this medium can be changed by the users, by us. Anthroposophy never has gotten into TV or movies as far as I know, with all the millions of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it except for a brief one in a little-known film on UFOs in the section detailing Trevor James Constable and his filming of invisible etheric UFOs ("Overlords of the UFO", in the 1970s). In the same way, there has been a total blackout on cancer cures like the Hoxsey and Gerson therapies, and radionics, and so many other things, since all one had to do was brainwash the few managers of the major TV networks and/or intimidate them with the threat of lawsuits for reporting information the medical dictatorship has declared verboten. That lock on information is gone now. If few have so far taken advantage of the new freedom--- well, the medium is young yet. But if it had been around 30 years ago, for instance, they might not have been able to get away with what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for instance.
                 
                   (For those who never knew of him ----and he was crucified before he could become big enough to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor here in Virginia Beach who got very interested in "radionics" machines, devices invented by Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr. Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s, that are able to attune to and diagnose the etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them through studying the psychic readings Edgar Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it 'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery in a new form of an ancient science of the Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr labs I believe (whose company in the UK is apparently defunct now), and set up an Etheronic Research Foundation next to his chiropractic office and spent a few years seeking grants for this study and practicing with it. One of his clients apparently complained to the authorities about something--- I never did find out what the actual complaint was--- and he was put on trial for whatever they term it when you heal without permission. In vain he brought William Tiller here from Stanford and other researchers into radionics to testify---they found him guilty and took away his license to practice chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving him of his livelihood. Back in the 1950s they did worse to Ruth Drown and Wilhelm Reich, which is why no one knows yet about etheric physics except we anthroposophists. But with the free flow of information called the internet, everyone in the 21st century will!)

                -starman
                www.DrStarman.com




                To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
                From: robertsmason_99@...
                Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:21:18 -0700
                Subject: [steiner] re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


                To Starman, who wrote:

                >>First, I see any technology as neutral in
                itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the
                medium anymore than complaining about your
                appearance in the mirror!<<

                Robert writes:

                I’d say that, to a large degree, “the medium is
                the message”, regardless of programming
                content. (Not to deny, of course, that this
                content very largely determines the overall
                effect.) Hoffman’s ideas about this, and the
                *Atlantic* article, were what provoked me to
                start this thread in the first place. Recall
                those who, correctly in a way, opposed the
                advent of Gutenberg’s print technology. And
                recall Nietzsche and the typewriter. -- More
                recently I again came across Steiner’s remarks
                in this vein, regarding the cinema:

                "It is quite natural that the world today
                should be confronted with impulses leading
                entirely to materialism. That cannot be
                prevented, it is connected with the deep needs
                of the age. But a counterbalance must be
                established. One very prominent means of
                driving man into materialism is the
                cinematograph. It has not been observed from
                this standpoint; but there is no better school
                for materialism than the cinema. For what one
                sees there is not reality as men see it. Only
                an age which has so little idea of reality as
                this age of ours, which worships reality as an
                idol in a material sense, could believe that
                the cinema represents reality. Any other age
                would consider whether men really walk along
                the street as seen at the cinema; people would
                ask themselves whether what they saw at such a
                performance really corresponded to reality. Ask
                yourselves frankly and honourably, what is
                really most like what you see in the street: a
                picture painted by an artist, an immobile
                picture, or the dreadful sparkling pictures of
                the cinematograph. If you put the question to
                yourselves quite honourably, you will admit
                that what the artist reproduces in a state of
                rest is much more like what you see. Hence,
                while people are sitting at the cinema, what
                they see there does not make its way into the
                ordinary faculty of perception, it enters a
                deeper, more material stratum than we usually
                employ for our perception. A man becomes
                etherically goggle-eyed at the cinema; he
                develops eyes like those of a seal, only much
                larger, I mean larger etherically. This works
                in a materialising way, not only upon what he
                has in his consciousness, but upon his deepest
                sub-consciousness. Do not think I am abusing
                the cinematograph; I should like to say once
                more that it is quite natural it should exist,
                and it will attain far greater perfection as
                time goes on. That will be the road leading to
                materialism. But a counterbalance must be
                established, and that can only be created in
                the following way. With the search for reality
                which is being developed in the cinema, with
                this descent below sense-perception, man must
                at the same time develop an ascent above it, an
                ascent into Spiritual reality. Then the cinema
                will do him no harm, and he can see it as often
                as he likes. But unless the counterbalance is
                there, people will be led by such things as
                these, not to have their proper relation to the
                earth, but to become more and more closely
                related to it, until at last, they are entirely
                shut off from the Spiritual world." (Cosmic
                and Human Metamorphoses; lecture 4)

                . . . and:

                ". . . . it is part of the natural evolution of
                humanity; we should be clear about the
                following characteristic of our age, namely,
                that if man does not strive out of inner
                activity for development and maintain it
                consciously, then with mere intellectualism at
                his twentieth year he will begin to get rusty.
                He then receives stimuli only from outside, and
                through these external stimuli keeps himself
                going. Do you think that if things were not
                like that people would flock to the cinema?
                This longing for the cinema, this longing to
                see everything externally, depends on the human
                being becoming inwardly inactive, on his no
                longer wanting inner activity. The only way to
                listen to lectures on Spiritual Science, as
                meant here, is for those present to do their
                share of the work. But today that is not to
                people's liking. They flock to lectures or
                meetings with lantern slides so that they can
                sit and do as much as possible without
                thinking. Everything just passes before them.
                They can remain perfectly passive." (Younger
                Generation: Lecture X)

                I think that we could plausibly hypothesize
                that the tendencies that RS spoke of here are
                intensified with TV and computer imaging. But
                I would assume that the computer at least
                offers the opportunity for the viewer to be
                somewhat less passive, depending on how much he
                uses it for creative work. Still, I doubt that
                this, in itself, would be the kind of
                *thinking* work that Steiner was talking about.

                Steiner does give us an outline of the
                *general* problem: inner passivity, ethereal
                goggle-eyes, materialistic effects on the soul.
                And he is no Luddite; he allows that these
                things are necessary in our times. More, he is
                not a defeatist; he gives us strong hints about
                the healthy counterbalance: inner work, the
                inner activity of real thinking, the kind he
                taught in *PoF*.

                Starman wrote:

                >>So I don't see anything negative about the
                internet in relation to people waking up, and
                in fact I see more positive in it than the
                older TV and radio. Comments?<<

                Robert writes:

                About TV: Regardless of programming, it does
                tend to hypnotize people.

                “By the way, your TV screen has a flicker rate
                that induces a hypnotic trance. No kidding.
                Read about it in The Edison Gene by Thom
                Hartmann.”
                <http://www.under- one-roof. net/life- coach/coaching- newsletters/ coach-newsletter 5-01-07.html>

                “If you take a person who has never watched
                television at all and you put them in front of
                a television set, it will take 45 minutes for
                their brain to enter into hypnotic wave. If you
                put that same person in front of a television
                set the next night, it will only take five
                minutes before they become hypnotized by the
                flickering light. And the following day, the
                third day, they will go into the hypnotic wave
                in five seconds. TV is the greatest thing that
                has destroyed every nation in the world because
                every show will propagandize you.”
                <http://www.wakeupfr omyourslumber. com/node/ 5490>

                About radio: At least it does allow people to
                conjure up their own imagery, rather than just
                passively accept the imagery that is fed to
                them. Still, it does create an unnatural
                electromagnetic environment that people must
                live in. I think RS said something to the
                effect that this “wireless” environment is
                making people less intelligent -- but I don’t
                recall the exact words or citation.

                About the Internet: I agree that it gives
                people at least the opportunity to be less
                passive than TV, for instance. But how many
                people really take advantage of the
                opportunity, and how many just use the Internet
                as a more convenient, most personalized TV?

                But, as the *Atlantic* article suggests, even
                for those who use the Internet interactively,
                it might well be shortening their attention
                spans and making their thinking “staccato”.

                It’s true that the freedom, scope, and speed of
                the Internet make garbage “content” more
                readily available than before, and it’s a good
                question as to whether so many people will
                freely choose the garbage over the worthwhile
                content that the net effect will be to debase
                people in general. But regardless of the
                content of the media, it seems clear enough
                that the media themselves are becoming ever
                more “Ahrimanic”. Writing is more Ahrimanic
                than speech; print is more Ahrimanic than
                writing; and electronic communications are more
                Ahrimanic than print. And this is so
                inevitably; there would be no point in trying
                to hold back this “progress”.

                But the real question is how to take the
                Ahrimanic in healthy moderation and how to
                counter it “spiritual activity”, in the modern
                form brought by Steiner in Anthroposophy.

                Robert Mason




                Be the filmmaker you always wanted to be—learn how to burn a DVD with Windows®. Make your smash hit
              • Robert Mason
                ... movies as far as I know, with all the millions of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it except for a brief
                Message 7 of 12 , Sep 2, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  To Starman, who wrote:

                  >>Anthroposophy never has gotten into TV or
                  movies as far as I know, with all the millions
                  of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the
                  Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it
                  except for a brief one in a little-known film
                  on UFOs in the section detailing Trevor James
                  Constable and his filming of invisible etheric
                  UFOs ("Overlords of the UFO", in the 1970s).<<

                  Robert writes:

                  I’m not sure, but I think that RS may have
                  popped up in a German movie or two a few years
                  back.

                  Starman wrote:

                  >>. . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for
                  instance.

                  >>(For those who never knew of him ----and he
                  was crucified before he could become big enough
                  to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor
                  here in Virginia Beach who got very interested
                  in "radionics" machines, devices invented by
                  Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr.
                  Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s,
                  that are able to attune to and diagnose the
                  etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them
                  through studying the psychic readings Edgar
                  Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it
                  'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery
                  in a new form of an ancient science of the
                  Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr
                  labs I believe (whose company in the UK is
                  apparently defunct now), and set up an
                  Etheronic Research Foundation next to his
                  chiropractic office and spent a few years
                  seeking grants for this study and practicing
                  with it. One of his clients apparently
                  complained to the authorities about something--
                  - I never did find out what the actual
                  complaint was--- and he was put on trial for
                  whatever they term it when you heal without
                  permission. In vain he brought William Tiller
                  here from Stanford and other researchers into
                  radionics to testify---they found him guilty
                  and took away his license to practice
                  chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused
                  him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving
                  him of his livelihood.<<

                  Robert writes:

                  I first had contact with him in the early ‘80s,
                  when all that legal excrement was coming down.
                  He then left the country; went to Thailand, I
                  think, and I lost contact with him. But he
                  landed in Sedona, and I was in touch with him
                  there, briefly, by long distance, around ’89.
                  Lost touch with him again, but it seems he went
                  to San Clemente Island, and I saw a very brief
                  note on the Net a few years ago that he had
                  died there. That’s about all I know, except
                  that he apparently was still working with
                  radionics, with elaborate new “machines” that
                  he developed. As with Reich, I have to wonder
                  whether his death was natural.

                  Starman wrote:

                  >>. . . . no one knows yet about etheric
                  physics except we anthroposophists. But with
                  the free flow of information called the
                  internet, everyone in the 21st century will!<<

                  Robert writes:

                  Oh, but the cutting-edge research all over the
                  place is stumbling into the “etheric”, though
                  that term might not be used for it. In this
                  country that research might be “fringe” stuff,
                  poorly funded if at all -- or suppressed by
                  academic politics or economic pressure, or by
                  outright murder. (But what’s happening in the
                  “black world”? I suspect that “they” know
                  plenty.) But you could look around Borderland
                  Science, Keely Net, Etheric Warriors, etc. for
                  some of the “fringe” buzz. -- But in other
                  counties, such as Russia, it’s not necessarily
                  so “fringe”; the Russians speak of “bio-
                  photons”, “torsion fields”, etc.

                  Robert M
                • Durward Starman
                  Starman wrote: . . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for instance. (For those who never knew of him ----and he was crucified before he could become big
                  Message 8 of 12 , Sep 2, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Starman wrote:

                    >>. . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for
                    instance.

                    >>(For those who never knew of him ----and he
                    was crucified before he could become big enough
                    to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor
                    here in Virginia Beach who got very interested
                    in "radionics" machines, devices invented by
                    Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr.
                    Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s,
                    that are able to attune to and diagnose the
                    etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them
                    through studying the psychic readings Edgar
                    Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it
                    'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery
                    in a new form of an ancient science of the
                    Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr
                    labs I believe (whose company in the UK is
                    apparently defunct now), and set up an
                    Etheronic Research Foundation next to his
                    chiropractic office and spent a few years
                    seeking grants for this study and practicing
                    with it. One of his clients apparently
                    complained to the authorities about something--
                    - I never did find out what the actual
                    complaint was--- and he was put on trial for
                    whatever they term it when you heal without
                    permission. In vain he brought William Tiller
                    here from Stanford and other researchers into
                    radionics to testify---they found him guilty
                    and took away his license to practice
                    chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused
                    him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving
                    him of his livelihood.< <

                    Robert writes:

                    I first had contact with him in the early ‘80s,
                    when all that legal excrement was coming down.
                    He then left the country; went to Thailand, I
                    think, and I lost contact with him. But he
                    landed in Sedona, and I was in touch with him
                    there, briefly, by long distance, around ’89.
                    Lost touch with him again, but it seems he went
                    to San Clemente Island, and I saw a very brief
                    note on the Net a few years ago that he had
                    died there. That’s about all I know, except
                    that he apparently was still working with
                    radionics, with elaborate new “machines” that
                    he developed. As with Reich, I have to wonder
                    whether his death was natural.
                     
                     
                    *******That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in bad health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all that time, and a friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach, where he died a quite natural death in her house a few years ago, old, broken and forgotten by almost everyone.
                     
                       Believe it or not, occultists are not so important that the mythical 'Power Structure' stays up nights worrying about them, has their phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning. Most people in business and government have never heard of any of these people, and regard what little they do hear of them as utter quackery. It's up to us to prove our science works without blind faith in it, and few do so.



                    Starman wrote:
                    >>. . . . no one knows yet about etheric
                    physics except we anthroposophists. But with
                    the free flow of information called the
                    internet, everyone in the 21st century will!<<

                    Robert writes:

                    Oh, but the cutting-edge research all over the
                    place is stumbling into the “etheric”, though
                    that term might not be used for it. In this
                    country that research might be “fringe” stuff,
                    poorly funded if at all -- or suppressed by
                    academic politics or economic pressure, or by
                    outright murder. (But what’s happening in the
                    “black world”? I suspect that “they” know
                    plenty.) But you could look around Borderland
                    Science, Keely Net, Etheric Warriors, etc. for
                    some of the “fringe” buzz. -- But in other
                    counties, such as Russia, it’s not necessarily
                    so “fringe”; the Russians speak of “bio-
                    photons”, “torsion fields”, etc.

                    Robert M

                    *******People who say that haven't been much in touch with Russian academia lately! The myths propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for 40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that is tolerated by Putin's government now.
                       As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and simple. If you make contacts in government, you'll find absolutely no one here in the US allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-science. That whole Independence Day scenario is just imagined by people with the most incredibly wacked-out ideas of how our government operates. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and government in both the US and Russia is totally, completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church or what science fiction you read are your business, but leave it outside the office door if you expect to go anywhere.
                        It's a myth that there are amazing scientific discoveries being suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA--- rather, people in the fringe science/occult world usually become unbalanced and destroy themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in government cares about any of these crackpots who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in the grip of Lucifer.
                     
                    -starman


                    Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How
                  • Robert Mason
                    ... thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in
                    Message 9 of 12 , Sep 4, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      To Starman, who wrote:

                      >>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                      thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                      knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                      radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                      when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                      was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                      friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                      Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                      her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                      forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                      Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                      info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                      Clemente.

                      I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                      the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                      elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                      googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                      this:

                      “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                      Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                      instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                      teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                      principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                      analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                      pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                      unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                      His body was cremated right after.”
                      <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>Believe it or not, occultists are not so
                      important that the mythical 'Power Structure'
                      stays up nights worrying about them, has their
                      phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to
                      keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning.
                      Most people in business and government have
                      never heard of any of these people, and regard
                      what little they do hear of them as utter
                      quackery. It's up to us to prove our science
                      works without blind faith in it, and few do
                      so.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      But “most people in business and government“
                      aren’t in the real Power Structure, and probably
                      know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                      Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware
                      of the danger that the “light-side” occultists
                      and semi-occultist pose for it.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>People who say that haven't been much in
                      touch with Russian academia lately! The myths
                      propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                      Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for
                      40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that
                      is tolerated by Putin's government now.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      Some people over there apparently take such
                      “rubbish” seriously enough:
                      <http://www.pyramids.ru/english.html>
                      "[The Russian pyramid discoveries we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that ‘torsion fields’ can be harnessed to create positive consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity surrounding the pyramid.
                      "Ozone holes appear to close up over the pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos.com for more information.]"
                      <http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=362&Itemid=30>

                      "They have collected a lot of data indicating that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown ‘pyramid power’. Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30 to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and Gas."
                      <http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter7.html>

                      I haven’t been in touch with Russian academia
                      lately, but you can read about some of the more
                      recent research here:
                      <http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=103&Itemid=36>
                      I would guess that you could find more by
                      Googling around a little.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology
                      or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                      simple.<

                      Robert writes:

                      But there is a black world; it was written into
                      law in the National Security Act of 1947. But
                      it’s so dark that there is no clear boundary
                      between the governmental and the non-
                      governmental. It’s a good question as to which
                      is the tail and which is the dog.

                      And it doesn’t come just from Hollywood. There
                      are reporters, such as George Knapp:
                      <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22george+knapp%22++%22area+51%22&aq=f&oq=>
                      . . . a scientist such as Bob Lazar:
                      <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22bob+lazar%22++%22area+51%22&btnG=Search>
                      . . . a pilot such as John Lear:
                      <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22john+lear%22++%22area+51%22>

                      . . . just Google around.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>If you make contacts in government, you'll
                      find absolutely no one here in the US
                      allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-
                      science. That whole Independence Day scenario is
                      just imagined by people with the most incredibly
                      wacked-out ideas of how our government operates.
                      Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and
                      government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                      completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from
                      orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church
                      or what science fiction you read are your
                      business, but leave it outside the office door
                      if you expect to go anywhere. It's a myth that
                      there are amazing scientific discoveries being
                      suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA---
                      rather, people in the fringe science/occult
                      world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                      themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in
                      government cares about any of these crackpots
                      who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                      the grip of Lucifer.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      There’s a long history of fringe researchers
                      being harassed and dying under mysterious
                      circumstances. You seem to know about Dr.
                      Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                      Mallove for instance:
                      <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Eugene+Mallove%22++murder>

                      As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy;
                      those in the know, know better. Orthodox
                      science is for the chumps on the outside. Most
                      of those in “the government” are indeed outside
                      the real Power Structure. The grunts in the
                      trenches are allowed to operate only on a need-
                      to-know, compartmentalized basis.

                      You seem to accept that Reich was persecuted by
                      "the government"; why wouldn't "they" just as
                      well persecute other scientists who get too
                      close to the truths that are not supposed to
                      be known to those on the "outside"?

                      Robert Mason
                    • Durward Starman
                      That s a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for
                      Message 10 of 12 , Sep 7, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                        thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                        knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                        radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                        when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                        was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                        friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                        Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                        her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                        forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                        Robert writes:

                        That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                        Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                        info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                        Clemente.

                        I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                        the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                        elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                        googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                        this:

                        “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                        Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                        instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                        teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                        principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                        analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                        pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                        unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                        His body was cremated right after.”
                        <http://forum. treasurenet. com/index. php?topic= 74098.1080; wap2>

                         
                        ******He died two years ago. This is a perfect example of how you can't believe what you read on the internet. Always check things out, and not with 'sources' that believe the same nonsense you're trying to verify. That explains all the rest of the stuff you posted, none of which requires any further response; it's horse-hockey.
                         
                           Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though sometimes questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer like, "When did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a Threat or a Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy theories. It appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will not be participating further. Others are welcome to.
                         
                        -Starman

                        www.DrStarman.com




                        To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
                        From: robertsmason_99@...
                        Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:34:22 -0700
                        Subject: [steiner] RE: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


                        To Starman, who wrote:

                        >>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                        thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                        knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                        radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                        when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                        was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                        friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                        Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                        her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                        forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                        Robert writes:

                        That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                        Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                        info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                        Clemente.

                        I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                        the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                        elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                        googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                        this:

                        “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                        Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                        instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                        teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                        principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                        analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                        pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                        unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                        His body was cremated right after.”
                        <http://forum. treasurenet. com/index. php?topic= 74098.1080; wap2>

                        Starman wrote:

                        >>Believe it or not, occultists are not so
                        important that the mythical 'Power Structure'
                        stays up nights worrying about them, has their
                        phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to
                        keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning.
                        Most people in business and government have
                        never heard of any of these people, and regard
                        what little they do hear of them as utter
                        quackery. It's up to us to prove our science
                        works without blind faith in it, and few do
                        so.<<

                        Robert writes:

                        But “most people in business and government“
                        aren’t in the real Power Structure, and probably
                        know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                        Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware
                        of the danger that the “light-side” occultists
                        and semi-occultist pose for it.

                        Starman wrote:

                        >>People who say that haven't been much in
                        touch with Russian academia lately! The myths
                        propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                        Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for
                        40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that
                        is tolerated by Putin's government now.<<

                        Robert writes:

                        Some people over there apparently take such
                        “rubbish” seriously enough:
                        <http://www.pyramids .ru/english. html>
                        "[The Russian pyramid discoveries we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that ‘torsion fields’ can be harnessed to create positive consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity surrounding the pyramid.
                        "Ozone holes appear to close up over the pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos. com for more information. ]"
                        <http://divinecosmos .com/index. php?option= com_content& task=view& id=362&Itemid= 30>

                        "They have collected a lot of data indicating that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown ‘pyramid power’. Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30 to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and Gas."
                        <http://www.soulsofd istortion. nl/SODA_chapter7 .html>

                        I haven’t been in touch with Russian academia
                        lately, but you can read about some of the more
                        recent research here:
                        <http://www.divineco smos.com/ index.php? option=com_ content&task= view&id=103& Itemid=36>
                        I would guess that you could find more by
                        Googling around a little.

                        Starman wrote:

                        >>As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology
                        or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                        simple.<

                        Robert writes:

                        But there is a black world; it was written into
                        law in the National Security Act of 1947. But
                        it’s so dark that there is no clear boundary
                        between the governmental and the non-
                        governmental. It’s a good question as to which
                        is the tail and which is the dog.

                        And it doesn’t come just from Hollywood. There
                        are reporters, such as George Knapp:
                        <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22george+ knapp%22+ +%22area+ 51%22&aq= f&oq=>
                        . . . a scientist such as Bob Lazar:
                        <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22bob+lazar% 22++%22area+ 51%22&btnG= Search>
                        . . . a pilot such as John Lear:
                        <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22john+lear% 22++%22area+ 51%22>

                        . . . just Google around.

                        Starman wrote:

                        >>If you make contacts in government, you'll
                        find absolutely no one here in the US
                        allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-
                        science. That whole Independence Day scenario is
                        just imagined by people with the most incredibly
                        wacked-out ideas of how our government operates.
                        Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and
                        government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                        completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from
                        orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church
                        or what science fiction you read are your
                        business, but leave it outside the office door
                        if you expect to go anywhere. It's a myth that
                        there are amazing scientific discoveries being
                        suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA---
                        rather, people in the fringe science/occult
                        world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                        themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in
                        government cares about any of these crackpots
                        who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                        the grip of Lucifer.<<

                        Robert writes:

                        There’s a long history of fringe researchers
                        being harassed and dying under mysterious
                        circumstances. You seem to know about Dr.
                        Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                        Mallove for instance:
                        <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22Eugene+ Mallove%22+ +murder>

                        As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy;
                        those in the know, know better. Orthodox
                        science is for the chumps on the outside. Most
                        of those in “the government” are indeed outside
                        the real Power Structure. The grunts in the
                        trenches are allowed to operate only on a need-
                        to-know, compartmentalized basis.

                        You seem to accept that Reich was persecuted by
                        "the government"; why wouldn't "they" just as
                        well persecute other scientists who get too
                        close to the truths that are not supposed to
                        be known to those on the "outside"?

                        Robert Mason




                        Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live. See Now
                      • carol
                        D. Starman: Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which anthroposophy
                        Message 11 of 12 , Sep 8, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          D. Starman: "Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about
                          the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul
                          which anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though
                          sometimes questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer
                          like, "When did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a
                          Threat or a Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy
                          theories. It appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will
                          not be participating further. Others are welcome to."

                          It might 'appear' that the question is being ignored, but in fact, the
                          exercise itself proved that < within conversation/human exchange over
                          the internet as medium> specific topics can be broadened in any given
                          direction, given the will to do so by those involved, and that ' true
                          transparency' does have a chance of showing up somewhere along the
                          way..

                          In everyday living, it happens that we find it interesting just
                          listening to a couple of people talk over a given subject- each
                          individual brings up interesting details of which 'we' may have no
                          immediate knowledge of. We gain somehow from our participation as
                          listener. Of what might have been discussed through a situation thus
                          described, we in turn may filter, or perhaps we may retain key details;
                          we may accept to hold some closer to our inner beings more than others,
                          we may simply retain an overall impression which itself conveys meaning
                          to us etc.

                          From my experience of using the internet, something of the nature of
                          what happens in person to person exchanges, manages to transcend- given
                          that good intentions are a ground rule, at the onset.

                          Through the 'freshness' of the 'internet' exchange of information
                          concerning this researcher from Virginia Beach (both participants to the
                          'conversation' live there as well, as far as I can see) I, as observer,
                          was able to gain something from it, for myself. For example, I watched
                          as various ideas literally were placed forward, over a period of time,
                          showing up on my electronic monitor. These ideas eventually came to
                          express (at least) how an eyewitness account might compare with what has
                          been pre-prepared for mass consumption. (Of course, a little more
                          was expressed...)

                          This was enlightening for me- for it actually furnished me with a
                          seemingly 'real' life lesson- for 1, in filtering information...

                          Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul? Perhaps the best
                          answer I can now furnish is the following: given that the internet is
                          here, the 'consciousness soul' had best establish it's place, therein.

                          carol.




                          --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and
                          fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                          radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in bad
                          health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                          friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach, where he died a quite
                          natural death in her house a few years ago, old, broken and forgotten by
                          almost everyone.<<Robert writes:That's shocking to me; I didn't
                          have a clue that Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last info I
                          had, indirectly, was that he was in San Clemente.I was pretty sure that
                          I had seen something on the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                          elaborate "machines" before he died. But I googled and
                          didn't find it again. I did find this:"One of the founders in
                          Radionic research was Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                          instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to teach classes to the
                          agency on Radionic principles starting in 1979. Charles used to analyse
                          pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel pics from Mindanao. He died in
                          1999 under unusual circumstances in a Military hospital. His body was
                          cremated right after."
                          <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>
                          >
                          > ******He died two years ago. This is a perfect example of how you
                          can't believe what you read on the internet. Always check things out,
                          and not with 'sources' that believe the same nonsense you're trying to
                          verify. That explains all the rest of the stuff you posted, none of
                          which requires any further response; it's horse-hockey.
                          >
                          > Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated
                          subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which
                          anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though sometimes
                          questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer like, "When
                          did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a Threat or a
                          Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy theories. It
                          appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will not be
                          participating further. Others are welcome to.
                          >
                          > -Starmanwww.DrStarman.com
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > To: steiner@...: robertsmason_99@...: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:34:22
                          -0700Subject: [steiner] RE: Is the internet good or bad for the
                          consciousness soul?
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > To Starman, who wrote:>>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                          thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He
                          was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                          when he was in bad health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all
                          that time, and a friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach,
                          where he died a quite natural death in her house a few years ago, old,
                          broken and forgotten by almost everyone.<<Robert writes:That's
                          shocking to me; I didn't have a clue that Dr. Whitehouse was back in
                          The Beach. The last info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                          Clemente.I was pretty sure that I had seen something on the Net about
                          him being in San Clemente with elaborate "machines" before he
                          died. But I googled and didn't find it again. I did find
                          this:"One of the founders in Radionic research was Dr. Charles
                          Whitehouse. Charles was the first instructor at the Defense Intelligence
                          Agency to teach classes to the agency on Radionic principles starting in
                          1979. Charles used to analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                          pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under unusual circumstances in a
                          Military hospital. His body was cremated right after."
                          <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>Starman
                          wrote:>>Believe it or not, occultists are not so important that the
                          mythical 'Power Structure' stays up nights worrying about them, has
                          their phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to keep the Golden
                          Shining New Age from dawning. Most people in business and government
                          have never heard of any of these people, and regard what little they do
                          hear of them as utter quackery. It's up to us to prove our science works
                          without blind faith in it, and few do so.<<Robert writes:But "most
                          people in business and government" aren't in the real Power
                          Structure, and probably know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                          Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware of the danger that the
                          "light-side" occultists and semi-occultist pose for it.Starman
                          wrote:>>People who say that haven't been much in touch with Russian
                          academia lately! The myths propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                          Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for 40 years, but
                          absolutely nothing wacko like that is tolerated by Putin's government
                          now.<<Robert writes:Some people over there apparently take such
                          "rubbish" seriously enough:
                          <http://www.pyramids.ru/english.html>"[The Russian pyramid discoveries
                          we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that
                          `torsion fields' can be harnessed to create positive
                          consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable
                          decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity
                          surrounding the pyramid. "Ozone holes appear to close up over the
                          pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well
                          production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is
                          cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos.com
                          for more
                          information.]"<http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task\
                          =view&id=362&Itemid=30>"They have collected a lot of data indicating
                          that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown `pyramid power'.
                          Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of
                          organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were
                          placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30
                          to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above
                          the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing
                          enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and
                          seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a
                          better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports
                          were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and
                          Gas."<http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter7.html>I haven't
                          been in touch with Russian academia lately, but you can read about some
                          of the more recent research
                          here:<http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view\
                          &id=103&Itemid=36>I would guess that you could find more by Googling
                          around a little.Starman wrote:>>As for the "black world" of Area 51
                          technology or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                          simple.<Robert writes:But there is a black world; it was written into
                          law in the National Security Act of 1947. But it's so dark that
                          there is no clear boundary between the governmental and the
                          non-governmental. It's a good question as to which is the tail and
                          which is the dog.And it doesn't come just from Hollywood. There are
                          reporters, such as George
                          Knapp:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22george+knapp%22++%22area+\
                          51%22&aq=f&oq=>. . . a scientist such as Bob
                          Lazar:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22bob+lazar%22++%22area+51%\
                          22&btnG=Search>. . . a pilot such as John
                          Lear:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22john+lear%22++%22area+51%2\
                          2>. . . just Google around.Starman wrote:>>If you make contacts in
                          government, you'll find absolutely no one here in the US allowed to
                          waste funding on fringe or pseudo-science. That whole Independence Day
                          scenario is just imagined by people with the most incredibly wacked-out
                          ideas of how our government operates. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble,
                          but science and government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                          completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from orthodoxy at your peril.
                          What you do in church or what science fiction you read are your
                          business, but leave it outside the office door if you expect to go
                          anywhere. It's a myth that there are amazing scientific discoveries
                          being suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA--- rather, people in
                          the fringe science/occult world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                          themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in government cares about
                          any of these crackpots who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                          the grip of Lucifer.<<Robert writes:There's a long history of fringe
                          researchers being harassed and dying under mysterious circumstances. You
                          seem to know about Dr. Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                          Mallove for
                          instance:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Eugene+Mallove%22++mur\
                          der>As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy; those in the know,
                          know better. Orthodox science is for the chumps on the outside. Most of
                          those in "the government" are indeed outside the real Power
                          Structure. The grunts in the trenches are allowed to operate only on a
                          need-to-know, compartmentalized basis.You seem to accept that Reich was
                          persecuted by"the government"; why wouldn't "they" just aswell persecute
                          other scientists who get tooclose to the truths that are not supposed
                          tobe known to those on the "outside"?Robert Mason
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > _________________________________________________________________
                          > Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with
                          Windows Live.
                          > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/
                          >
                        • Robert Mason
                          ... Just for clarity: I don t live in Va. Beach now; I m about 50 miles away. I did live there for a couple of years, about 20 years ago. Robert M
                          Message 12 of 12 , Sep 9, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, "carol" <organicethics@...> wrote:

                            >. . . . Virginia Beach (both participants to the
                            > 'conversation' live there as well, as far as I can see). . . .

                            Just for clarity: I don't live in Va. Beach
                            now; I'm about 50 miles away. I did live there
                            for a couple of years, about 20 years ago.

                            Robert M
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.