Fat is a type of crazy

But then if everything is on auto pilot since the start you are the same as non-believers 99.9 per cent but for some reason you are convinced there is a god even though it has no actual interaction or judgement or moral guidance or any form of contact in your life. Maybe you believe in the amazingness of reality rather than god.

I must admit some places have pretty cheap accommodation for my upcoming trip, indicating low demand, whereas in some main tourist areas it is a bit expensive. Airfares have gone back to normal in Australia but maybe not elsewhere.

I said Thailand tourism would bounce back fast after covid. Many said it would take many years. Being out of Thailand it helps to see what makes it desirable as a destination. I told you so.

They seem to say it can happen from taking drugs too. Hard to comment on something I haven't experienced. A bit suspicious of things that cause such a big reaction. It either means you are opening things up and it's a good thing or you are holding something back, akin to holding or limiting your breath, and causing the brain to react in an extreme way.

Ethics can come from intuition and experience rather than from god. Not sure where ethics comes from in terms of spiritual research if not religion. Failings in ethics is not science's fault but discoveries make terrible outcomes possible. The answer may lie with real world solutions and laws rather than looking for answers through spirituality. The latter may be good for some things but giving a surge of ethics to the whole world through spirituality is not something I see as realistic at this point.

A bit rude. You don't get away with that type of thing at a big government department where I work or a hospital like you. Unless he's a good friend. He might keep working because he likes it, because it helps him feel younger and to support his family, because he is bored at the idea of too many free hours, or because he feels insecure or with limited self worth at the thought of retirement. That's his reality and working in Australia ain't so bad.

Happy to acknowledge that science is a bit scary in its applications. Everything from atomic bombs, to artificial intelligence and chat gpt, and what technology is doing to the planet, to our psyches, etc is terrifying if you think about it. So many positives too though. For me the answer isn't to look for a god as gods have a bad track record both with practical ethics and of intervening and fixing things. Spiritual endeavours might help bring a kind of peace. I suppose the answer is to see what is reality and adapt both to the world, and to my own circumstances, as the decades pass.

If it doesn't work it's physics. It is a self deprecating comment among physicists saying that it is hard to make experiments work as expected - maybe due to complexity, funding, etc. It has nothing to do with those pointing out science's limitations and whether or not in turn they reject physics. Sometimes you think too much and miss the point. Then come to some unwarranted conclusions.

Surely a country would want to control who comes and goes. Is your opinion the same for other countries? Use resources paid for by local taxes? The alternative of saying anyone can come and go from any country sounds impractical and chaotic for a range of reasons.

Somebody out there loves you Or is confused by you, saddened by you, or wishes to present you with a trophy. But now you'll never know who that is.

I had a beauty two nights ago. They said there had been a $800 withdrawal from my Commonwealth Bank account and did I approve it. Don't bank with Commonwealth Bank. They can fix it. So I let them go through the process till they attempted to access my computer, and I got bored, and left it there. Seen lots of scammers from Bangalore and Mumbai and Kolkata on youtube, such as Scambaiter and Kitboga and Scammer payback, so that I pretty much knew the script myself.

My previous post was about the criticism of science. It is fine though as you say to keep an open mind and see what can be from meditation or other thought or non thought processes. But I stick to my point that whatever you are doing is not inconsistent with science. Some of your conclusions may be inconsistent with what science indicates is most likely based on the evidence. I would find some peace in that and say I can either work to develop some sort of evidence or be happy on my personal quest.

I totally accept that thoughts can affect our experience of life and have said so. Psychology. Psychiatry. Feelings. I can't see a link between thoughts and some unknown power that results in a new reality.

It's not rubbish if you can get your mind around what science is. Your subjective experience is a little bit of science. You have felt or sensed certain things and drawn conclusions and , unless you are irrational, that is somewhat scientific. You can't get to the next stage of providing objective proof for whatever reason. So you can say, my subjective experience was so strong and alarming that I believe it is a sign of something such as god, and I accept others won't believe it if they haven't had the same experience. That's enough. Science isn't wrong not to stand on the roof tops and say Tippaporn experienced this so we should all believe it. It is what it is.

I think these days thoughts can be measured or at least identified in a form. Surely too if ideas create reality, and Seth teaches how to effectively do this, Seth followers should be statistical outliers in some form or another. Like I say I am not saying what is or isn't but I do find criticism of science not fair.

I see what you are saying but I think science is science and to criticise it is like saying a human should have 3 legs. When you experience who you are, or the positive effects of kundulini, that is a form of evidence. But evidence of one subjective opinion has limited worth and I am sure you'll agree that is appropriate. Even if you can't measure the individual effect you could statistically measure say the positive outcomes of yoga for the community. The point is science is not hindering you. If you think about it how could science say something is likely correct because a small number of people say they had a subjective experience. If 10000 people trained in kundulini and experienced a god and this statistically had an effect different to the rest of the community then there it is - evidence. So you could gather like minded souls and build statistics or stay in your own silo and enjoy what you enjoy. If you do the latter don't criticise science is all.

You complain about repetition, but I repeat science has no opinion about spirituality, atoms, dolphins or anything else in the universe. It simply says that a thing needs evidence to be acceptable as credible. Credible can sound emotional but this is simply in terms of if evidence indicates it is likely to be correct. Seth could - say something others couldn't know that is a real thing come up with a theory that could be tested Seth followers could show, based on his theories, that they have a different statistical success in turning dreams into action due to what Seth taught them. Or that because they dream more they have more actual success than the average person. Or better health - longevity - whatever If nothing to show that's fine - Science lets you do your thing.

Same in Australia. Economy too weak. No wage increase. Economy too strong causing inflation. Limit wage increases to curb inflation. The worker cops it both ways.

I would use this as an opportunity. He's clearly done wrong so politely discuss it with him, let him know you accept it is an accident, but please stay off the land unless you and your wife are there. You need to stand up in a situation like this even if you cause a bit of a ruckus in the short term.

I saw it in the paper but in fact online. Don’t say it much now.

Likely we are the same. Maybe humans are significantly different to other life forms through evolution rather than god anointing us in some way. We can have man made rules that killing a cockroach is less significant because we perceive them as less alive in a sense based on awareness, consciousness, and the way they live. Not sure justified or not. Keep in mind the sunset you find beautiful is in the environment in which humans evolved. Warm weather, beautiful things etc feel good for us, in my opinion, as an adaption by humans to the world not a god made world created to be beautiful to humans.

Science doesn’t know anything for sure. I am saying that unless there is somewhere in the universe where thought and questions are impossible you can consider what is going on where you are and if you don’t simply rely on your feelings, but feelings can be a factor, but look at what is going on and attempt objectivity that is all science is. If you see the sunset you mentioned it makes you believe in god. You could stop there and have faith that it is god. Or you can ask yourself why you think it is a sign of god ie what is the feeling that suggests god, could there be other explanations, what might god be that makes me feel this way. Those questions are the beginnings of science. The alternative of faith might work better for you and that’s fine.

I have said this before but even in the world of god, dreams, spirituality, the 10th dimension, things may work differently but that difference can be described and is science. Even if no rules apply that is a thing that can be described and science can attempt to work it out to make the dream world consistent with the known world. If there is a different so far unknown world.

No. Elad is correct unless you can show how the rules are different in the 5th dimension and why the rules he discusses don’t apply. Science is everywhere by definition including heaven and the 5th dimension and in everyone’s head and spiritual world. Nowhere to hide.

Bush, Obama and Trump pushed for NATO to pay more. Trump pushed harder and you could say that is fair. But there seemed to be constant bickering from him about NATO and little praise or constructive ideas for reform beyond more payments. That takes a toll over time. In 2019 German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron, in turn, suggested that this might be the right time to establish an indigenous European Defence Union among Europeans to complement NATO. “The times when we could rely on others are over,” Merkel added. A leader needs to not only criticise, even if sometimes the criticism is warranted, but maintain steadfast support and come up with better solutions. I don't think he achieved that and I think 4 more years would have lead to a further weakened NATO. Add to that his tepid criticism or actual support for some of NATO's potential or actual adversaries.