Alchemy and The Philosopher's Stone is Real

reply to post by prepared4truth


Right? As if Amazon reviews are a credible source... haha.

The very first comment I see from Amazon:

I haven't read this book. Maybe it's interesting. Probably not. What it is, though, is spam. The author - or a proxy in India - has been trying to spread word about this book across the internet by spamming message boards. So unless you support that kind of thing, find another book.

I haven't read this book. Maybe it's interesting. Probably not.

I haven't read this book.

Really? Someone is posting about a book they haven't even read and then giving a statement like "Probably not." As if the word "probably" provides anyone with information.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylanRight? As if Amazon reviews are a credible source... haha.

Within the thread, please confine commentary to the material presented and avoid the personal attacks upon other members. Once that goes out of control, it goes down hill fast.

Thanks.

Originally posted by WillowToad

Originally posted by ErroneousDylanRight? As if Amazon reviews are a credible source... haha.

Within the thread, please confine commentary to the material presented and avoid the personal attacks upon other members. Once that goes out of control, it goes down hill fast.

Thanks.

I don't really see a personal attack unless you are perceiving it as one. I was merely stating that in your attempt to disproof the integrity of the book, using an Amazon review is not a solid piece of evidence.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylanRight? As if Amazon reviews are a credible source... haha.

As credible as any forum post, as credible as yours or mine. I don't see your issue unless you have a problem with your own credibility, that is.

Of course, you are aware that you can easily look at the reviewers history] to see where they are coming from overall.

Of course.

Originally posted by LiveToSpendIt

Originally posted by ErroneousDylanRight? As if Amazon reviews are a credible source... haha.

As credible as any forum post, as credible as yours or mine. I don't see your issue unless you have a problem with your own credibility, that is.

Of course, you are aware that you can easily look at the reviewers history] to see where they are coming from overall.

Of course.

I do have a problem with my own credibility. In fact, if you go back a few pages you'll see that was what my first post in this thread stated. We can't trust anyone but ourselves (hardly that sometimes) so all this arguing is just for the sake of arguing.

The best way for them to prove the book as "right" or "wrong" is just to merely attempt it.

reply to post by LiveToSpendIt


But to single out ONE negative review, whereas the entire scope of reviews is definitely positive, is at most dishonest. Any Seeker would see the information presented in the book and realize that it is credible. No member yet has proved anything to shed negative light on the information contained in the book, in spite of the outlandish shouts of "SPAM!" or whatever other foolish claims are being made.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan

I do have a problem with my own credibility. In fact, if you go back a few pages you'll see that was what my first post in this thread stated. We can't trust anyone but ourselves (hardly that sometimes) so all this arguing is just for the sake of arguing.

The best way for them to prove the book as "right" or "wrong" is just to merely attempt it.

OK

Got it.

Best on ya'.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan

I do have a problem with my own credibility. In fact, if you go back a few pages you'll see that was what my first post in this thread stated. We can't trust anyone but ourselves (hardly that sometimes) so all this arguing is just for the sake of arguing.

The best way for them to prove the book as "right" or "wrong" is just to merely attempt it.

I am sorry to hear you have so little self-esteem, I have found you to be credible...if not slightly off base.

Yes, proof is in the pudding, is it not?

The arguing is called discussion and in my POV if one wants to attempt to find eternal life and unfathomable wealth then, IMO, they deserve to waste their next few years and to lighten their wallets accordingly. Truly deserved, let them play God and see if this isn't not only a completely fruitless exercise, if they cross a line of dimensionality or spirituality, and their quest gobsmacks them upside the head with a mighty blow, it is truly deserved once again.

For those who might be on the fence of pursuing this ridiculous quest, then it is only right that they hear, loud and clear, other viewpoints. Mine is particularly clear - from a point of extensive experience in such matters of the alchemical nature, of the occult...

The OP formula, it's total bullsh**.

Total.

Originally posted by LiveToSpendIt

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan

I do have a problem with my own credibility. In fact, if you go back a few pages you'll see that was what my first post in this thread stated. We can't trust anyone but ourselves (hardly that sometimes) so all this arguing is just for the sake of arguing.

The best way for them to prove the book as "right" or "wrong" is just to merely attempt it.

I am sorry to hear you have so little self-esteem, I have found you to be credible...if not slightly off base.

Yes, proof is in the pudding, is it not?

The arguing is called discussion and in my POV if one wants to attempt to find eternal life and unfathomable wealth then, IMO, they deserve to waste their next few years and to lighten their wallets accordingly. Truly deserved, let them play God and see if this isn't not only a completely fruitless exercise, if they cross a line of dimensionality or spirituality, and their quest gobsmacks them upside the head with a mighty blow, it is truly deserved once again.

For those who might be on the fence of pursuing this ridiculous quest, then it is only right that they hear, loud and clear, other viewpoints. Mine is particularly clear - from a point of extensive experience in such matters of the alchemical nature, of the occult...

The OP formula, it's total bullsh**.

Total.

If you had as much "experience" with alchemy as you claim, you would humble yourself to the text instead of attacking the Student. It is obvious to any real Student when experience is mistaken for wisdom.

To add: searching for the Philosopher's Stone is not a "ridiculous quest". The history of Alchemy shows that the Great Work takes time, among other things. Your wallet is just another factor of the equation, because at this point, nothing which physically manifests is free.

I would say that you are misguided. If you are truly not trying to spread disinfo... keep searching.

Originally posted by prepared4truth But to single out ONE negative review, whereas the entire scope of reviews is definitely positive, is at most dishonest.

The link that you failed to quote also leads to a series of reviews which are mixed, good and bad. Nothing dishonest about it unlike your failure to quote the poster and his link, btw.

Any Seeker would see the information presented in the book and realize that it is credible.

I am a Seeker and have been for years, my writings of over a dozen books and numerous publications prove this beyond any reasonable doubt. Your statement is at best inaccurate...at its very best.

No member yet has proved anything to shed negative light on the information contained in the book, in spite of the outlandish shouts of "SPAM!" or whatever other foolish claims are being made.

Wrong again.

All you need to do is read the thread instead of being disingenuous with our time.

Good luck in your quest for immortality and vats full of wealth.

Originally posted by prepared4truth...If you had as much "experience" with alchemy as you claim,

It's all in my signature; have a good life, I have no time for children on forums.

The Real Reviews

This is what the reviews really say. So you can take that argument out of this thread, respectfully.

Most of the reviews are positive, and the ones that are negative have the least amount of people agreeing with them.

That is fact.

I am a Seeker and have been for years, my writings of over a dozen books and numerous publications prove this beyond any reasonable doubt. Your statement is at best inaccurate...at its very best.

You can write whatever you want. That doesn't prove anything. A baby can write something and call it an alchemical text. The point is, you are attacking the credibility of a method you haven't even tried. Go figure... only one with the innocence and humility of a child will see the path.

No member yet has proved anything to shed negative light on the information contained in the book, in spite of the outlandish shouts of "SPAM!" or whatever other foolish claims are being made.

Wrong again. All you need to do is read the thread instead of being disingenuous with our time. Good luck in your quest for immortality and vats full of wealth.

Are you serious? I've read the thread and my point still stands valid. NO negative light has been shed, other than the opinions of those who have never tried the method presented.

The external aim of alchemy is to transmute base metals into gold nowadays, however it is possible, by altering the atomic structure of an element. But this requires such intricate knowledge of the nature of the atom and such sophisticated equipment that it is presumed impossible for medieval alchemists to have achieved it.

Or was it?

The evidence is against such a presumption. There are many testimonials from alchemists and others of cases of genuine transmutation. Even in our own times, we hear of a French alchemist who in 1969 produced gold and had it analyzed by German and Swiss laboratories. It was declared by them to be "a new state of matter".

So what you might say?

So how did these alchemists in the "pre-scientific age" achieve such extraordinary results? The only explanation that I know of is that these men were well versed in "occult science"; that is, they studied in a tradition of knowledge which gave access to a deep understanding of nature, visible and invisible.

Are you? Have you? Do you believe that by following a formula without the required states of purification and natural knowledge that you can be successful?

No one else has, why would you upset the Laws of the Universe, what makes you so very special to be so proud and presumptuous?

The inner gold of the alchemists is the perfected individual and the Philosopher's Gold is the perfection of nature.

One cannot be had without the other.

Originally posted by LiveToSpendIt

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan

I do have a problem with my own credibility. In fact, if you go back a few pages you'll see that was what my first post in this thread stated. We can't trust anyone but ourselves (hardly that sometimes) so all this arguing is just for the sake of arguing.

The best way for them to prove the book as "right" or "wrong" is just to merely attempt it.

I am sorry to hear you have so little self-esteem, I have found you to be credible...if not slightly off base.

Yes, proof is in the pudding, is it not?

The arguing is called discussion and in my POV if one wants to attempt to find eternal life and unfathomable wealth then, IMO, they deserve to waste their next few years and to lighten their wallets accordingly. Truly deserved, let them play God and see if this isn't not only a completely fruitless exercise, if they cross a line of dimensionality or spirituality, and their quest gobsmacks them upside the head with a mighty blow, it is truly deserved once again.

For those who might be on the fence of pursuing this ridiculous quest, then it is only right that they hear, loud and clear, other viewpoints. Mine is particularly clear - from a point of extensive experience in such matters of the alchemical nature, of the occult...

The OP formula, it's total bullsh**.

Total.

Look, I'm sure you can obviously see that this is just one person's opinion vs another person's, regardless of who is "right". You have said your piece, you have warned others, you did what you thought was right. That is all you can do. So, drop it. You have spoken already so now you can just let people do what they want. There is no reason to continue down this road of "yes. no" that the thread has become. Anything else is pointless.


@OP. OP, what plans do you have for the fermentation process? I am interested to see which route you take.

reply to post by LiveToSpendIt


LiveToSpendIt

The external aim of alchemy is to transmute base metals into gold nowadays, however it is possible, by altering the atomic structure of an element. But this requires such intricate knowledge of the nature of the atom and such sophisticated equipment that it is presumed impossible for medieval alchemists to have achieved it.

The external aim of alchemy is to transmute base metals into gold, an aim which is commonly thought to be impossible. Nowadays, however it is possible, by altering the atomic structure of an element. But this requires such intricate knowledge of the nature of the atom and such sophisticated equipment that it is presumed impossible for medieval alchemists to have achieved it.

www.newacropolisuk.org...

LiveToSpendIt

The evidence is against such a presumption. There are many testimonials from alchemists and others of cases of genuine transmutation. Even in our own times, we hear of a French alchemist who in 1969 produced gold and had it analyzed by German and Swiss laboratories. It was declared by them to be "a new state of matter".

The evidence is against such a presumption. There are many testimonials from alchemists and others of cases of genuine transmutation. Even in our own times, we hear of a French alchemist who in 1969 produced gold and had it analysed by German and Swiss laboratories. It was declared by them to be "a new state of matter".

www.newacropolisuk.org...

Exactly what kind of Plagiarist are you, Frank Camper?

We have tolerated much from you in your short tenure at ATS but now you have gone too far. And violated T and C in the worst way possible.

Is your name Julian Scott?

For your sake I hope so.

God Bless you, Frank.

Originally posted by LiveToSpendIt
The external aim of alchemy is to transmute base metals into gold nowadays, however it is possible, by altering the atomic structure of an element. But this requires such intricate knowledge of the nature of the atom and such sophisticated equipment that it is presumed impossible for medieval alchemists to have achieved it.

Or was it?

The evidence is against such a presumption. There are many testimonials from alchemists and others of cases of genuine transmutation. Even in our own times, we hear of a French alchemist who in 1969 produced gold and had it analyzed by German and Swiss laboratories. It was declared by them to be "a new state of matter".

So what you might say?

So how did these alchemists in the "pre-scientific age" achieve such extraordinary results? The only explanation that I know of is that these men were well versed in "occult science"; that is, they studied in a tradition of knowledge which gave access to a deep understanding of nature, visible and invisible.

Are you? Have you? Do you believe that by following a formula without the required states of purification and natural knowledge that you can be successful?

No one else has, why would you upset the Laws of the Universe, what makes you so very special to be so proud and presumptuous?

The inner gold of the alchemists is the perfected individual and the Philosopher's Gold is the perfection of nature.

One cannot be had without the other.

As stated earlier, you are misguided, as are many people who delve into Alchemy. You presume that there must be some intricate knowledge, some formula which "breaks the laws of the universe" ( ), some manner of sophisticated equipment which costs millions.

When indeed, older civilizations did not have these things and still reported such a Stone. For any knowledge to come into existence, it must come from an accidental, chaotic state.

Are you? Have you? Do you believe that by following a formula without the required states of purification and natural knowledge that you can be successful?

I am well-versed, although still a Student. I do know that I must maintain balance as above, so below, in order to achieve the Stone. However, the requirements are not as "mysterious" as you have been led to believe. The texts' true rules have obviously eluded you.

reply to post by Frater210


Well, that is quite interesting. There goes the validity of any of his posts haha.

Here is an interesting and recent insight by a Reviewer that appears to have read the OP book with introspection.

Review

Mostly fluff, September 14, 2011]

This review is from: The Book of Aquarius: Alchemy and the Philosophers' Stone (Classic Reprint) (Paperback)
I know this text intimately, I have translated it. On first sight it seems interesting, however as soon as one dives a little deeper into the text it becomes apparent that this "Author" is a wannabee and his superficial research has led to all kinds of unfounded and highly biased conclusions. A warning for the educated could be his writing style that never surpasses that of a high school kid, but of course the content is more important and that is for the most part an epic fail.

He mostly uses fluffy sounding text bites that sound smart, even wise - but upon closer inspection are meaningless. His conclusions often are laughably simplistic, e.g. UFOs arnt from outer space, they are from humans who had the stone. He cites one source that may support that claim and ignores 10.000 sources that contradict it.

He has now a following of half-wits that look up to him as a semi god who will deliver eternal life and riches upon them, and that seems to be the real issue behind all of this. Try to contradict him on is own turf and you get expelled with all kinds of laughable excuses - and I am not talking theory here. It happened to me too :-)

The few gems in the book could have been written on 2 pages: IF the stone is indeed physical it MAY well be derived from urine. But even this information was published in DETAIL in the 90s in a script from a channeller (CAC communications) and has since been published on the web.

Given the rather low grade of morals this Author has shown I would not put it below him to have just copied that claim and created his own little story around it.

Interesting in several ways including the paperback edition for sale and the false claim that the Philosopher's Stone has been a secret for 12,000 years.

12,000 years?/b]

Click on "First Pages"

www.amazon.com...=cm_cr-mr-title#reader_1451020163

Why, there's transmuted metal to gold in the British Museum!

Proof of Alchemy in British Museum - At Bottom

reply to post by LiveToSpendIt


Care to reply to Frater210's post?

Nah, I think he'd rather continue on his distraction/disinformation rampage.

We have exposed him and the best he can do now is resort to childish tactics.

All in all, for those new to the thread:

This book is a revealing look into Alchemy, specifically suited for those who have shown confusion from other alchemical texts. I recommend it.