The Language of Vampyr

a reply to: Direne

On a serious note: The weather sure is crazy these days. It has been frequently raining and it's really cold.

I don't know if this geoengineering is serious, but I am sure that Earth is acting up.
Earthquakes, Crazy Weather, Flash Floods all over the world, etc.

It would be bad news if all those efforts just made it worse.

You were probably right in terms of natural systems. It's beyond human control.
I had a dream how this world is going to end.
You can even see why Elon prefers to colonize the Mars and leave Earth behind but that too is futile.
I hope it isn't true and Earth isn't past of no return. It would be really sad for the inhabitants of Earth.
✌Any species is welcome to Earth. But it's sad to think we're fighting over Earth. Really sad. That's like saying, grab em by the pussy and they're yours. I know humans is a terrible species. But I don't want another civilization trampling over us too except for the Bidens.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

I understand your point. All life forms on Sol-3 are the result of a delicate balancing process between environmental and cosmic forces. All these biological life forms are geochemical beings. Altering the environment brings direct consequences on the design, including a serious impact on the cognitive capacity of the species.

It is not so much a question of what changes to introduce, but rather what changes to introduce that are compatible with the adaptive capacity of the different forms of life.

The issue is not that there are high levels of xenobiotics in the oceans, or that the atmosphere has too many gases of this or that type. The question is how much time life forms have to adapt to these changes.

There will be not only significant changes in how people live, but also in how people think.

Environmental changes affect the genome of the species, their levels of cognition, their physical form, their physiology, and the end result is always a new species. But if these changes accelerate, if they are unnatural, if species do not have enough time to adapt, they will become extinct. Meticulous geoengineering takes all this into account. It is not a matter of years, or centuries. It is about the long term. The point is that the human being is itself an evolutionary force and, as such, has a responsibility to all and is accountable to all other forms of life.

In addition, whatever happens to a specific planet has repercussions for an entire solar system. Therefore, the planet does not belong only to those who inhabit it, but to all those who may be affected by the actions of those inhabitants. No one is free to destroy a planet, whatever it may be. And no life form can arrogate to itself the right of ownership of the Universe. The main basis of geoengineering is not to modify the climate of a planet, but to modify those whose actions have become a disruptive evolutionary force.

It's not about making it rain in a desert. It is about avoiding turning what was not a desert into a desert.

a reply to: Direne

But if these changes accelerate, if they areunnatural , if species do not have enough time to adapt, they will become extinct. Meticulous geoengineering takes all this into account. It is not a matter of years, or centuries. It is about the long term. The point is that the human being is itself an evolutionary forceand, as such, has a responsibility to all and is accountable to all other forms of life.

So what exactly is unnatural?

Maybe some evolutionary forces are destructive?

So, are all these UAP's going to remain a mystery to us for many years unbeknownst that it was all just mecha aliens playing PING PONG in our holographic skies?



Don't answer

originally posted by: Terpene

So what exactly is unnatural?

Too fast and too furious.

Maybe some evolutionary forces are destructive?

Yes, humans. sheesh~ Basically saying that we must take account that Planet Earth are not all us.

I wonder to other "species" take this into account as well
that it doesnt just belong to them or us

so if we are responsible for the condition the earth then surely others have had an impact too ?

a reply to: sapien82

Sure, except they are hyper civilized, and we are not.

Thus, the superior syndrome complex.

There must be others out there we need to understand the nature of our reality first on their perspective, hence Direne said ours have a

cognitive defect

It is about the fact that the planet does not belong to humans alone, and that others have already decided to take action to save it, independently of humans.

and

It is as simple as understanding this: this planet does not belong to humans.

yep

a reply to: boozo

they would have had to go through the less hyper civilised state to get there
and so would have faced many similar problems we have at our current state of technology
so how did they surpass this stage ?

what did they do that we havent , if they live here too and are more advanced then why didnt they fix the issues
when they had the opportunity.

A lot of this doesnt make much sense
if we live with a hyper civilised species with better technology and they have been here the whole time
and are worried about the earth then why didnt they fix it already ?

if we are cognitively impaired by our existence here on earth then surely they too also have some defects

well I think that its interesting that the concept of ownership of a planet is even a thing , if live here and dont own it then no one else does , Normally the landlords get pissed off when you trash their apartment

a reply to: sapien82

So, let's say they are here.

Their co-admin told me once that there's this cosmic code that must be followed not to disrupt A planetary's evolution unless perhaps destruction is imminent and since we are a genocidal civilization, (nuclear bombs and world wars I and II) the disruption.

They were actually here past WWII Germany




It's not about owning; it's about saving the planet from catastrophic events.
As for them blending in, I have no knowledge.

a reply to: Direne

I really appreciate these in-depth responses Direne, and am staying open. However, I’d like to respectfully challenge your assessment of humanity.

From my observations, every time our ingenuity shines through, it’s silenced by something that always has an in-human signature. We can call it SV17q, The Activity, NTT. But whatever it is, it’s been suppressing our consciousness development.

I have this deep desire, for humanity to return to its ancient ways, when intuition was valued over pure information. But from the looks of things, that’s not going to happen any time soon. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t use technology. We just need to take down the altar of the screen, and replace it with our own innate intuition. Knowledge and perceptions can click into place, if we possess a state of being that aligns with the truth, which is a highly individual process.

But instead, we’re even seeing in this thread, the outsourcing of our intuitive intelligence to the AI altar. Instead of learning Big5, and other types of character encoding, we’re just mindlessly plugging it into AI. The results can be interesting, for sure, but it’s not genuinely human. Something else is speaking through the AI.

Stan Meyer invented an on-the-fly electrolysis technology, which ran his water powered car. He died of food poisoning, after eating soup from a restaurant. Apparently, he refused the military’s request to give up his patent, and wanted it to stay in the public domain.

There’s another off the top of my head... John Searl, who was trying hard to release a ZPE perpetual motion generator, that could be hooked up to any house. I haven’t heard more of that thread in a long time. But as you know, these stories happen all the time. I remember being at a conference, and a Searl employee was presenting an anecdote. Apparently, another employee was testing the generator in his home, and it surprisingly healed his lungs, due to the huge amounts of negative ions being generated.

The geoengineering agenda is generally frowned upon in these circles. If these and other technologies were to become unstuck from the black-budget world, we most likely wouldn’t need a geoengineering agenda. Our planet has the ability to naturally heal, she is a conscious being.

I’ve also read from many sources, that the climate agenda is based on inaccurate / deliberately skewed data. Isn’t Earth supposed to cycle through warming and cooling phases? Ice core samples do apparently provide proof.

Generally speaking, I perceive our #-show societies as merely reactions, to not having the trust of unseen ‘authorities’. If we’re treated like children, is it any surprise that a covert geoengineering agenda has been in play, for longer than any of us would like to admit? And why is it that we’re the ones to blame, when our abilities are deliberately being suppressed? Your kind could attempt to lead us back to Atlantean schools of thought / belief (Amelius consciousness, not Belial). But instead, a smart-city control matrix is being constructed all around us. Which is hypocritical in nature, due to electricity still being generated primarily from coal powered plants.

I know these issues are incredibly complex, and have many geopolitical components. There’s also xenobiotics involved, as you mentioned. But it’s just this painfully boring centralization of resources / digital slavery, without having any faith in humanity.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: Ksihkehe

The main basis of geoengineering is not to modify the climate of a planet, but to modify those whose actions have become a disruptive evolutionary force.

Yup, answered my own questions through this one line. It's always been a cybernetics agenda.

With all these land and water disputes I believe we're on for another World War with the freaks.
Sadge.

These #ing Chinese never stops aggravating tensions in South East Asia region.

a reply to: fireslinger

There is not a demographic problem: there is a demographic shift problem. An aging society, with an aging workforce.
There is no climate crisis: there is a crisis of non-sustainable economic and energy model. There is no need to geoengineer, what's needed is to think about optimum utilization of resources.

There is not a technological problem: there is a problem on how you use technology and a problem of how you interact with technology. Technology abuses you not because it is evil in itself, but because you have turned a tool into a God. It is not a problem about evil AI, it is a problem of not shaping AI with human values.

Labor shortages, economic shift, demographic shift, and a debasing of human values producing dehumanizing technologies, all this in a degraded environment and facing a climate change caused by an obsolete socioeconomic model, produce social upheavals, wars, misery and injustice. And it is not only the socioeconomic model that is obsolete: so is the system of beliefs and values, especially that stupid division between left and right in a world of maimed and one-armed people.

If you replace progress with outcome, if you replace soul with product, and if you replace philosophy with marketing what you are left with in the end is a picture of a degenerate and self-destructive civilization. Sometimes it is not enough to change a model of society, it is necessary to change the way of thinking about society, and for this it is not enough to educate: it is necessary to redesign.

That redesigning an entire species involves redesigning the entire geophysical and biochemical system should come as no surprise.

a reply to: Direne

and Im guessing the redesign doesnt account for every life
and mankind will not live to see the future.

How sad

ahh well it was fun while it lasted

is there anything I can do to help with the redesign to make sure its successful
so that we dont die out

I do agree with most of your points. The planet we share definitely has issues, and us humans are contributing factors.

But I just don’t agree with the cold calculating systems engineering approach being taken.

I can imagine the way that you and yours must perceive us. Quite often these days, I look at my family / friends as having inferior knowledge / understanding. That’s a tough perception to shake, because it contains truth. They don’t know anything about how the world really operates. Yet they think they know some of my beliefs, and perceive me as the weird out there misinformed one.

Then I try to take a step back, and see that they have an embodied wisdom of sorts, even if they barely know what’s going on. They’re good people at the core, who are just warped by decades of programming, and barely even know that they’re being programmed.

To your point, it just may be too late to educate. Hell, I’ve even given up with family / friends. Some do still listen, in their own ways.

But I take another step back, and see that the programming really isn’t their fault. It’s cradle to grave, and takes tremendous persistent will to break free.

The fault is in poor technology transfer, from SV17q down to us. Do correct me if I’m misunderstanding SV17q’s role, but let me elaborate.

Rather than propagate the paradigm shifting healing technologies I mentioned earlier, the dominant form is silicon technology, which is becoming more and more weaponized. I don’t think that humans are to fully blame for the weaponization. Corruption and greed only go so far, this is something different.

Instead, those healing technologies are severely limited. Personally, I think this is done on the level of corporate boards. The intersections of industries, intel agencies, and governments, which SV17q seems to control. There’s forbidden tech that will get you killed, and there’s sanctioned tech, that’s A-Okay for our surveillance capitalism model. Not to mention the EMF infrastructure around it, which has its own epigenetic consequences.

You have to agree that something is not right here.

a reply to: fireslinger

If one day your radio telescopes were to detect an unmistakably artificial signal of extraterrestrial origin, and if that signal were to become more and more intense, and if some time later your telescopes were to detect spacecraft, and if your satellites were to pick up clear images of how those spacecraft land on Mars and colonize it.

If this same process were repeated with the other planets in the solar system and each and every one of them were eventually colonized by these spacecrafts; and if in all that time the extraterrestrials did not show the slightest interest in Earth and actively shunned all contact, how would you feel?

And if, after a millennium of peaceful coexistence, in which those extraterrestrials did not show even the slightest desire to interact with you, suddenly your telescopes detected that the Sun's brightness began to decrease; and if after a detailed analysis you detected that this decrease in the Sun's brightness was due to the extraterrestrials building megastructures around it, tell me, how would you feel?

And if you knew that their lack of interest in communicating was due to the huge cognitive and biological difference between you and them, how would you feel?

Would you think that this is a hostile and cruel species? Your scientists would tell you that, in reality, it is just a Type II civilization that is doing just what a Type II civilization is supposed to do: extract as much energy as possible from the Sun. The Earth would freeze and all life on it would disappear. But tell me, how would you feel? Frustrated? Would you hate them?

Now tell me: how would you feel if you were a fish living in a coral reef that was suddenly filled with plastics and objects that obscured the light? How would you feel if you were a tree monkey hearing the sounds of loggers' saws? How would you feel if you were a dolphin if your world was filled with crashing noises and the waters became polluted? Do you think dolphins, monkeys and coral reef fish hate humans? No, they don't hate you. They simply don't understand why you ignore them, why you refuse to make contact with them, or why you degrade the ecosystem that gives them life. They just don't get it.

A whale stranded on a beach has the same look as a human just before the Sun is hidden behind an alien megastructure.

It is not a question of ecology, nor of saving this or that planet. It is not a question of hostile or benevolent species. It is a question of a blindness that cannot be attributed to either one or the other, the worst kind of blindness possible: cognitive blindness.

a reply to: Direne

Very interesting, and lines up with the increased solar activity lately.

I'm thinking back to that black cube megastructure around our sun, that was spotted in a live NASA stream. The stream was apparently immediately cut.

I unfortunately have some mind-numbing work to do, but will mull all this over as a background process.

a reply to: Direne

the worst kind of blindness possible: cognitive blindness.

What you going to do about it? Moan...
It's not impossible to remedy.
Maybe, its just because a few profit greatly from that impairment?

so the aliens building a megstructure also dont care for any other life , how did they get around the cognitive gap
do they even care either ?

how can you be hypercivilised , im guessing you abandon compassion and understanding for technological prowess
so teh choice is either life free with all life or go down the root of selfish technological prowess
in hopes that at least your "advanced" conscious civilisation makes it from one cold dead universe to the next
and repeat the process over and over not caring for anyone or thing beneath you
seems like thats how life works survival of the fittest but replace fittest with selfish

the old addage that higher beings dont interact or bother with the ants
just like how aliens dont bother with us because we are irrelevant to their goal of total energy capture
and going up the scale

well the good news is there is one such civilisation that is advanced and also extremely compassionate
and they do care about the cognitive gap

they must exist out there somewhere in the vastness of space
maybe they have the morals and the compassion to make the effort to understand all beings

humans at least do try , dogs , cats, apes , horses, all the animals we have domesticated we can communicate with to a degree.
I know generally all the time what my dogs are feeling by their behaviour and the way they look at me

is it just about desire , the will to try
It makes me sad that some beings just dont give a rats ass
then there are some that love rats

do aliens love animals like we do ?

do aliens love ? seems pretty cold to capture all the energy of the sun just so you can build more things or get better technology whilst everything in the system dies

we love plants , do aliens love plants ?
I cant communicate with plants but I talk to them giving them some CO2 , I water them and position them around my house to find the optimal spot for the type of plant so it grows better.

a reply to: Direne

If a type II civilization would eliminate us then there are only a couple broad questions I can think of to consider. That is, absent frivolous personal concerns.

Are humans/other lifeforms on earth irrelevant to those with much greater intelligence and understanding of reality?

Are type II civilizations merely indifferent?

In either case it would seem that to solve the problem humans, in conventional modern human thinking, should aspire to be more intellectually advanced than a type II civilization. This would necessitate being more technologically advanced than them as well. If there is no way to shift existence outside this perceptual reality then we would need to develop sufficient technology to prevent incursions by more advanced entities in this one. Even if the goal were to protect the other lifeforms this also requires we assume dominion to allocate resources.

Those two directives are not necessarily going to always be aligned in their development, not even over cosmic timeframes, and it's questionable if they even can be aligned. It would seem that it's actually highly unlikely that the two would manifest in an "ideal" synergy. This is best represented in your musings on technology and anti-technology I suppose.

If you're running endless simulations then either you're doing so because you've not yet attained that perfect synergy yourself or there is some reason beyond the scope of most human understanding. Either seems equally plausible to me with the information I have.

The ultimate conclusion would seem to be that a sufficiently advanced conscious intelligence would either willfully cease to be conscious the way we understand it or create new realities. Does God eventually get tired? If they do, were they really ever God? Does abondoning that consciousness also qualify as cognitive blindness or does it become a simple lack of cognition?

I am again reminded why you don't make your information readily available for easy consumption, while also somewhat lamenting lack of further access to your collective archive. The human brain would seem to eventually get into an impossible computational lock if mired in ego. I think I'm still interested in new realities though and am not yet tired enough to cease existing. Perhaps access to your collective archive would introduce a spiral to that level of fatigue. I still have too much ego, too much self-awareness and not enough fatigue.

a reply to: Ksihkehe/sapien82


You both ask interesting questions. And you both show some hostility and anger against a hypothetical species that would exhibit the selfish and indifferent behavior I described.

But you both have to put yourselves in the position of the other species on your own planet, because they may be asking exactly the same questions of you: Do humans love us? Are we irrelevant to humans just because we are jelly fishes? Are humans so blind they do not see we are conscious life forms, too? Do they care at all? Technological development does not go hand in hand with ethical development. Nazi Germany is a good example.

To deforest an entire jungle just to sell timber, to look the other way when it is put on the table that the standard of living of one part of the planet is at the expense of the misery of others, is this not indifference? A hypercivilization need not be evil or kind. It is enough that it exploits the resources of the galaxy without caring what happens to other civilizations. Are humans evil or just incapable of preventing the annihilation of other species? Are they perhaps negligent? Or are they just dimly aware beings?

And if a solar flare destroyed the entire civilization of the Earth in 9 minutes, would you stop worshiping the Sun? Would you call the Sun evil or wicked? The Sun plays the Sun and behaves like the Sun. With its flares. Nothing personal, nothing planned. And alien megastructure builders are just alien megastructure experts. Nothing personal against your civilization.

It seems that the complaint is the following: how is it possible for sensitive and intelligent beings to be indifferent to the pain they cause to other sensitive and intelligent beings. But that complaint is as much as asking this question: how is it possible for humans to engage in wars in which they murder members of their own species?

The most successful simulations are those in which consciousness is suppressed. They result in civilizations of ants, bees, cockroaches. Or of fungi. The same social structure, the same goals, technologically capable, and space explorers, but indifferent to anything that is not an ant, or a bee, or a cockroach. Like humans?.

Anyway my post was a what-if analysis, a hypothesis. For the moment, humanity is enough to destroy itself. There is no need to blame third parties. But the question remains relevant: why is humanity so utterly indifferent to all the damage it causes and causes itself? What was the blunder?