I've researched the Church of Satan... there's one close to where I live. While at one time I found them somewhat interesting, I never found it that appealing, to fight against something to such a degree, that like Bob was saying, it's sort of like a constant flying spaghetti monster fest. Many people think The Church of Satan was highly influenced by Aleister Crowley and I do at least find him and the things he did and believed to be far more interesting than satanism.

Okay, obviously one would expect a Lovecraft site to be biased, but for presenting the other side of the story...
There's a FAQ which discusses Lovecraft, Greene and Crowley
http://www.hplovecraft.com/life/myths.aspx there are also links to a Necornomicon FAQ itself on that page.

I personally tend to favor the idea the book was invented by Lovecraft, and why people would want to claim it's a real book is beyond me.

thanks man.
that rabbit hole goes much further.with the mention of dee and kelly who are responsible for the enochian (or angelic) alphabet,and also enochian magicks.which leads to crowley and the thoth tarot deck.

there can be some correlation between lovecrafts "old ones" and angels.we are not talking the cherub,fairy godmother type angels of childrens stories,but angels who are messengers of god,where gabriel is mentioned as being the size of a solar system an to gaze upon his actual countenance would render the observer mad.

none of that warm and fuzzy from fairy tales but horrors.

i loved studying those esoteric books but they always creeped me out,probably why i love lovecraft.

That's almost exactly what I just said 17-18kg in earth terms. Do you think laid on your back you could easily throw a 17kg object 1.5-2m upwards?

He's not doing a push up he's trying to jump upright. Launching nearly 20kg of weight far enough to get to your feet would take some doing that way I'd say. Just lifting 20kg with the arms alone is an effort never mind throwing it which is effectively what's happening here.

This is part of the reason I defaulted to thinking in terms of rocketry as it's not as simple as just someone trying to lift something, they are trying to propel themselves 1-2m upwards with only a thrust from the arms. Much better to wiggle around/push up to get to your knees so one could bring one's legs muscles to bear (made very difficult by hard to bend suit).

Frankly I think it would be a total pain in the arse getting back upright. If it weren't for the suit you could easily push up to your knees and then straighten your legs but the inflation is going to make that very hard work (but doable after a struggle to one knee as other video footage proves).

The alternative however which sparked this whole argument i.e. lay on your front and push off with your arms. That I think would be considerably harder than you are making out. Throwing a 17kg weight with only your arms over 1m in height is not what I'd call effortless.

My old CRT monitor probably weighs about 20kg, it'd take everything I had to throw that over 1m up into the air. Without the power of your thigh muscles and the rigidity of your spine 20kg is quite a lot really.

How high can you "jump" with only your arms? (like those super push-ups where you clap your hands in between to show off) maybe a foot or two if your really really strong? So with the extra weight of a suit and reduced gravity multiplying the result by 6 under lunar gravity, 6feet is probably just about attainable for someone in peak physical shape. But it's defiantly not what I'd call easy!


Re: conspiracies The only one I really take at all seriously any more is the idea that 2001 (esp the book) was perhaps (very) loosely based on actual events. I have time for it simply because of Arthur C. Clarke himself who was going to give an interview (which he rarely does) on Project Camelot of all things but died about 2 weeks before it happened. If you know anything about project camelot you'll know whatever he had to say was going to be mental but then again he was very old and eccentric and plenty other people involved in the space program have "jumped the shark" so to speak. (Edgar Mitchell talks about aliens on a regualr basis, Buzz Aldrin has spoken about monoliths on Phobos, pilots being followed by "Foofighters" in WW2 etc. etc.)

But it's basically wishful thinking on my part, the story and implications are remarkably plausible for what they are but that is all they are. Combined with the whole Jack Parsons/Alastair Crowley connection to the JPL my creative juices start flowing. However the obvious counter argument i.e. that the world is largely run by genuine lunatics is never far from my mind either (look at the whole "men who stare at goats" thing).

I'll listen to anyone and some I'm even prepared to believe on their own terms but I have to defer to actual evidence where it exists (or does not exist). Consequently while I'll listen to someone like John Leer talking about stuff that would seem outlandish even in a science fiction story, people why claim the moon landing was a hoax tend to get the cold shoulder as it's pretty demonstrably not true/hard to believe.

I realise that's kind of backwards but willing suspension of disbelief is a lot easier when there's really no tangible evidence either way. (why I suspect huge incomprehensible delusions like those espoused by many religions get so much traction. It's easier to believe the big lie than the small one)

Jolly entertaining though regardless

That's not what I was saying at all though perhaps I explained poorly.

So imagine you are in a 0 gravity environment. You have 2 balls (lol) one has a mass of 1 kg the other a mass of 100kg. You throw both equally hard. What happens?

One ball travels away from you at 100x less the velocity of the other. This is intertia, it is an effect of mass not gravity. Gravity is an additional force but it's absence would not change the fact that a big heavy space suit requires a significant force to move at a usefully velocity in the 1st place.

It was perhaps misleading to use the example of a fulcrum (lever) but in this context it's quite illustrative. If it was 0 gravity you could apply a tiny force to a massive object and just wait however long it takes to get it where you want (like an infinitely long lever). When gravity becomes a factor duration becomes more and more of a concern (like the fulcrum of the lever gets shorter and shorter).

Concequence: the lower the gravity the easier (less work/deltaV) it is to move an object. However a massive object still requires a proportional large force to move in a useful way (in this case fast enough to overcome 0.16g for long enough to get upright).

I'm not saying gravity has no effect (quite the opposite) I'm saying big heavy thing requires big heavy force to shift even in reduced gravity environments.


As for bases on the moon, mars, stargates, ueo's, void whales, phobos being hollow (phobos is some crazy shit), hexagon on Saturn etc. Etc. I'm not outright dismissive, but to treat it as anything but food for thought/entertainment is a little worrying to say the least. What do you have to go on there other than the testimony of other people who claim to have been involved or whatever?

There's no hard data avaliable to the likes of you and I on such things. Many of these ideas cannot be entirely refuted, but nor can they be confirmed either. That puts us squarely in the realm of superstition and religion.

I'm a part time discordian/khaos magus/git wizard so I do have more time than most for superstition and flights of fantasy but I steer well clear of treating any of that kind of think as objective fact.

The realms of materialism and idealism should stay entirely separate except when they converge and compliment each other e.g. If I can imagine a black swan and then go out and find one (after performing the necessary experiments to disprove any other possible explanations for why it might seem black) then I can tell others that black swans are definitely a real thing. The same cannot be said for say the flying spaghetti monster or the chocolate tea pot orbiting the sun even though believing in such things makes my life more interesting under certain circumstances (and such liberated thought processes can eventually lead to as yet undiscovered ideas which may indeed prove to be "true" or helpful).

"Given all theories of the universe are absurd, it is better to speak in the language of one which Is patently absurd so as to mortify the metaphysical man." -Alaistair Crowley

Translation: if your going to indulge stuff like this don't take it or yourself too seriously or you will go mental!

Praise be to pope Bob!
23

Lovecraft is up there with the Great Tricksters -- like Aleister Crowley and Toto from the Wizard of Oz.

Ok firstly for ChaosEngine, your paraphrased quote of statements which voiced a sentiment I have had since engaging in conversation with seekers about the existence of 'God or no God': The same mechanism of filtering the words you read through your own belief system is a time-honored technique of the most fundamentalist of back-assward Christians and theologians who read the words of the Bible and fit them conveniently into their limited world view filtered through a similar limited and linear, perception of existence.

(*edit-I now realize that you did not in fact, paraphrase my statement rather, bcglorf's , but the sentiment remains true)

My statement was (and yes Dannym3142, that was NOT supposed to be a question mark, edited with the appropriate period): "I have a legitimate beef with rabid supporters of any particular ideology or philosophy when the shit becomes tiresome and repetitious when tinctured with rage and anger and intolerance."

Your paraphrase of sentiment ChaosEngine, "evangelical atheists are as bad as fundamentalists," then followed by "bollocks" (bullshit), is indicative to me of the rage and anger I attributed to the average atheist's consternation with these 'stupid', 'backwards', 'hillbillies' etc.,(who are too dumb or dense to wrap their heads around the very idea that an omnipresent uni-being does not exist, yadda yadda yadda.) Further, the example used 'When was the last time atheists shot a young girl for wanting to go to school?' to justify your position is reminiscent of any Southern Baptist preacher using similar extreme examples of the human condition to support their own arguments for the infallibility of their 'god'. The words used connote a similar intolerance and ignorance of that which is wholly metagnostic or, 'the unknowable' and I regard the mechanism as the selfsame dynamic.

"So, sorry if I'm not going to sit down and STFU about it." Good. It means you are on the path to enlightenment and intend to continue to seek truths which satisfy the gnawing curiosity that ALL humans are frought with in our tenure here on Earth. Keep at it.

dannym3142: (sorry for the question mark, it confused me as well when reading it again) I used Crowley and Planck's observations as an exercise in tossing a non-linear curve-ball into the circle-jerk of those whose search for absolute truth and the nature of the universe, of matter/non-matter, seemingly ended when they decided that it's a no-brainer as to whether or not faith has a place in the argument for or against the existence of a supreme being. Faith can't be argued either, we all need it to perform the simplest of our daily monkey-tasks.

Yes-I was chastising VooDooV for the blanket of down-votes to my comments because I sense his rage and anger at my input on threads similar, and recognize in atheists the same robotic mechanism they accuse Christians of which litter blog after blog when God is mentioned, by the ever-incrasing rabid anti-god fan-boys who attack with guns blazing at the very mention of that which is unable to be understood when approaching it from linear patterns of thought. That, and I refuse ever-again be ganged-up on on this site by a few well-be-nots who have it out for me because they can't understand what the fuck I am trying to communicate. I let my guard down in the past and it cost me over a year in SIFTJAIL (to all you fucking wannabe cops here present and future, suck my balls!)

Your fight is not with God but with the exponentially-increasing non-linearity of the world we inhabit, and the chaotic desire to process the information coming into the grid with time-honored methods of argument. IMLTHO this doesn't work.

All the seemingly trollish statements I make on similar threads are made with a view to wrenching another way of thinking out of the stubborn adherents to any one pattern or direction of mental process.

It can't be argued that a realm of universes exist outside of our own limited perceptive apparatus and all argument ends there for myself for the sake of my own insanity.

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."
-A. Crowley


"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter."
-Max Planck

About as sick of atheists trying to rationalize their point of view as I am Christians or Muslims, Zorasters or Svengalians trying to do the same through equally nefarious methodologies namely, Socratic method or tired, Platonic argument.

Get a box! Eat a peach! Enjoy the fucking ride for fucksake already !

All hail this woman and her joy in the midst of all the noise

That square-state thing always bothered me, too-Idaho has a sexy shape, Kentuckys' totally bad-ass!

Fewer states through fusion-What would work well would be about 10-20 states broken up into chunks of punks, skunks, drunks, chumps, etc. A prison state, pick a shitty one where hardly anyone lives and make it for prisoners and those employed by the private concerns for profit (slave-labor).

One state for all the hippies.
One state for all the insects (experts at whatever it is they do)
something along these lines....let's try a NEW experiment-

Any change should start with a year of trials and executions for all the cunts who have flagrantly usurped the golden rule-(sorry atheists, adepts of Crowley, pagans.....even YOU folks live by "do unto" )-These other types of hu-man can't help it, they're broken and retarded and need not breed or teach their kind their ways....I'm talking about the 1%-They and their offspring are now OUR slaves!

But seriously, the criminals who control the planet need their dirt showcased on the telly, then and only then I might decide to watch TV.....

I suspect you've heard it all over the place in various different forms . Crowley merely translated and expounded upon it, the fundamentals of the mantra itself have done the rounds in the Occult and Esoteric circles for millenia. ("nothing is true..." goes back 1000's of years also).

If you had been reading more closely, you might have noticed that I never said the OT was irrelevant; I said that the moral and ceremonial laws given to Israel were done away with. It is still the word of God and much of it concerns prophecy which confirms Jesus as the Messiah and prophecy about the last days.

What you consider to be progress is to discard Gods laws and believe that you can enlighten yourself up to His level. This is exactly what caused humanity to fall in the first place; it's the same lie that human beings have been chasing since the beginning of time. What spiritual progressives/relativists cannot understand is that you can't build a ladder up to Heaven. You can't get anywhere near a holy God on your own. That holy God, in the person of Jesus Christ, had to bring a ladder down to Earth for us. And to get on that ladder you have to pay a very heavy price; you have to die. When you get on that ladder you don't get to do whatever you want anymore. You have to be holy as He is holy, and that's exactly what all of these seekers of the esoteric and "secret knowledge" don't want to do. That's all this relativity amounts to; justifying rebellion against God so you can do whatever you want. Or as aleister crowley summed it up "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". That is from Satans lips to your ears.

@Chairman_woo

Crowley certainly had his "shit" together, eh??

"In the absence of willpower the most complete collection of virtues and talents is wholly worthless."

.....aaaaaaaannnnd then he sunk into depths of depravity and self-abuse hitherto unseen in the 20th century

Occultist, demon worshipper, and follower of Aliester Crowley..in his own words:

GW) There was always a certain amount of speculation about your occult studies. It may have been subtle, but you weren’t really hiding it.

(Page) I was living it. That’s all there is to it. It was my life - that fusion of magick and music.

(GW) Your use of symbols was very advanced. The sigil [symbols of occult powers] on Led Zeppelin IV and the embroidery on your stage clothes from that time period are good examples on how you left your mark on popular culture. It’s something that major corporations are aggressively pursuing these days: using symbols as a from of branding.

(Page) You mean talismanic magick? Yes, I knew what I was doing. There’s no point in saying much about it, because the more you discuss it, the more eccentric you appear to be. But the fact is - as far as I was concerned - it was working, so I used it. But it’s really no different than people who wear ribbons around their wrists: it’s a talismanic approach to something. Well let me amend that: it’s not exactly the same thing, but it is in the same realm. I’ll leave this subject by saying the four musical elements of Led Zeppelin making a fifth is magick into itself. That’s the alchemical process.

It's well known amongst demon worshipers?

See, you were just complaining about apostasy in another post today. And yet it sounds like you're sort of buying into some sort of weird, middle ages Malleus Maleficarum stuff here. Nowhere in the bible does it say that marijuana use is a sin. Am I wrong about that? Or is this something that god told you personally? To me, it sounds like you're just buying into the antiquated perception of mainstream society that says that marijuana use is "evil". So you're going to base your gospel (remember, you're the one who's preaching) on the words of Aleister Crowley now? All of a sudden Aleister Crowley is the last word on what's holy or unholy? Seems to me like he's the last person whose word you would want to take on the subject.

Oh, but you used the word "abuse" right? Drug "abuse" is sinful and Satanic? Well, isn't the abuse of anything sinful and satanic? So it's kind of a moot point right? Can't you just as easily abuse butter, or adrenaline or the bible?

Well what about the legitimate use of a drug? Is using aspirin sinful and satanic? It sounds to me like you're pretty much writing off the use of any marijuana ever. Well what about someone dying of leukemia who hasn't eaten in a week because they're so sick? I'd like to see you say to that person that they were worshiping demons for taking marijuana to help them eat. That the sick or the dying should not receive comfort because of something Aleister Crowley said.

It sounds to me like you're guilty of letting the devil convince you of something that God has yet to let us know about.

I won't even get into the whole "burning bush" thing since I know you prefer to take any bible verse that suits your purpose literally.

>> ^shinyblurry:

What you think about me has no bearing on my witness here. Even if no one believes me, at least they will have the information if they ever wake up. Satan is real, and anyone who doesn't know God has been utterly deceived by him. It's been well known amongst demon worshippers that marijuana opens you to spiritual realms controlled by Satan. Aliester crowley stated that very clearly in his book of the law. Drug abuse of any kind is sinful and satanic, and invites possession.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
Shiny, it's comments like that that truly help illustrate the level of your ignorance.

What you think about me has no bearing on my witness here. Even if no one believes me, at least they will have the information if they ever wake up. Satan is real, and anyone who doesn't know God has been utterly deceived by him. It's been well known amongst demon worshippers that marijuana opens you to spiritual realms controlled by Satan. Aliester crowley stated that very clearly in his book of the law. Drug abuse of any kind is sinful and satanic, and invites possession.

>> ^Ryjkyj:
Shiny, it's comments like that that truly help illustrate the level of your ignorance.