You will have heard perverts imposed themselves on the Olympic’s opening ceremony, mocking God and committing innumerable blasphemies in the name of, well, whatever the name is of the sex god cult that now rages over the world.
It occurs to me that co-incidents are somewhat like misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation. There are no such things as these three. There is only information you accept (as is your right) or that you reject. They are similar to co-incidents in that there are meta-causes you accept or reject (as is your right). In both, there will be uncertainty. But in both, I have the right to choose for myself what I reject or accept. The Regime NEVER does. And I refuse to concede that right to them.
I think its interesting that it's really only a small subset of the right that even knows it's happened. My brother is early gen x libertarian, pays attention online, and he had no idea there was a blackout in Paris after the opening ceremony. I think it's intentionally not being reported, similar to the Trump assassination attempt being memory holed, but this they can ignore from the beginning. Even though our freemasonic elites promote atheism to the masses, because in their worldview only the inner circle matters, they are not atheist themselves. They believe.
I’m not a Christian but the opening ceremony sickened me. So beautiful to see the lights of sacre-cœur still shining amidst the darkness. Paris is a beautiful city and sacre cœur, with its view overlooking the city, is my favourite part of paris
I was pondering coincidences a day or so ago and my initial thought was:
How can we possibly have POTUS material from both Father and Son (Adams and Bushes) or husband and wife (Clintons/Obamas)? Is it just a coincidence that these are the "best America has to offer"?
I can't prove it mathematically, but my gut tells me there is an almost zero chance in probabilities that this could be true.
I believe nothing in politics happens by coincidence. The Olympic self-idolatry festival is a pure political act.
The theme of the adoration of the Sacred Heart is Jesus Christ's love for humanity. Some people who suffer from a collectivist bias, understand the word humanity as an abstraction. Others, who enjoy individualist rationality, see that the word humanity refers to each specific human being.
Love is divine, and incomprehensible by mere mortals, and exhausts any description.
And love sometimes implies judgment and punishment: It is not an act of love to encourage people to poison themselves.
Gnostic idolatry of the self is just poisoning with extra steps.
To belong to the category of humanity, one has to acknowledge error and work for improvement. In contrast, Gnostics project their error on their betters: as they say, misery loves company. They don't want to belong to humanity, rather, they want to be cartoon characters.
The modern mind is a little too fond of its attachment to mechanical causation. Nobody reads Hume, for one. But when a logical person calculates the odds of such perfect timing, such an answer to such an event, then you’d have to be obtuse and ignorant of Occam to come to any conclusion but Divine Karmic response.
In the statistical study whose results are presented by him in the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism, the statistician and professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet discovered the cause of the perversion of Western civilization. The cause is for the perverts to mistake a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of a model of this system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties," each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system exhibits no such properties. The stability of a physical system is an emergent property of this physical system, thus, every physical system that exhibits the property of stability is a complex system. The perverts, however, model a stable physical system as if it were a "non-complex" physical system. In his book, Desmet reports that this phenomenon has caused a replication crisis in which the predicted outcomes of the of the events of the future differ greatly from the observed outcomes. For example, the predictions of the epidemiological models used in attempts by public health authorities in their attempts at gaining a degree of control over the COVID-19 epidemic failed to replicate when these models were tested. The millions of fatalities that resulted from the mistake of modelling the "complex" physical system that was a successful health care system for treating COVID-19 as if it were a "non-complex" physical system by the builders of the models of this system would could have been avoided through usage of the method for the construction of a model of a "complex" physical system that was invented by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, circa 1975 while he was a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of Callifornia, Berkeley. Soon after he received his PhD, I hired Christensen for the task of building a model of a "complex" physical system. Following construction of this model its predictions were successfully cross-validated.
A decade later, Chiristensen published the seven volume treatise on this topic that was titled the Entropy Minimax Sourcebook to document his work. After the publication of this work, I came upon a subset of the volumes of this treatise in the library system of Stanford University, a research university that conducted medical research. Examination of the checkout cards of these volumes revealed that they had been checked out very few times, When I approached Stanford's scientific faculty with the proposition of assisting them in building models of "complex" physical systems i received no response from them. A professor who was a friend of my wife explained that his colleagues were "set in their ways."
Christensen's entropy minimax principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the inferences that will be made by a model of a complex physical system from a larger set of possibilities and under incomplete information abot the outcomes of the conditional outcomes of the events of the future. The Problem of Induction is a philosophical problem and Stanford publishes the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which, however, does not cite Christensen's Entropy Minimax Sourrccebook. When I emailed the author of this article ro advise her of this shortcoming she failed to return my message and blocked me from further attempts at discussing the matter with her. I have advised the editors of this encyclopedia of this state of affairs but many months have elapsed without a response from them to this issue. Meanwhile, the perverts continue their partially assault on Western civilization.
Anger would imply something unforeseen. Since God “inhabits the circle of eternity”, He sees the end from the beginning and thus cannot be surprised.
And since God is eternal, infinite and universal, He is therefore absolute. Consequently, all His “reactions” are, in a sense, baked into reality itself.
Conceptions of God zapping this and blowing up that in fits of pique are anthropomorphic projection born of a rather primitive grasp of God’s relation to the universe.
A little spiritual humility will reveal the reality of the pitiful insignificance of our politics, pop culture and other earthly events. God has much, even infinitely, bigger fish to fry than some crude and debased pop culture spectacle, of which there currently is a seemingly never-ending procession. It is inconceivable that the “Olympics” have any more cosmic significance than your local “pride” parade or than a callow teenager’s prurient pursuits.
No, God is not mocked, because such pitiable displays, destined to be entirely forgotten in a few short years, have zero significance relative to the Infinite.
Thank You, John; I could not have said it any better, and I am doing my best not to point out multiple scriptures from the Word of God, the Holy Bible, from the above statement. Unfortunately, we live in an age where men/women want to live based on their definition of God and the Bible when, in fact, that is not righteousness based on the Bible's teachings. Sad, we have to pray for people like this. People have to realize that this is a world ruled by the enemy satan.
Careful (and receptive) attention to scripture (a good example is Isaiah, chapters 40 through 55) will reveal what I mean.
The God concept definitely evolved from Samuel through to its triumphant revelation as the Heavenly Father in the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
God is love, Divine Love.
“The fruits of the spirit are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance”. If humans are capable of that, surely the infinite God of infinite Love is capable of so much more, wouldn’t you think? How could Divine Love stoop to petty vengeance, trifling and mean harassment of his beloved children, nasty cruelty towards his errant offspring?
You might contemplate the parable of the prodigal son of which Jesus was so fond. Why was he fond of it? Because it reflected the gentle mercy, the generous forgiveness of the Heavenly Father. Mercy is the tempering of justice by love.
God is not, and cannot be, arbitrary, irrational, hasty, or unreasonable. God is not the victim of the lack of self-control or of unworthy emotion. God is the kind and loving Heavenly Father as so painstakingly revealed by His Son, Jesus Christ.
Then, you take the miracles and wrath of the Bible to be what? While our concept of God might change, and if prompted by Revelation then this change will be towards greater conformity to the truth, He Himself cannot change. He either 'hardened Pharaoh's heart' that He might do signs and wonders of wrath and judgment or He did not. If He did, then it is reasonable to think that He might again. If He didn't then Jesus Christ is a liar and unworthy as a teacher.(His Apostles too.)
Well, here’s how I see it: Can I believe God is mean, petty, spiteful, vindictive, cantankerous, arbitrary and unpredictable, cruel, filled with anger and “wrath” — all those things that are so vile when found in humans, or can I believe in a kind and infinitely loving, forgiving, merciful, nurturing, generous, gentle and just Heavenly Father — the ideal towards which he beckons with his plea to “be you perfect, even as I am perfect”?
I pick the latter. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.
Well written, but you missed the point that when we mock God we deserve to be punished and God Who Is Infinite out of Love corrects us for our own good.
Well you’ve certainly got a nice theological system there. Very logical and very sound.
Only problem I personally have with it is it’s completely foreign to the God I know, the God of the Bible who absolutely does get pissed at human depravity and issues warnings and signs to those who have ears to hear.
Y’all and your fancy rules for “how God behaves” make me laugh. Read the last 1/4 of the book of Job and get back to me.
I don’t think atheists have to prove God does not exist. For one thing, that would be impossible, since you cannot prove a negative. But also, atheism only means you do not believe gods exist, that you are not a theist. It doesn’t mean you preclude any remote possibility of a god. This differs, btw, from agnosticism, where you just “don’t know”.
I am also an “ ayardgiraffist”. I do not believe there is a giraffe in my backyard. I’m pretty solid in this belief. But, OK, sure, maybe there is. I can’t prove there’s not. Even if I walk back there and don’t see one, maybe it’s invisible to me for some reason. Atheism is like that.
I have not seem a confirmation of the blackout in any mainstream media nor by authorities. I've seen only Twitter posts and videos and then articles based on those.
Beautifully done, as usual.
It occurs to me that co-incidents are somewhat like misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation. There are no such things as these three. There is only information you accept (as is your right) or that you reject. They are similar to co-incidents in that there are meta-causes you accept or reject (as is your right). In both, there will be uncertainty. But in both, I have the right to choose for myself what I reject or accept. The Regime NEVER does. And I refuse to concede that right to them.
Excellent point, thanks.
I think its interesting that it's really only a small subset of the right that even knows it's happened. My brother is early gen x libertarian, pays attention online, and he had no idea there was a blackout in Paris after the opening ceremony. I think it's intentionally not being reported, similar to the Trump assassination attempt being memory holed, but this they can ignore from the beginning. Even though our freemasonic elites promote atheism to the masses, because in their worldview only the inner circle matters, they are not atheist themselves. They believe.
The IOC has been pulling the story on copyright grounds., reports Sen. Rand Paul.
I wouldn't be surprised. The IOC is on a high step of the satanic ziggurat
God saw Paris; and He’s Pissed 😤 Off
I’m not a Christian but the opening ceremony sickened me. So beautiful to see the lights of sacre-cœur still shining amidst the darkness. Paris is a beautiful city and sacre cœur, with its view overlooking the city, is my favourite part of paris
Wait a minit....! What happened to all the windmills and solar panels? I thought they were supposed to render this blackout thing obsolete!?
I was pondering coincidences a day or so ago and my initial thought was:
How can we possibly have POTUS material from both Father and Son (Adams and Bushes) or husband and wife (Clintons/Obamas)? Is it just a coincidence that these are the "best America has to offer"?
I can't prove it mathematically, but my gut tells me there is an almost zero chance in probabilities that this could be true.
I believe nothing in politics happens by coincidence. The Olympic self-idolatry festival is a pure political act.
The theme of the adoration of the Sacred Heart is Jesus Christ's love for humanity. Some people who suffer from a collectivist bias, understand the word humanity as an abstraction. Others, who enjoy individualist rationality, see that the word humanity refers to each specific human being.
Love is divine, and incomprehensible by mere mortals, and exhausts any description.
And love sometimes implies judgment and punishment: It is not an act of love to encourage people to poison themselves.
Gnostic idolatry of the self is just poisoning with extra steps.
To belong to the category of humanity, one has to acknowledge error and work for improvement. In contrast, Gnostics project their error on their betters: as they say, misery loves company. They don't want to belong to humanity, rather, they want to be cartoon characters.
Well said. I agree
The modern mind is a little too fond of its attachment to mechanical causation. Nobody reads Hume, for one. But when a logical person calculates the odds of such perfect timing, such an answer to such an event, then you’d have to be obtuse and ignorant of Occam to come to any conclusion but Divine Karmic response.
The blackout was caused by a short circuit in Kamala Harris' brain.
In the statistical study whose results are presented by him in the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism, the statistician and professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet discovered the cause of the perversion of Western civilization. The cause is for the perverts to mistake a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of a model of this system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties," each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system exhibits no such properties. The stability of a physical system is an emergent property of this physical system, thus, every physical system that exhibits the property of stability is a complex system. The perverts, however, model a stable physical system as if it were a "non-complex" physical system. In his book, Desmet reports that this phenomenon has caused a replication crisis in which the predicted outcomes of the of the events of the future differ greatly from the observed outcomes. For example, the predictions of the epidemiological models used in attempts by public health authorities in their attempts at gaining a degree of control over the COVID-19 epidemic failed to replicate when these models were tested. The millions of fatalities that resulted from the mistake of modelling the "complex" physical system that was a successful health care system for treating COVID-19 as if it were a "non-complex" physical system by the builders of the models of this system would could have been avoided through usage of the method for the construction of a model of a "complex" physical system that was invented by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, circa 1975 while he was a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of Callifornia, Berkeley. Soon after he received his PhD, I hired Christensen for the task of building a model of a "complex" physical system. Following construction of this model its predictions were successfully cross-validated.
A decade later, Chiristensen published the seven volume treatise on this topic that was titled the Entropy Minimax Sourcebook to document his work. After the publication of this work, I came upon a subset of the volumes of this treatise in the library system of Stanford University, a research university that conducted medical research. Examination of the checkout cards of these volumes revealed that they had been checked out very few times, When I approached Stanford's scientific faculty with the proposition of assisting them in building models of "complex" physical systems i received no response from them. A professor who was a friend of my wife explained that his colleagues were "set in their ways."
Christensen's entropy minimax principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the inferences that will be made by a model of a complex physical system from a larger set of possibilities and under incomplete information abot the outcomes of the conditional outcomes of the events of the future. The Problem of Induction is a philosophical problem and Stanford publishes the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which, however, does not cite Christensen's Entropy Minimax Sourrccebook. When I emailed the author of this article ro advise her of this shortcoming she failed to return my message and blocked me from further attempts at discussing the matter with her. I have advised the editors of this encyclopedia of this state of affairs but many months have elapsed without a response from them to this issue. Meanwhile, the perverts continue their partially assault on Western civilization.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California
terry_oldberg@yahoo.com
1-650-918-6636
You’re not far away from Stan. Drop in on them. Seriously. This info is much appreciated., btw.
(I like to think it was suddenly angry Leftists in the Paris electricians union too)
Reminiscent of the ball lightning strike that hit the south transept of York Minster, July 9th 1984...
“God is only slow to anger.”
Incredibly slow. As in “never”.
Anger would imply something unforeseen. Since God “inhabits the circle of eternity”, He sees the end from the beginning and thus cannot be surprised.
And since God is eternal, infinite and universal, He is therefore absolute. Consequently, all His “reactions” are, in a sense, baked into reality itself.
Conceptions of God zapping this and blowing up that in fits of pique are anthropomorphic projection born of a rather primitive grasp of God’s relation to the universe.
A little spiritual humility will reveal the reality of the pitiful insignificance of our politics, pop culture and other earthly events. God has much, even infinitely, bigger fish to fry than some crude and debased pop culture spectacle, of which there currently is a seemingly never-ending procession. It is inconceivable that the “Olympics” have any more cosmic significance than your local “pride” parade or than a callow teenager’s prurient pursuits.
No, God is not mocked, because such pitiable displays, destined to be entirely forgotten in a few short years, have zero significance relative to the Infinite.
This is absolutely true of the God of Philosophy and absolutely false of the God of Scripture, a little humility would reveal that to you.
Thank You, John; I could not have said it any better, and I am doing my best not to point out multiple scriptures from the Word of God, the Holy Bible, from the above statement. Unfortunately, we live in an age where men/women want to live based on their definition of God and the Bible when, in fact, that is not righteousness based on the Bible's teachings. Sad, we have to pray for people like this. People have to realize that this is a world ruled by the enemy satan.
Careful (and receptive) attention to scripture (a good example is Isaiah, chapters 40 through 55) will reveal what I mean.
The God concept definitely evolved from Samuel through to its triumphant revelation as the Heavenly Father in the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
God is love, Divine Love.
“The fruits of the spirit are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance”. If humans are capable of that, surely the infinite God of infinite Love is capable of so much more, wouldn’t you think? How could Divine Love stoop to petty vengeance, trifling and mean harassment of his beloved children, nasty cruelty towards his errant offspring?
You might contemplate the parable of the prodigal son of which Jesus was so fond. Why was he fond of it? Because it reflected the gentle mercy, the generous forgiveness of the Heavenly Father. Mercy is the tempering of justice by love.
God is not, and cannot be, arbitrary, irrational, hasty, or unreasonable. God is not the victim of the lack of self-control or of unworthy emotion. God is the kind and loving Heavenly Father as so painstakingly revealed by His Son, Jesus Christ.
That’s what I take away from scripture.
Ya, but even Jesus showed us that at times it was necessary to throw around the furniture and get out the bullwhip.
But it took Jesus, a man, to do it.
Then, you take the miracles and wrath of the Bible to be what? While our concept of God might change, and if prompted by Revelation then this change will be towards greater conformity to the truth, He Himself cannot change. He either 'hardened Pharaoh's heart' that He might do signs and wonders of wrath and judgment or He did not. If He did, then it is reasonable to think that He might again. If He didn't then Jesus Christ is a liar and unworthy as a teacher.(His Apostles too.)
Well, here’s how I see it: Can I believe God is mean, petty, spiteful, vindictive, cantankerous, arbitrary and unpredictable, cruel, filled with anger and “wrath” — all those things that are so vile when found in humans, or can I believe in a kind and infinitely loving, forgiving, merciful, nurturing, generous, gentle and just Heavenly Father — the ideal towards which he beckons with his plea to “be you perfect, even as I am perfect”?
I pick the latter. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.
As God is eternal, infinite and universal and we are not, it is not for us to determine what is important for God. He will let us know.
Well written, but you missed the point that when we mock God we deserve to be punished and God Who Is Infinite out of Love corrects us for our own good.
And coincidences how God gets things done .
Well you’ve certainly got a nice theological system there. Very logical and very sound.
Only problem I personally have with it is it’s completely foreign to the God I know, the God of the Bible who absolutely does get pissed at human depravity and issues warnings and signs to those who have ears to hear.
Y’all and your fancy rules for “how God behaves” make me laugh. Read the last 1/4 of the book of Job and get back to me.
I don’t think atheists have to prove God does not exist. For one thing, that would be impossible, since you cannot prove a negative. But also, atheism only means you do not believe gods exist, that you are not a theist. It doesn’t mean you preclude any remote possibility of a god. This differs, btw, from agnosticism, where you just “don’t know”.
I am also an “ ayardgiraffist”. I do not believe there is a giraffe in my backyard. I’m pretty solid in this belief. But, OK, sure, maybe there is. I can’t prove there’s not. Even if I walk back there and don’t see one, maybe it’s invisible to me for some reason. Atheism is like that.
I have not seem a confirmation of the blackout in any mainstream media nor by authorities. I've seen only Twitter posts and videos and then articles based on those.
It’s because the story going around isn’t what happened and unfortunately everyone seems more interested in pushing a beautiful but false story over the facts. It was one provider in a handful neighborhoods for a few minutes. Mainstream French media coverage: https://www.bfmtv.com/paris/paris-des-arrondissements-touches-par-une-panne-de-courant-cette-nuit-une-anomalie-technique-selon-enedis_AN-202407280126.html
Thanks. Still a blackout, of course, but a more limited affair.
Which may make it harder to decide, for some, to assign the meta-cause.