“You pass through life like early morning…”


Sakura Blossom

Dreaming, not waking 

Early morning breezes tickle,

Dandelions dance.


       Amidst many changes in my life I am called to write. There is a certain kind of feeling experienced when you leave everything behind for a completely new path. It’s a feeling like floating on a wave – not quite awake, not quite asleep, dreaming, not waking. Every moment is full of endless potential. But, then again, isn’t it anyway? It is in these times of transition that we find ourselves – our real, true, unbiased, no-illusions, self. We tend to find that the Self is completely unlimited. That, in fact, there isn’t a Self, definable as such, but a series of comings-and-goings. A kind of desperate plea for uncertainty. At first, it feels liberating. You have no responsibilities, nothing in your name, no job to get to, no school, or family, or friends calling for your attention. Everything is just space. Everything is limitless. Driving over the mountains, clearly endless blue skies above us, we felt as though we were on top of the world. We had 14 hours of homelessness, in one of the most beautiful parts of this country. The air is so much fresher all these miles above the busy cities and refineries. It’s almost too easy to forget all of this modern world.

       Forgetting is what our minds want to do. It is the easy way out of responsibility. Caring is difficult. Caring takes time and attention and energy, none of which are easily replenished as every action takes time to see the result. Caring can be overwhelming. Up here, on top of the world, there is nothing to care about. It is here where I experience true release, true happiness. You see children smiling for no reason at all, smiling at the smell of the flowers and the songs of the birds and the feel of the air against their skin. It is up here that I can truly say I understand what they are smiling for. The sun feels so close and so warm, and time slows down.

       It has been one full week since we experienced that. It didn’t take long for the 14 hours to pass and for us to take the seemingly short descent into the valley that we now call home. You see the city before you see the ocean, all lights and busy people. It is like waking from an existential dream of non-duality. The experience is much like taking that first step out of a retreat hall and onto a busy street. It’s a bit overwhelming, but you’re lucky, because you have all this stored up happy energy from the experience of release. This stored-up energy allows you to see the new landscape with fresh eyes, non-judging and compassionate. You make it through the busy city, as your new home lies on the far side, only blocks away from the vast, free ocean. You get here unscathed, still holding that happy, light energy close to your heart. This energy had permeated your whole body, and it lifted you to a lightness that was like you had become a cloud. The flowing and pulsing dance of wind and life-energy still coursed through you, with you, as you.

       As you enter your new home and proceed with all the formalities, you take a deep breath, and feel suddenly dizzy with realization. The search you have been on for your whole life, this search to be happy and free like you feel on top of the mountains, you feel it now too. It hasn’t left. The only thing that changed is your perception. Rather than seeing it for what it is, always present, you see it as something only attainable in certain environments. You close your eyes, letting your other senses experience the moment, and you feel this dreamlike happiness. Opening your eyes, it’s still there. You take a step, and still, it’s with you. A smile spreads on your soft lips and your eyes brim with tears. Regardless of what life calls on you for, you are there, completely present, and it is okay. Everything is okay. Everything is okay because inherently, you are free. You are expansive and huge, infinite. You are potential. Everything is potential.

       Cherry blossoms line the streets, mingling with flowers you don’t recognize. You can pick up probably a dozen different bird songs. You tell yourself that the steady thrum and vibration is the sound of the nearby ocean, though you’re probably kidding yourself. The tides pull at you as the pulse closer and further, grasping and releasing. Even the concrete buildings squished into city-blocks pulse and vibrate with life. Everything exists in meditation. Everything meditates.

       Abandoning your few possessions, the first stop is the bay, the soft sand squishing between your toes, the smell of salt-water and fish a welcome reminder that you are home, and you are safe.

Photo Copyright (c) April 2014, Chraeloos

Advertisements

Past in monsoon changes linked to major shifts in Indian civilizations


Past in monsoon changes linked to major shifts in Indian civilizations.

I had to comment on this more than just a tweet. Last year, I started studying the evolution of humanity. I came across great evidence suggesting that people originated in India, and then headed to Africa (and everywhere else).

This could turn out to be a very long post, so bear with me. (First off, why bear? Are bears patient? Are they able to put up with things for a long time? Do they play with their food? Hm.)

Ok, for all of you who don’t want to read everything: This, to me, shows that (much later than the emergence of the modern man), India was perfect breeding grounds for evolution, industrially, evolutionary, and genetically.

Now, the heavy stuff.

The Sumerians are considered the earliest civilization. They had the first written language, first schools, etc. But they have a problem. It’s called the Sumerian problem. And that is no one knows where they came from.
Because of Kurt Lambeck we know that the Persian Gulf was dry land between 18,000 and 14,000 BC, or right after the ice age, and the melting is what filled it up. This happened as the tides happen today – often. The Persian Gulf is rumored to have drained and refilled constantly between 14,000 and 7,000 BC. That whole area was probably where they came from, or, as Hancock and Lambeck (two researchers) suggest, “east of Iran”. Know what’s east of Iran? India.
So here I pose the question. Did the Sumerians emerge from India? The Indus Valley Civilization is also unknown for it’s origins. Could they all be the same? I’ve posted a few questions in forums about this, based on DNA of the two, but of course we don’t have enough information about the actual people to say at this point. I hope in the future we will gain more knowledge.
Persian Gulf Floods
The above is scanned from “Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization” by Graham Hancock. It details the Persian Gulf from 21,300 years ago until 4800 years ago. Of course this is relative as it fluctuated. However this gives a good idea where the travelers could have gone and when. I don’t see why they would have travelled from China or Pakistan along the water’s border. The only place they would have kept to the shore lines would have been India. Pakistanis likely would have headed more North than West and the Chinese wouldn’t have gone that south in the first place.
The other idea is that they could have come from within the Persian Gulf. As far as we know it was a ‘garden of eden’ before it was flooded, the perfect temperature and climate and conditions to house a civilization. That we won’t know though until we search the bottom of the sea. And even then perhaps they still emerged from India, settled in the Gulf, and then travelled North as the water forced them too. We know the earliest Sumerian city was Eridu, which is the most north-western city. So they likely travelled as far north as they were comfortable, and then settled. The waters stopped rising so they were able to create cities close to the water as time passed.
I’d love more information regarding DNA and geological evidence. I’m sure if they traveled somewhere along the way they would have dropped something. We know Egypt and India share seals and other art forms but we don’t know much about the land between the two. What I’m wondering, is based on the linked post from above, does the monsoon differences prove any of this? Does it prove the natural causes for migration?
And, I’ll mention Kumari Kandam, the proposed sunken continent that attached India, Australia, and Madagascar. It’s possible that the monsoons would have assisted in it’s sinking.
What do you think?

Questions Encountered at the Museum


I went to the museum today, and encountered a few questions I thought I’d share.

How does camouflage evolve?

“The key is that evolution takes small steps over time. The ancestral Eastern tiger swallowtail caterpillar probably looked nothing like a bird turd, and its predators probably completely ignored bird turd as a source of food. In this population any mutation that occurred which made one caterpillar look 2% more turd-like than the others would give that caterpillar a greater chance of survival, as predators would be a little more likely to discount it as a food source. That caterpillar would grow up, reproduce, its offspring would look 2% like a turd and the cycle repeats. Eventually the 2% turd mutation would spread throughout the population. As it becomes more common there would be selective pressure on the predator to identify things that look slightly poo-like as potential food sources. This means that if a second mutation occurred which made the caterpillar look 5% like a turd it would then spread in the same way. Selection would then favour birds able to identify these caterpillars. This could then repeat until we end up with caterpillars that look almost 100% like a bird poo and predators that can tell the difference between a 99% bird poo-like caterpillar and a real bird poo.” –Charles Darwin & Evolution

That’s all fine and dandy, but still, how does the creature know what it should look like?

For mimicry, or on a more general scale, Crypsis to happen, the creature that changed its appearance would need information. Information is something that (as far as we know) insects, animals, etc. don’t have the ability to get. Iyner, on “The Naked Scientists”, states that probability could be at work: “What is the essential difference between that scenario and the arrival of a similar characteristic through two different paths?”

Gavin, on biology-online, says: “Maybe the missing element here is that bugs exist in populations. Variable populations. Reproductive success is at the heart of evolution, and it is reproductive success relative to the other members of the population that is important. If a bug is slightly greener than all the other bugs, it will have a slightly better chance of surviving and reproducing when spending its time, moving or not, amongst green leaves, thus passing along its slightly more greenishness. Maybe that first slightly greener bug got eaten anyway before reproducing. Fast forward a thousand years. A second slightly greenish bug appears but doesn’t get eaten. Slight greenishness is now established in the population. Further mutations may then, over time, improve the greenishness. Later, or concurrently, other variants arise in the population that modify behaviour or body length or morphology that allow those bugs to survive better than others in the population. These new traits then get established in the population.”

But again, this doesn’t answer the question of how it knows what to look like. Maybe I’m over thinking this, but mutations don’t happen all that often. So, how does something adapt to its environment so flawlessly, but so slowly? If it’s left to randomness, to some mutation happening, and benefiting the creature by it not getting eaten, then it would still take a vast amount of time for the population to be completely overrun by the same characteristic (if its even possible for all of the population to change). It would have to be a slow process, and I don’t see how so many different creatures could all survive, and expand their population, based on this theory. Basically, the best explanation we have is of this flawed randomness. I’m skeptical.

How do archaeologists decide where to dig?

Thinkquest says, “Archaeologists look for artifacts at places where prehistoric people probably lived. Early people needed shelter, water, and food, just as we do. So, archaeologists look in caves, near water, in forests, etc. to find things prehistoric people made or had while they were living.
As time passed on, people started living in villages, towns, cities, etc. That is why archaeologists also look at sites of ancient cities. Tombs and sunken ships are also places of many artifacts. It is hard to believe, but areas of destruction from wars can also be sites of many ruins and artifacts.

First, archaeologists do a survey, because it is very expensive to do excavations, and they want to make sure there will be artifacts at the site. The survey includes looking for mounds, foundations, and other visible structures and collecting potsherds. They draw maps and charts and take photographs of the area. They do surveys before people destroy the site by building buildings, houses, and roads, because after the site is destroyed, no one will ever learn about the site.

The second thing archaeologists do is find the artifacts or other signs of behaviour, such as holes for storage, burial, or shelter. This can be done many ways. The most common way is doing an excavation. Another way is making test pits. All of the dirt removed is carefully screened. The dirt falls through the screen, but the artifacts stay.” Also, random people can come across artifacts and will alert archaeologists to the discovery.

When did people decide to have pets, and what made them decide to breed “friendlier” animals?

We honestly don’t know. We do know that people have kept animals around for various purpose, ie. t-bonham@scc.net says: “Cats were used for rodent control, dogs for various uses (herding, hunting, guarding, etc.). I suppose some rich people (Pharaohs, Roman Emperors) kept individual cats or dogs strictly as a pet, but the majority of the species was still a working animal.” Pets probably came about either by the domestication of wild animals (over time, as they spent more time around humans) which would lead to more affection being placed in them and less potential productivity, or by an animal giving birth and the whole “Mommy can I please keep him??” scenario.

Intro Notes for Tuesday Jan 24 Discussion


Topic: Intervention for the sake of Future Generations

Rupert Read let out a publication titled, “Guardians of the Future: A Constitutional Case for representing and protecting Future People”.

In this document he argues for “the creation of a new legislative structure – Guardians of Future Generations.”

Find Entire PDF Here: http://goo.gl/mUzG6

The World Future Council let out an interview with the Hungarian Ombudsman for Future Generations:

“Parliamentary commissioners or ombudspersons are elected as independent watchdogs to monitor the protection of human rights as defined in a country’s constitution.

Hungary has four such Ombudspersons and their competencies for intervention vary significantly.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Future Generations has comparatively strong powers and can stop on-going activities causing severe harm to the environment

or intervene in on-going administrative and court procedures.”

http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/hungarian_ombudsman.html

The idea of these councils is to protect the environment, ensuring that people’s of the future are able to exist in a stable, healthy environment.

“If we really feel that the procedures must be halted because otherwise irreversible environmental harm could happen,

then exceptionally we have the right to suspend a permit or authorization of a particular project.”

http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/hungarian_ombudsman.html

Read argues that, roughly, the Guardians’ powers [should] be, on this proposal, at least twofold:
a) To veto in whole or in part new legislation that threatened the basic needs and fundamental interests of future people.

b) To force a review, on petitioning, if appropriate and merited, of any existing legislation that threatens the basic needs and fundamental interests of future people.

c) The Guardians could be given the positive power to initiate legislation.

Do you think a system like this is possible, or beneficial? Is it something that could be monitored effectively, democratically?

If it’s plausible, is it a step forward? How would we ensure there was no corruption? What is too much power?

“[Society is] a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”
– Edmund Burke

What do you think? I open the floor.