Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (111886)	4/30/2005 7:58:12 AM
From: average joe	Respond to of 793964

the underlying reality of our consensus reality Why The Bleep Should We Care? --------Dateline: Friday, April 29, 2005 By: RANDALL FITZGERALD By: Phenomena Senior Editor "In the beginning was the void..." is the opening quasi-Biblical passage in the New Age cult hit of a docudrama, What The Bleep Do We Know!? A series of talking heads, none identified by name until movie's end, then expand upon the theme with cryptic questions and aphorisms: Why are we here? What is reality? What's happening within us will affect what's happening around us. A dramatic element is interwoven throughout the commentaries, a storyline featuring the actress Marlee Matlin as a heartbroken character who learns to transcend the emotional wound of losing her husband to another woman. She re-programs her consciousness to feel compassion and forgiveness. Let it be said that as I viewed the DVD, I was already inclined to embrace this intelligent entertainment as a worthy effort at explaining how science and spirituality describe the same phenomenon. I had also read the book by Lynne McTaggart, THE FIELD: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe, which probably inspired the creators of What The Bleep. What The Bleep has been called The Handbook To The Matrix movies because it explains the underlying reality of our consensus reality, a realm dominated by consciousness itself, where the 'rabbit hole' of quantum physics can only be understood or felt in spiritual terms. In the midst of stimulating commentaries by a collection of physicians and scientists, including Fred Alan Wolf, William Tiller and Candace Pert, we find a Washington state woman, JZ Knight, channeling a disembodied entity named Ramtha, who claims to be 35,000 years old and from Atlantis. Finding in this documentary a channeled entity commenting on quantum physics -- and doing so in the most banal of terms -- was, for me, akin to a public announcement that What The Bleep shouldn't be taken seriously. That is my bias. I have read a huge volume of channeled material andit has never sounded or felt like a product of anything more elevated than the channeler's alter-ego. So imagine my surprise when I read a review of What The Bleep by Chicago Sun Times film critic Roger Ebert in which he wrote of JZ Knight: "Among the experts on the screen, only one seemed to make perfect sense to me. That was a pretty, plumpish blond woman with clear blue eyes." Never underestimate the allure of common sense! So what is Ramtha's (JZ Knight's) philosophy? This description comes directly from the Ramtha website: "The four cornerstones of Ramtha's School of Enlightenment are the concept of the Void, consciousness and energy creating seven levels of reality, the mandate to make known the unknown, and the statement, 'You are God.'" Internet millionaire William Arntz, who fronted the $5 million production budget for the film, previously studied at Ramtha's School of Enlightenment, as did the other producers of What The Bleep. It seems the film was designed to bring Ramtha and the Ramtha message to a mass audience by packaging JZ Knight surrounded by credentialed respectability. By not identifying any of the 'talking heads' until film's end, the producers tried to give equal weight to all of the observations being made, while elevating Knight/Ramtha to a stature equal to authorities eminent in their fields. That manipulation felt unnecessary to me and ultimately detracted from what would have otherwise been a masterful effort at inspiring a mass audience to Think Big Thoughts. phenomenamagazine.com

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (111886)	4/30/2005 8:14:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793964

I got a kick out of your exchange with KLP. Here we have a rightie advocating a government regulation and a leftie arguing against unintended consequences and do-gooders.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (111886)	4/30/2005 2:17:13 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793964

Did you forget? We were discussing folks with no medical insurance. The question is why? If people want medical service, there should be two ways to get it: 1) Receive the service AND pay for it themselves. 2) Receive the service, AND have medical insurance to HELP pay for it. Many people want the service, and don't even think of paying for it themselves. They would much rather forget the bill, and have others pay it for them. Therefore, I will say again: >>>We could fix the insurance situation easily. NO person could have a car, a cell phone, nor a TV until they purchased at least a Basic Medical Insurance Policy. Period.<<<<