Notes from an "alternate universe": The Revelation of the Real World

I think it’s talking about conflating the two. Losing sight. An opaqueness.

Could it be said that as you move in the extreme of either direction (Absolute <-> Chaos) that you are losing your sense of self?

I’ve always thought of Jesus Christ as light. A light being. A bright countenance. A halo. The ultimate example. That he came to this world to shine his light on the human condition. And show what is possible. What could be.

Christ as a pineal gland - I imagine as an eternally burning candle of the mind. Bright and shiny … reflected in one’s countenance and actions. Light.

It’s interesting to think about the physical pineal gland as a light nestled in the darkness of mind being washed with blood.

Last Edited by Lady of Stars on 03/17/2024 10:54 PM

Yes, ignorance is more blissful when so many around one prefer to be ignorant and one wants to relate more to them.

People need Layer 1 in order to have a technology-based society.

Layer 3 says "the pursuit of technology and integration of oneself with it is evil and leads to the destruction of society"

Why technology? It is the best way to unfold the narrative that your Self is outside of you and 'over there', if that is the way you're leaning.

There are vertical conspiracy narratives that one could subscribe to in Layer 2 without subscribing to others.

So, for example, one could believe that Kennedy was killed and it was an inside job (which is irrelevant, since no one was killed at Layer 3) while still adopting core Layer 1 beliefs.

That person could leave what they believe about Kennedy at that, without delving deeper so that they could continue a pleasant Layer 1 life.


Reality is easily ignored by most, since we take queues from 'other people' in our perspective to formulate our sense of it. We sense reality by illustrating it from our core, so it is natural to take these queues.

Rh-negatives, I think, are more likely to know that they are the authority of their reality and do not need to rely on consensus.


Of course. It is what keeps most at Layer 2 from venturing into Layer 3 territory.

If I made a video talking about how most humans are actually aliens and presented evidence for it, 100x more people would want to know about it, I'm sure. In fact, some of you probably thought, just now, "Really? I want to see that!"

But how things actually are? "Ahh.. that's history and I don't really care. There's nothing I can do about it. Tell me more about aliens."

How could one 'lead the way' in such an environment where people PREFER to keep their eyes closed?

That's what I have been doing, but it's a drip feed :)

As events locally and on the world stage unfold, people can have some kind of basis for new understanding instead of me just talking about things.

Like, for example, instead of me talking about President 'Lincoln' being someone else and having his brother as First Lady, people can see that in a more relative way. The actual understanding would come much later, of course, but at least the basis for understanding these things is unfolding.


Things will be more obvious as time marches on.


Since about 2006 I was quite upset with how the Elite-Public dichotomy appeared. I felt similar to how you did/do about how 'messed up' things had become.

And then I remembered that it is/was my interpretation of reality, and now it makes a whole lot more sense.

You're very welcome, Lady of Stars.

Yes, it's quite interesting how that change happened without anyone really taking note of it.

"I 661" would be a rare find, and quite obvious. Do you happen to remember what building that was on?

I suppose it could be thought of like the film Inception where there is self-realisation by the dream characters. (Moreso, that the dreamer realises they are the dream characters.) The date is an estimate of when this type of realisation would occur for me.


If people in the dream begin to realise who the dreamer is, the videos may be set to private sooner. They're really only for my daughter, anyway, but I'm happy if someone gets something out of them.

I would guess they would remain public for at least a couple of years.


What holds the Matrix together isn't media but more of a desire to be within it. Media-free means something like "I will stop drinking coffee to stay awake after this date," but on a much larger scale. It's more of an unplugging from physical reality, though it does not mean any sort of death.


When it doesn't make sense for me to come back, then I won't in that way. But I would still be here and there in other ways, just as I am with other things.

Interesting, but if you were born in Chile, instead, would you think of it as 'history' and not affecting your 'here and now'?

As written, Jesus talking to a group of people: "Ye are gods"

Same conversation, but talking with one person: "You are God"

How would you like to expand on this?

Perhaps. Of course to answer that question, I'm temporarily creating a mental model of someone from Chile, and trying to see it from their perspective, and I don't know much about the place so I'd have to say something like "maybe some would, and some wouldn't". I can think of someone much closer to me that would be super interested in it (but likely very dismissive of it!).

Of course, me saying I'm not interested in "history" isn't quite true, I suppose I thought that at the time because I don't have any direct experience of it, so it seems to me that it could be presented in quite a twisted way, cobbled together however folks want to direct the narrative - my own personal history I've had a great deal of interest in, even with not having memory of the direct experience, so I'm being quite hypocritcal about it, I suppose.



Hmm, I'd say that had it been presented in that way, perhaps there would be less conflict in that persons mind, and therefore if the premise was true then the story might have gone much differently.

Business decisions based on consumer demand, even across other sectors.

The more people demand smartphones, apps, and so on, for example, the more expensive electricity becomes to supply, which affects the food industry in multiple ways, governance, politics, and so on.


I'm not sure if I should go there, but...

An environment that exists outside of one's interpretation of reality? Or is "the environment" from one's own mind?

The 'pollution' from our breath and from cars encourages tree and plant growth. Are we sure that we know what pollution is?

Are we sure that we know how to take care of the environment when we do not take good care of ourselves and each other?

Do people tend to do consider the environment and other people when they willingly ingest and put into their skin toxins that contaminate the water supply and are usually not filtered out by the time others consume it, for example?

Things that point to everyday people BEING RESPONSIBLE for the world that we have seem taboo.


Please excuse my directness, but I intend to be more direct as time passes...

You mention that it's hard to see your own role in it. But may I embellish your next sentence?

"Especially when I’ve spent my adult life being very mindful about it and contributing to the problem by my own choices"

It's good that you are at least thinking of your role in it.

Let's break it down:

1) Reality comes from YOU, not outside of you. This is your perspective, which you cannot see or experience beyond. It's all YOU.

2) The clusterfribble is something that YOU made, for a purpose.

3) Rather than spending the next thousand years thinking about WHY you made things that way in your interpretation of reality, you may wish to consider that there IS NO clusterfribble. That is just how you are interpreting it.

4) The evidence for there being no clusterfribble is that you're very willing to blame others for what exists entirely in your perspective. Those "others" are also in your perspective.

5) You very likely WANT there to be a clusterfribble while pretending that it did not come from you. It's not there in the first place. You just made it up because drama, friction, conflict, differences, et c., are how you come to exist. Without some kind of "other" there would be nothing.

6) You understand the concept that you are your perspective but at the same time you seem willing to think that these problems come from outside of yourself.

You have yet to see how absolutely amazing and wonderful this clusterfribble actually is. Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

We inherently do not want to take responsibility for reality, for it would mean that we do not exist. Making others responsible (people, processes, and so on) is how we continue to have a sense of existence.

We do not need to understand any of this, of course, and I am not doing anyone a service by explaining it. Rather than understanding it, however, we can at least have a sense for the roles of things.

There needs to be Chaos, so let's develop robust systems to manage it.

There needs to be Order, so let's develop a society that pushes its limits while remaining in its boundaries so that there can be balance.

When we began to lose our sense of Self (through the choices we have made to diminish it via the pineal gland, conscious of it or not) we lost the sense for natural balance.

Whereas before the 'nobility' helped to maintain food and water systems, infrastructure, and so on, without our sense for balance (the order of the nobility balanced by the chaos of the public) over time they became evil and the cause of the world's problems.

Human nature will not change anytime soon but at least people can begin to accept that roles are being played.

It looked like an old shop.
I took a photo:

[link to live.staticflickr.com (secure)]

Allow me to steal the word "clusterfribble". It's wonderful!

This one arrived last saturday. I will start reading when I finish this one:



This is a fun read, very down to earth.
Thanks for the recommendations!

Christ is a light, I think, as the pineal gland; the central place of one’s perspective?

As to the biblical saying… what exactly is “woe”? It certainly has to do with inversion.

I was thinking about inversion… and thought:
Everything you perceive to be blue is everything EXCEPT blue, because that is the color that is not absorbed by the “blue” thing.

I'm going to find it a bit tricky to accurately curate the posts in the usual way, so I'm just going to pick some bits that caught my attention from your recent ones and wondered if you might explain the thoughts behind them more?

>> I suppose it could be thought of like the film Inception where there is self-realisation by the dream characters. (Moreso, that the dreamer realises they are the dream characters.) The date is an estimate of when this type of realisation would occur for me.

This gets tricky for me. I guess it will become more clear over time. 5 years feels a ways off though. It would be cool if we could get there quicker, but I see there's a balance needed.

>> What holds the Matrix together isn't media but more of a desire to be within it. Media-free means something like "I will stop drinking coffee to stay awake after this date," but on a much larger scale. It's more of an unplugging from physical reality, though it does not mean any sort of death.

I'm assuming you've already had glimpses of what this would be like? Can you explain what the experience is like? I'm glad to mean it doesn't mean any sort of death.

>> When it doesn't make sense for me to come back, then I won't in that way. But I would still be here and there in other ways, just as I am with other things.

Would it be fair to say you are already doing this, in a way?

>> You have yet to see how absolutely amazing and wonderful this clusterfribble actually is. Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

I love this. It gives that hope feeling! I echo Tuurr in loving the word. I hope really experiencing that happens, for my own perspective (and all the parts I know, and am yet to know), soon.

At this point, I appreciate directness :)

May I ask, how do you interpret the food system? How do you look at what food/products have become and find it “absolutely amazing and wonderful”?

I’m missing something.

Even as I shift my interpretation of the role the elites play, I find myself up against a wall in my thinking about how to re-interpret the system.

It’s harder for me to see how when looking at these things that are farther away in my perspective. These systems are so large. Sure, my interpretation is within my control but change to the system in the big picture seems less so.

Do you not subscribe to the food system - shop at a store for products? Do you make your own lotions and soap? Grow your own food? Buy direct from people who do? Is this how you re-interpreted it? Or is it about where you spend your dollar - in support of companies and products you believe in?

You do eat, right?! Your food comes from somewhere.

Could you walk me through your process? I’m sorry to say, I’m struggling to see how a re-interpretation from me addresses the core issues of toxins that are most definitely there, wreaking havoc from food, soil, water to air.

I’m not trying to beat a dead horse. I really want to understand the mechanism to re-interpretation with this kind of thing that touches almost everyone.

I don’t want it to be a clusterf^*% that I’m aware of. I don’t want toxins everywhere. In everything. But when I look around, (and read labels) that is what I see.

How does one change this expression of oneself - To Actionable change to the system - so that these types of toxins are not used anymore in the manufacturing of goods? **

Am I thinking too big again? I can’t help the passion I feel about it.

Muddy waters of my mind. Help :)


**let’s just leave it at actionable change to the system. I know it’s unreasonable to think it can be done without toxins at such a scale.

How does one change this expression of oneself to be reflected as actionable change within the system? Or the birth of a new system? Movement that’s meaningful.

Last Edited by Lady of Stars on 03/18/2024 10:24 PM

Is that the most important question? Hmm...


Why would you want to do something with it?

Well, if it was me I would try to find a way to discover why I would WANT to be a victim in that way and why it would make me more comfortable and happy than other options.

An exploration exercise of some sorts.

Hello Rainbow!


Indeed! It seems that posting on the thread has opened up the Potential of all of you! Funny how one step tends to pull more pathways into perspective. As long as my partner gives the OK, I'd be happy to share a bit. Perhaps this is the impetus I need to start interacting with the threads again.

After so many years of focusing on Ecsys, Chaol's teachings, the Dream World, etc, I found myself seeking out interaction in the real world. It felt like Ecsys was a computer program running in the background- helping me to learn and evolve and grow- but no longer required constant attention. I checked the threads more out of curiosity than having something to contribute. It was fun seeing a new batch of Chaolites navigate the material.

That said, these past few weeks I've been pulled here- as if to say it's time for Ecsys 2.0. These recent topics are fascinating, and I'll probably be replying to things from 50 pages ago for awhile! However, energy is in the air and you can always count on a Nexus to shake things up, right?




Exactly. It was the 'finding Potential' aspect of the Genius that set a few things in motion and ultimately led me back here. The four elements do require effort, but I've found that if you start to define one, it creates a ripple effect on the others. So seeking out a means of interaction will likely bring more structure, possibility, and representation of your goal into perspective, etc. Not completely passive, but with less wasted energy than no Genius/Ecsys.


Hope to see everyone in the Great Library!

I think it would be rather difficult for anyone to see beyond a Layer 1 narrative if they were raised to believe in it. Massive cognitive dissonance would set in, as would be expected.

The following aired on Greek television a number of years ago. It presents part of the story well, though in my opinion does not show the big picture, and so is inaccurate with some major details:



Throughout history, have the people now known as 'Greeks' called themselves Greeks? What did the people call themselves in, say, the 17th or 18th century? Homer referred to Greece as Achaea far more than any other names, but the people also referred to themselves as Hellenes.

Is it possible that Greece as a country was created in the 1800's, for example?

Did Greeks actually speak Greek or did they, for example, speak a modern form of the old trade language, Koine?

None of these answers would serve as 'proof' because in most cases one would not actually be looking for any evidence.

Perhaps I am mistaken and there is one thing that would serve as 100% irrefutable evidence. What do you think that might be?

Of course. That would not be rational to hold.

There was no record of the Parthenon until the 17th century. This is not evidence, of course, but there was no evidence or record of other supposedly ancient structures, either.

Nearly all records of Ancient Greece come to us from 1500 onwards, especially after 1700. All originals have been lost, it is said. Yet, somehow, there is plenty of supposed artwork from the period.

The Parthenon is a Viking Thing, which were throughout Europe. The name Athens is from the Icelandic Albing, anglicised to Althingi.

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Homer was French, not Greek (because there were no Greeks in Europe at the time, as they called themselves something else). Homer was French Bishop Saint Omer of the Saint Omer clan. They settled in what we call Greece today during the Viking/Norman so-called invasion. The Odyssey was set in northern Europe. Homer's works were also translated into Latin during the time of Omer.

But.. this is all inconsequential. However, there's an interesting and well-researched book called Where Troy Once Stood, with some evidence showing Troy was near Cambridge, England. (I haven't read the book, though.)

Yes. He was called Plato at the time by peers. This is also evidenced on a portrait done after his death that says "Plato". Now he is known as Pletho (to prevent cognitive dissonance, I would assume).

Pletho's teacher was Elisaeus, who seems like a mirror copy of Plato's teacher, Socrates.

Pletho's student was Scholarius, who coincidentally was also against Pletho's teachings, like Aristotle. Their names also have similar meanings. Even the word 'scholar' used to refer to Churchmen in the Middle Ages whose theology and philosophy was based on Church Fathers and Aristotle, is similar.


There is no evidence for any of it existing before 1500.

There is all ways material for people to help people remember the greater reality.


Only the origin and dates need to be embellished. The definitions of words change as needed. The content does not need to be changed.

That the origin of something is hidden is not unusual. This is still done today, such as someone copying the work of others (text, media, et c) and applying it to a new narrative or whatever without attribution.

Regarding so-called steps to operate as souls, has anyone used this practically? There is no need to hide anything, even if 'the steps' had some utility.


Though Europeans and Americans alike intentionally destroyed evidence of the Old World from buildings to roads and more (or built over them), many historical records and originals still exist. We do the same today, often for economic reasons but also political or social (such as filling in canals of cities with dirt, substrate, filler).

Not much actually needs to be hidden in a world where people do not really care to know about reality. These should be unveiled in time by others when the world is ready.

I would say that there is nothing to fear from your own interpretation of reality. As your pineal gland becomes more clear you should be able to sense what foods to eat and avoid without paying attention to which inhibit tyrosinase.


Not everything that is good for you is completely good for you. I drink herbal teas on a regular basis and do not notice any difference in my abilities (if I had them).

Personally, I don't consider any food or drink 'harmful' per se, though there is a long list of food and drink I have no interest in consuming.


Why would it be? The importance is the structure of the cells, not the color of the skin. There are plenty of people with very dark skin who don't have any good sense at all, though things were not all ways that way.

Allow me to invent Critical Class Theory.

If Critical Race Theory produces thoughts like, "White people are the cause of the world's problems! Hurr durr..." then Critical Class Theory would be something like, "The Elites are the cause of the world's problems", or perhaps the class I've been diving into, "The masses are the cause of most of the world's problems! mmmm.... sammiches.."

What?!?! The 'white man' isn't your enemy? You don't say :)


Yeah, he's only those things we agree with (for now).

(But I guess the trick would be unveiled if we thought 'God is everything we like')

"That which I sense is me."


Now THAT is something that definitely needs to be healed.

I just wonder how long it would take. I'm sure humour could help speed things up.


"This is how I am choosing to interpret reality, even if I don't understand why I am choosing it."


It's how the brain works. Negatives help regulate behaviour after one is past about 12 years of age, so it also transforms how we think about things.


And take responsibility, which is the theme.


Time reveals all. And just make sure you want the same thing tomorrow, next week, and next month.