Charles Fort (1874-1932) was a fascinating figure that dared to challenge the scientific status quo. Fort specialized in the collection data that he declared to be "damned" because it refused to fit in the acceptable range of scientific orthodoxy.
Here are some of the stated goals of his eponymous Fortean Society:
-
To remove the halo from the head of Science.
-
To make human beings think.
-
To destroy scientists' faith in their own works and thus force a general return to the truly scientific principle of "temporary acceptance".
-
To inform the general public of the political and self-preservative character of most work done under the ambiguous cloak of "pure" science, principally astronomy and physics.
-
To inform the general public that the "cosmic order" Science pretends to have established in the flux of existence is simply a mental discipline imposed upon mankind as an expedient to enforce social and economic "order" under what must be--at longest--an ephemeral status quo.
-
To prevent scientists from further development of any hierarchy, Brain Trust, Court of Wisdom, authoritarian dictatorship of intelligence or learning, which would--if permitted--lead to a more powerful domination and consequent paralysis of human mentality than any ever imposed by any Church or State or Press in history, not excluding any of the ideologies current today.
-
To destroy awe for Authority, as such, in the youth of the world at as tender an age as possible.
-
To provide the means for the perpetuation of dissent from any and all dogmas as long as time shall last.
What do you think? Are we not the spiritual successors, the very embodiment of the aims of the Fortean Society from a century ago?
They were heavily maligned in their time, as are we. We dare to challenge the $cientific orthodoxy, because it must be challenged.
Here are the published works of Charles Fort:
The Book of the Damned (1919)
New Lands (1923)
Lo! (1931)
Wild Talents (1932)
I'm going to make a post about science, water and life itself at some stage. The scientific progress I've uncovered is a real game changer.
Looking forward to it!
I'm in. Does that foundation or ancestors still exists officially, could we use its name?
I sure hope so, if not let's take on the mantle!
Found http://forteans.com.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/
Looks not very alive, though...
This is actually good for science. The consensus oriented, publish or perish cultured, funding-seeking, Institution of Science(TM) today actually gets in the way of breakthroughs (one recent example: https://www.reuters.com/article/nobel-chemistry-idUSL5E7L51U620111005)
You'd think mathematics was safe from this attitude since they are the most careful about assumptions. But nope. Look at what was done to Georg Cantor.
This rings a bell..can you elaborate?
Yes certainly. Up until almost the end of nineteenth century, mathematics was pretty much based on constructive methods (i.e. a mathematical proof could not use any object that couldn't be defined in a finite number of steps).
Cantor introduced the idea of working with objects that were infinite (could never be defined in a finite number of steps eg: the complete decimal representation of pi - we can only calculate it till a finite number of places). Today his ideas form the foundations of all of standard mathematics.
But at the time, there were strong objections to it. Basically one group of mathematicians were so sold on their "ideology" of math should be that they publicly made personal attacks against him ("charlatan", "corruptor of youth" etc.). Dude suffered mental breakdowns and left his work/job to start lecturing in philosophy instead. Died in poverty in a sanatorium.
Sounds like 2020 in some ways: group gets scared of "dangerous" idea, cancels propagator of idea, propagator's personal life is ruined.
Fascinating, thank you so much. Something happened at the turn of the 20th century when new paradigms were suggested and aggressively and often violently repressed. This seems to have affected multiple fields, as the "traditionalists" fought tooth and nail to defense their anachronisms and irrelevancy.
I think we're still in the aftermath of this clash, over a century later. The Cantor stuff is fascinating!
Well it were repressed earlier too,but academic science was not so strong and establishment.
What if life represents the finite form; moved by the infinite flow from inception towards death? All objects one perceives are subjected by what moves them into form. We exist within the momentum of motion as choice responding to balance (need/want).
Yeah, that might be our reality.
But mathematics, in principle, is abstract and has nothing to do with our reality. Mathematics exists within its own universe (a universe created by a mathematician with its own language, logic and rules aka axioms, all chosen by the mathematician). Our limited human minds can wrap around this simplistic universe and thus gain some kind of intellectual satisfaction from understanding it, and in seeing some kind of aesthetic beauty in it. Of course non-mathematicians don't see this beauty and don't feel this satisfaction, and only see the drudgery of thinking hard and manipulating symbols on paper, so they aren't attracted to mathematics.
Of course, we can unabstract it with respect our own universe so as to apply it to our own universe. This is because it was abstraction arising out of phenomena in this universe in the first place that we transplanted into our artificial universe as mathematics, though not all of it. The rest of mathematics arose from playing with and abstracting from pre-existing mathematics within the artificial universe.
ABSTRACT', verb transitive [Latin abstraho, to draw from or separate.] As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) we represent the separated form with the choice to draw out of the balance (momentum) of flow.
You consented to believe in suggested "nothing"; which the parasitic few draw out of "everything" by suggesting you the inversion thereof. To consent to suggested information (fiction) deceives one to ignore perceived inspiration (reality).
PRIN'CIPLE, noun [Latin principium, beginning.] Inception of life represents form to flow transmutation; while death represents form to flow transmutation out of the same base (energy). Beginning/end aka inception/death represent the balance for the choice of life within; a balance (momentum) defined for temporary form and by ongoing flow.
U'NITY, noun [Latin unitas.] - "the state of being one; oneness". As form within flow we each represent ONE within ALL. Comprehending this represents self discernment; which is needed to further comprehend that ALL represents ONE in energy; which uses flow/form aka loss/growth as internal balance for self sustenance.
Therefore choice (ONE) within balance (ALL) represents self sustenance of ONE within ALL and for the ONEness of ALL. All our responses to reality are for the sustenance of ONE; which represents the only NUM'BER, noun - "the designation of a unit reference to other units" that matters (form) within reality (flow).
For each ONE; each other ONE represents a) "another" and b) inspiration or temptation...not a 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 etc. Math deceives ONE to ignore ONEself for denominations of other ONEs. The parasites suggest us mathematical problems; while we ignore the following... PROB'LEM, noun [Latin problema; Gr. to throw forward, and to throw; Latin pello.] It's flow (ongoing order) that throws problems forward (temporary chaos) aka form.
ONE represents the problem out of ALL. Why? Because energy self differentiates internally (flow to form) to establish a balance for temporary growth (form) within ongoing loss (flow). In other words...ALL potentiality self segregates into individual ONE potential; to allow each ONE to grow in response to ALL perceived.
The parasites suggest us to consent to seek order out of chaos (by progressing; achieving; problem solving and so on); which deceives us to ignore that we represents chaos out of order. We each need to use choice to respond to the balance the natural order (flow for form) represents.
That represents the parasitic suggestion of information that deceives the host to ignore perceived inspiration. Flow moves form; which form perceives as inspiration to respond to by choice for self sustenance. Choice represents the response to balance (momentum) and balance within flow represents for choice of form...need/want aka self sustenance by adaptation or ignorance thereof for the temptation of stagnation.
One perceives sound; other ones choose to shape words out of perceived sound as idolized meaning; which they then chose to suggest to each other. Why? Because those who suggested meaning gain control over those who consent to suggested meaning; while ignoring that ALL meaning for each ONE is communicated by movement (flow); hence perceived as inspiration; not suggested information by other. Suggested information represents affixed meaning (true vs false); perceived inspiration represents ongoing meaning (if/then) aka if flow; then form.
LOG'IC, noun [Latin id; Gr. from reason, to speak.] Nature doesn't speak; it doesn't brand itself; it doesn't suggest information. Consenting to those who do; while ignoring perceived inspiration are choosing want over need in response to the balance of nature. Wanting suggested information causes a conflict with all those who choose to not want the suggested information, and want vs not want; while ignoring need represents the conflict of reason.
Every conflict in this system is based on this; and the ignorance of the many causes the responding parasitic exploitation by the few who utilize suggestions (all -isms) to cause division (reason); which allows the few to control all conflicts of the many. After establishing any conflict of reason; the few then suggest contradiction of suggested to both sides to keep them reasoning. This is called talmudic reasonig, while the so called talmud teaches to use implication (if/then) over reason (want vs not want; true vs false; good vs bad etc.)
The conflict of reason cannot be won; because only those who made the suggestion those within reason are reasoning about; represent the will to define its suggested meaning; while everyone else is in ignorance of their free will of choice; since they consented to the suggested choices of others.
The only thing that cannot change within constant change (flow) represents the rules that define how change operates. Those represent the laws of nature, and form within flow can only comprehend them; not perceive them; since form exists within the momentum of flow. Life cannot perceive its own inception and death; only grow comprehension of it by getting inspired throuhg everything else.
Those who suggest by free will of choice; gain control over those who consent by free will of choice to the suggested. Choice represents the response to balance (need/want); while consenting to suggested choices (want vs not want) represents the temptation to ignore balance. That represents ONEs internal struggle within ALL aka need over want instead of want over need. Need demands struggle from form to resist flow; while want tempts form to fall for the velocity of flow.
We each represent ONE growth potential within ALL loss potentiality. Perception (knowledge) of ALL potentiality allows each ONE within to transmute potential comprehension (understanding) out of it; by choice of response (need over want). This represents basic alchemy aka transmutation (form) out of base (flow) as well as transmutation (flow/form) out of base (energy).
Satisfaction implies want of outcome; while ignoring need for balance and the parasitic few have a sleight of hand for this from the Rolling (flow) Stones (form); that goes: "I can't get no satisfaction...'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try".
a) MATH, noun - "a mowing; as in aftermath" aka a suggested harvest tool for ignored potential.
b) non-math represents consent to not want suggested math; which puts one into the conflict of reason against those who consent to want suggested math. It is therefore the suggestion of math that deceives others to consent to a self inflicted division (reason). Both sides (want vs not want) ignore need; and that ignorance is being parasitically exploited by the few among the many.
Math itself represents perceived inspiration (need) or suggested information (want); depending on what each ONE chooses within the balance of ALL. Choosing want over need ignores ALL for the suggested choices (want vs not want) of another ONE. If you choose need over want; then math represents a tool of self sustenance like all the rest of reality; but also always the temptation for choice to fall for.
ARTIFI'CIAL, adjective - "in opposition to natural" does not exist within energy; because NATURE, noun [Latin from nature born, produced, ] is implied within EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power". We represent the formed growth within the flowing loss that represents the internal self sustenance of energy. We represent the inherent power of resistance (form) to the inherent power of velocity (flow).
What you perceive as artificial represents our conscious memory; upholding suggested meaning (affixed words aka mental stagnation); which self corrupts us to ignore to adapt to ongoing movement (adaptation).
This reminded me of rupert sheldrake's book "the science delusion". He tells a story about a scientist that, after much prodding" finally admits to him the force of gravity ("G" as i learned it in my physics class) isnt really a constant but was consensus-ed into being one.
For those averse to Google for reasons: Link to ISTA
Bookmarked for later...
You've reminded me of the Fortean times magazine -used to love that, is it any good now I wonder?
I actually bought the April issue a little while ago. I've always found the Fortean stuff sort of hit or miss, but more miss than hit. Haven't gotten into reading that issue yet though. There's other researchers/foundations I prefer. But it was cool to still see the magazine in stores. I was just flipping through it after this post reminded me, has an ad for toilet paper with Boris Johnson on it and a comic at the back like something out of Mad Magazine. I'll have to see if that store still carries it on a regular basis.
Great question! I hope so!
Actually randomly saw someone I follow on social media say yesterday it is the only mag that reviews their work so must be going strong. (His name is Anthony Peake btw got some great theories on life after bodily death). The serendipity is going to make me track down a copy and see if it's still any good!
That is perhaps the most profound and revealing statement he said.
PROP'ERTY, noun [Latin; proprietas.] - "a peculiar quality of any thing; that which is inherent in a subject, or naturally essential to it" aka form (object) to flow (subject) causing the need for ONEs choice within ALL balance. Free will of choice represents ONEs property within ALL; which is why choosing to ignore it for suggestions by others allows them to pretend to claim property over ignored choice.
Dinosaur sightings are reported as recently as last week: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/could-surviving-species-plesiosaur-stalking-6050661
The mothman prophecies is based on this Fortean's work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPY0CcAmHNY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1b-Z2IGm58
I was looking at the collected works in the Library awhile back, had Book of the Damned and one other in an anthology. I think he's good at collecting reports but not necessarily good at separating the real from the hoaxes. I like his work but mostly take it with a grain of salt the way I do the likes of Brad Steiger. I think John Keel was a bit better and Jacques Vallee. I appreciate people who research this stuff though, despite the ridicule they endure. I wish scientist would be less dogmatic and more open to such things.
I love it
Relevant Star Trek clips:
I've got Charles Fort on my Kindle, but I think I need to buy the main trilogy book soon. Finally listened to some H.P. Lovecraft but Fort should probably be higher priority. I know he is highly regarded.
Axolotl, what are some of your favorite quirky things you've learned / heard from Mr. Fort? Isn't he most well known for documenting things like animals falling from the sky?
[spez]
Oops, forgot the clips:
https://youtu.be/5m5HXgP_IwI
https://youtu.be/n7TEjdQ7qEw
We are "owned" as a species and that there are more lands beyond Antarctica are 2 big ones.
I'll get back to you after I finish all 4 books.
Some fun quotes:
Science is established preposterousness.
The outrageous is the reasonable, if introduced politely.
Do you want power over something? Be more nearly real than it.
Darwinism of course was never proved: The fittest survive. What is meant by the fittest? Not the strongest; not the cleverest—Weakness and stupidity everywhere survive. There is no way of determining fitness except in that a thing does survive. “Fitness,” then, is only another name for “survival.” Darwinisn: That survivors survive.
Beyond this earth are—other lands—from which come things as, from America, float things to Europe.
The fate of all explanation is to close one door only to have another fly wide open.
HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form, species.]. What causes form? Flow causes momentum; within which form can temporarily sustain within ongoing flow.
If form represents response to flow...what can form own? OwnerSHIP even implies being a vessel (form) within motion (flow).
What a nonsence. All fitting to environment survive. Or rather more clearly:
those who not fit to their environment too much do not survive enough to have offspring.
Truism so.But big one. This is really Darwin's theory.
"Survival of the fittest" is vulgar and wrong interpretation by half-brain calvinists for whom that was scientific confirmation of their "supremacy".
It is the same like human ancestor being monkey.
It is not.Common ancestor who could be called monkey (and who said evolution wasn't tool of God who is REASON to create another sentient reason at his image). What is also forgotten but was from ancient times known to ancient "primitive" nations - we share much with all other life,all animals and even maybe plants.
Consider this..."Monk Key" aka MONK, noun [Latin monachus.] - "a man who retires from the ordinary temporal concerns of the world". Is that the key?
No. Simply telling about Darvin theory.
OR'DINARY, adjective [Latin ordinarius.] - "according to established order" aka allegory for flow + TEM'PORARY, adjective [Latin temporarius.] aka allegory for form + CONCERN, verb transitive [Latin, to separate, sift, divide.] aka allegory for form divided through the momentum of flow.
How is that suggested Darwinism (or any -ism for that matter)?
I would answer you would do this thing you are doing again... eh... kurwa...
Sometimes your answers are genius sometimes writing answers to thing that shouldn't be answered proves you are dumb too (yes,according to me & my opinion)
Your answer was unnecessary. My answer was for u/axolotl_peyotl rather.
QUESTION, noun. [Latin quaestio. See Quest.] - "to seek". If one represents choice within balance (need/want); then to seek implies want over need aka ignorance over adherence to self sustenance.
Does nature suggest questions to your perception and does nature require you to proclaim answers? What if the value of all questionable and answerable resides within balance; and our responding choice represents the evaluation thereof?
What if you don't need to proclaim value; only adapt to ongoing value by temporary choice of evaluation. Did you need to prove me dumb or did you choose between wanting and not wanting to prove me dumb?
What if I didn't responded to a suggested question; but to perceived inspiration for the sustenance of self?
Adaptation to perceived inspiration for growth of comprehension.
Earth is flat Fuck theoretical physics
What about this:
https://www.brighteon.com/08e2ac4b-461e-4852-b8cf-2c2bded2a1ea
Suggested -ism vs suggested -ism doesn't challenge the status quo of submission to suggestion.
SCI'ENCE, noun [Latin scientia, from scio, to know.] from knowledge (to perceive). The status quo for all perceived represents ones response to all perceived as form (life) within flow (inception towards death). In short..."to know" represents "to response to perceived movement".
Suggested scientism represents suggested information over perceived inspiration; hence ignorance of movement causing idolization of affixed information.
Holding onto suggested information represents ignoring to adapt to perceived inspiration; hence being condemned to consequence of ignorance.
...are in ignorance of being in balance; while being moved forward; hence life representing a resistance within being moved from inception towards death. All goals aim towards death; hence representing the temptation to ignore the balance that sustains life.
The halo; the crown; the corona represents an allegory for lack of comprehension (understanding) caused by ignorance towards perceived inspiration for suggested information. The few who flash the crown symbolism are guarding the growth of comprehension among the many by utilizing suggestion to deceive the many to consent to ignorance (choice of want over need), and thereby self restrict their own growth of comprehension.
That implies by means of suggestion aka in submission to the will of those suggesting the -ism. In this case as switch from Scientism to Forteanism. That doesn't represent thinking about what nature offers towards perception; but what others suggest one to ignore perceived for.
Suggesting another -ism doesn't destroy faith (consent to submission to will of others) it just deceives the faithful to change what he has faith in.
Force of flow (velocity) causes force of form (resistance). Form responds to flow by choice. Inception represents flow to form; death represents form to flow. Both states exist within the same flow; so life represents transmutation out of and back into base.
That implies temporary chocie of form in response to ongoing balance within flow; yet here represents acceptance of suggested -ism; while ignoring balance.
Each one within flow already is "in form" and therefore doesn't need other form to suggest information. We represent in formed animation.
That implies choice responding to balance for the sustenance of form within flow; not choice consenting to suggestions of other choice; while ignoring to respond to balance.
The flow moving form from beginning towards end represents the natural order for all within; which form ignores when consenting to suggested orders by other form.
Sleight of hand right there...FLUX, noun [Latin fluxus, fluo, fluxi.] - "the act of flowing; the motion"; yet the implication of motion isn't suggested...the response within the momentum of motion.
Suggested laws of men to those who consent to ignore perceived laws of nature (defined by flow upon form).
Choice responding to balance (need over want) causes hierarchy based on self sustenance; while choice of want over need ignores this for the suggestions of others choice; which causes a chain of command hierarchy of the many under the suggestions of the few. The chain of command aka beast system aka pyramid scheme represents a hierarchy based on the temptation of ignorance; hence causing the party line; the mainstream narrative; the order followers; the none player characters (NPCs); the goyim; the golem; the useless eaters etc.
Free will of choice represents ones sole authority over self within balance. No other choice can choose for one to respond to balance (need/want) under natural law as form within flow.
AWE, noun aw. [Gr. to be astonished.] - "fear mingled with admiration or reverence; reverential fear". All fears are defined by outcome; hence death; which implies a temptation for life to ignore self sustenance by choice based response to balance (adaptation). Temptation demands resistance; yet tempts ignorance.
As form within flow one represents the formed response to being perpetuated by ongoing flow; and it is flow that provide the means of balance/choice as well as self differentiation and conscious perception; memory and comprehension.
DISSENT, verb intransitive [Latin , to think.] - "to disagree in opinion; to differ; to think in a different or contrary manner". Agreement versus disagreement represents the conflict of reason (want vs not want) of suggestion by the choice of those consenting to it. Both sides of reason (want vs not want) respond to the suggested choices of others; while ignoring to respond to balance.
Form represents the response to flow; and dissent towards flow represents ignorance of form aka self destruction by ignoring to balance for self sustenance.
Form (life) doesn't need to follow flow (inception towards death); it needs to resist succession. How? By choice based adaptation as form to flow (balancing). One such demanded response to being moved represents breathing aka SPIR'IT, noun [Latin spiritus, from spiro, to breathe, to blow. The primary sense is to rush or drive.]
Try using both body and mind to stop yourself breathing and let flow teach form a little lesson about responsibility of choice within balance. The parasites showed you a recent sleight of hand for this..."I can't breathe" leads to death. Then they tested the ignorance of the many by suggesting to "put a mask over your nose and mouth". What followed was mass consent to spiritual suicide by ignorance aka life ignoring responsibility over choice within balance.
Challenging temptation implies consent to suggested why choosing to be against it instead of for it. The few suggest (abortion); the many consent by either being for it (pro-choice) or against it (pro-life); which puts those who consented into the conflict of reason (pro-life vs pro-choice) against each other; while ignoring the sleight of hand right in-front of their faces...life equals choice; and yet half a century of pro-life vs pro-choice ignorance is what is sustaining abortion.
It doesn't matter which side one chooses to reason about; only that one consented to want or not want a suggestion.