The Land of Win!!! [a fable full of allegory]

[The Omega Concern]

Wizard of Oz


On the day of the wedding, I am quite nervous. The performance of the song is going to be a surprise to everyone with the exception of the wedding planner, who I asked her if she could keep it a secret as I told her the night before that's what I was going to do. She was the one who needed to stage the guitar just at the right time so as not to spoil the surprise.


So...the moment comes. My big speech is upon and I tell the gathering of some 400 friends and family that I'm not doing a speech, I'm going to surprise the bride and groom with a song I've written called Wizard of Oz. ooooook?

I know this sounds cheesy on a certain level, but I can't escape thinking about how this was the most unconditional loving feeling I've ever had. Even in the days and moments leading up to the actual performance, the butterflies in my stomach were really something. If you know the difference between Agape and Eros love, this was all about the Agape aspect of it. I just wanted to get through the song but I could sense the thickness in the air I was creating and time was slowing and atoms seemed to be splicing.

So I grab the guitar and stroll over to the chair where the mic stand was as I'm talking to the wedding party and doing a quick set-up of the mic. With the bride and groom on my right, I perform the song and get through it without a hitch. I was nervous as could be of course, but the song was in me and in the end, it was the song that carried me through that moment...and the moment was had and that was that.

It was a nice addition to what was already a perfect day for the newlyweds. I changed the lyrics just a bit to ******* their names in the song and it was the perfect touch.


The mystery occurs some 2 1/2 years later.


My brother and his wife have their first child...


on my Birthday!

[The Omega Concern]

Obviously, there is a 1 in 365 chance that this occurrence is a coincidence. You might understand why I just can't leave it at that. I suppose there are 364 other reasons that are not coincidental and that's what I'm working on, for my own curiosity, to further determine how the intuitive process might work.

Had I not performed the song Wizard of Oz at their wedding and their first born was born on my B-day, I likely would chalk it up to coincidence. But since I did, and I did because I was a musician and if not for this "Land of Win" experience I've detailed here, I would never had become a musician, the whole thing can be overwhelming even for me at times. Coincidence or not. I have a yearly reminder on our day that staring back at me is the Wizard of Oz.


And so...if you've made it this far, whether curious or cynic...I thank you for taking the time to read this thread and engage if you have and even if you haven't.

I had an instinct the baby would be born on my B-day when they first announced the expected date (which was 2 days before my B-day). and I had quite an interesting numerological sync just a week before the birth that was a "SINE" that eventually May 12th was going to be the day, and it was.

[T&T]

what I find interesting is how in this thread directly relates to how next TGBK song is coming out on billy's b-day.
I am now more then just curious.

[pavementtune]

To your post on remote viewing: There is a difference between belief and knowledge.
And before I start sounding arrogant, bitching around with anthropological facts, I'd rather leave it at that.

So what do you think, why this boy was born on this special day? do you understand this as a sign or something?

[stumpycat]

Originally Posted by The Omega Concern

Science is a lie, but it's an accurate lie, beholden to the standards of the day, not the future.

This is one of the most oft-repeated exercises in apologetics engaged in by those who just don't want to bother with actual science because it can't give them the answers to the questions they really want answered. (Yes, because the process of science isn't magic and is only as good as the individual implementing it AT THE TIME...but that is not the power of science...)

People of the 50's who optimistically (and naively) believed in everything a person donning a white coat told them would be a form "scientism"--NOT science. It is the PROCESS of science that has earned and deserves respect, because the process has PROVEN itself as being a reliable source for generating accurate information repeatedly and consistently. And it gets more accurate over time. Belief doesn't do that. Ever.

If science was a lie, we couldn't have accurately figured out the composition of the planets of our solar system before gleaming precise data using advanced imagery and sampling instruments which also of course utilized the power of numbers on paper and generations of insight into the nature of physics to chart the exacting course to such destinations. The precise quantification these numbers represent is perhaps one of the purest forms of truth mankind has ever known. The interpretations which occur in science are most often the problem, as are unseen variables, but ultimately science really is a self correcting process as more information becomes available. UNLIKE most forms of religion/spirituality/belief--which all purport to yield some sort of eternal truth, yet whose tenants can clearly be seen to evolve over time to accommodate the cultural acquisition of shifting values and actual data which would otherwise contradict its assertions--science really does work to iron out its mistakes in the end. Sure, there are people who hang onto bad theory because they are partial to it for whatever reason (usually a lifetime commitment to the idea) but eventually it will be overturned with a greater fine tuning of the knowledge. Something like religion is like a shitty cancerous meme wants to scare you into submission and obedience without an ounce of concrete proof whatsoever. Spirituality lacks proof but at least avoids levelling allegations of apostasy on others.

[pavementtune]

Stumpy...spirituality lacks proof? Of what? That's why we call it spirituality or belief, and not a scientific fact.

[stumpycat]

Originally Posted by pavementtune

Stumpy...spirituality lacks proof? Of what? That's why we call it spirituality or belief, and not a scientific fact.

That's my point. It seems like a fairly worthless means of actual knowledge acquisition. You know, the kind of knowledge that can be used to do all sorts of concrete things that make our lives fun/interesting/better. Or even move a step closer towards, say, explaining the origins of the universe and life.

Even if some kind of god or universal force existed, it would have *some* physical basis in reality (even if it wasn't one we had quite figured out yet) that would eventually yield some type of concrete evidence. Otherwise this energy/power/being/thing would simply have no influence whatsoever within our world. Physically it would be impossible.

[stumpycat]

Oh yeah, I guess I should clarify my position on remote viewing...

Despite what you may believe by now, I am not going to say that I haven't read about and seen some instances that do leave some doubt in my mind as to whether or not there might really be something there. The CIA was either so convinced of it (or just so desperate to defeat the Soviets that they were willing to grasp at ANY straws that would have even the slightest possibility of giving them some sort of tactical advantage) that they contacted a few men and one guy in particular--I can't remember his name right now--who was apparently uncannily accurate at sketching out the details of every test they threw at him (they'd go somewhere as a "target", he'd be back at the headquarters drawing their destination while they were surveying the remote location, etc.) that they kept throwing money at this spy project for 20 years or so before concluding that it had yielded "no value" to them. Of course, coming from the CIA you can probably either believe that statement or not because there's no telling why they really canned it. Also demonstrations where experienced remote viewers guide a class through the process using experimental pictures, known only to himself and the independent judges, yield interesting results from about half the class at least upon superficial scrutiny.

The psychological side of my analysis would definitely question what constitutes a "hit" or not, and of course our natural inclination to simply disregard information not consistent with what we're wanting to interpret out of a flood of somewhat broad/ambiguous descriptions. (This, of course, is the "cold reading" technique employed by mentalists which has been known to occasionally fool the scrutiny of investigators that are supposed to be able to snuff out this stuff.)

I've had similar events where I go to places (generally specific buildings) in dreams and years later find myself in the presence of a building that seems completely familiar in a way that it makes me say, "yeah, that's it!" It's a very particular feeling. But for the aforementioned reasons (eg. the hundreds of places I'm bound to encounter over a lifetime, and the statistical chance that multiple features will be similar in at least one instance) that I can discount that. This sort of stuff used to completely harass me when I was a kid (eg. having dreams about, say a particular fishing trip on a particular boat during a particular type of day on the Potomac river that my dad took with his father when he lived there as a child, even though at this point in my childhood I had no idea about that experience until I asked my dad about it) but now I've got more rational explanations for the feelings.

[stumpycat]

Originally Posted by pavementtune

Again: spirituality or belief is not a means to acquire proven facts or knowledge. You're mixing terms. That's the difference between these terms: you don't need facts for belief...

And you contradict yourself: why would it be physically impossible? like you said, me might just not be able to figure out its physical basis yet, therefore we couldn't identify its evidence or its influence as such...but a lot of smart guys tried to prove that 'god' is not existing. Quite interesting, as it is per se impossible to prove the non-existence of anything.

I only base my beliefs about things on what I recognize as a preponderance of credible evidence. This is the only form of belief that I recognize in my life. You are using "belief" in a different sense of the term, in the way that some people seem to use the term "theory" apart from its specific definition. This is why I cannot say that I can "believe" any form of religion or spirituality at this moment. Nothing has yet caused me to believe it. Theoretically that can change when I find the evidence sufficient.

I was coming from the perspective that even if in the present there is not sufficient evidence for proof or disproof, that in the FUTURE this would not necessarily be the case.

No you can't prove the negative here...but you can dig up a buttload of what I like to call "viable alternative explanations" that prove their worth both mathematically and through later testing when such conditions are possible (as with my example of tasking concrete measurements of planetary characteristics.) You can make the existence of god an increasingly unneeded accessory to account for remaining "unknowns" as the missing puzzle pieces become fewer and fewer.

[FoolofaTook]

Originally Posted by The Omega Concern

The next step in the process is The Magician and the archetypes Jane Lyle speaks to at this point in the troubadour process matches the experience I had with a shaman antagonist I presume to be Billy.

This is a glorious sentence. Only, you spelled "shaman" wrong. In the context of Billy, tis always shamEn.

[T&T]

maybe he meant sham man.

[Cade McNown]

I just gotta say, people hide behind science just as much as they do religion. The vast majority of people who are close minded and act superior using "scientific fact" to back their claim have never actually done the scientific research that they use to back their claims. I don't know if the posters in this thread have or haven't, but most people have not.

Going to a large university and majoring in science, what I feel is the most valuable lesson I learned through those four years is that a lot of science is not fact. Those who do the research present it as fact, but it often isn't. People who read their research or hear it second hand and believe it are not much different than people who read accounts of past events in the Bible.

A few hundred years ago (and to many now), it made perfect, rational sense to nearly everyone that the Bible (or other religious documents) told truth. Nowadays it makes perfect, rational sense to many that scientific "findings" tell truth. This will probably change into some other form of truth in the future. Stop acting like believing in science makes your opinion superior to other people who believe in different philosophies.

Interesting tale TOC, and thanks for posting it.

[hnibos]

my teacher in class today, a phd student, showed a website that contained links to egyptian history. he pointed out that this website is bullshit because if you search the site around youll see the woman who made it is some gypsy psychic type "bullshitter". he showed an interview of her where she was like her spirit guide zoroaster has saved her and guided her her whole life, and he starts laughing at her. this guy is some country georgia boy and i wanted to say that is no different than him praying when he goes to church or thanking god for being healthy and successful which im sure he does but i didnt want to get on this guys bad side. i was so tempted though.

/cool story bro

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Cade McNown

A few hundred years ago (and to many now), it made perfect, rational sense to nearly everyone that the Bible (or other religious documents) told truth. Nowadays it makes perfect, rational sense to many that scientific "findings" tell truth. This will probably change into some other form of truth in the future. Stop acting like believing in science makes your opinion superior to other people who believe in different philosophies.

Wow.

[hnibos]

he was kind of sort of on the right track. there probably is something we take as truth now that wont be taken as truth 400 years from now, right? right?!?!?1

[Trotskilicious]

i dunno, sounds like he just went up the asshole of post-modernism and hasn't figured out what to do next

not sure why he would stick with science if it's all bullshit based on belief.

[Cade McNown]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i dunno, sounds like he just went up the asshole of post-modernism and hasn't figured out what to do next

not sure why he would stick with science if it's all bullshit based on belief.

Collage costs a lot of money...didn't want to stay extra years.

Nobody can prove why anything happens in science...I know you close minded "logical" ones won't buy it, but here's my final note: There has to be supernatural forces at work that go beyond science. Science may help engineers in how to harness forces and create useful tools for society, but that's really all it's good for. The "why" always comes down to non understandable forces that nobody should try to act like they know.

Take any question that science "answers." I'll pick one. How do we digest food? I will simplify answers because terms aren't important for the point I am making and I don't claim to be an expert.

How do we digest food?
We chew it and swallow it then our saliva and stomach acids break it down and it goes through the intestines, etc.

How does the food break down?
The chemicals are produced by organs and have reactions with the food which separates the nutrients and waste.

Why do the chemicals react?
The elements in the compounds break bonds and form new bonds in order to balance charge and exist at a lowest energy state.

Why do the elements bond?
Because the electrons and protons must balance in charge.

Why do they balance in charge?
Because positive attracts negative.

Why does positive attract negative?
It just does.

Every scientific principle comes down to the answer "It just does." If I wasn't 100% accurate on my answers or overly vague, that wasn't the point in this exersize. The point was to quickly illustrate how "it just does" is the answer and this works for any question. But hey, science proves everything, right?

[T&T]

Originally Posted by Cade McNown

Why does positive attract negative?
It just does.

wrong.

n the quantum version of electrodynamics, the Coulomb force arises from the exchange of (virtual) photons, and this predicts the attactive/repulsive force between unlike/like charges, but why that is so is all but obvious. For example, the nuclear force between two protons arises from the exchange of another (virtual) particle, but eventhough the protons are identical, the force is attractive. Again, the "reason" for this difference is the fact that the photon is described by a massless vector field, in which the Coulomb field transforms as the fourth component of a 4-vector, and the meson field of the nuclear force is a scalar field with mass, in which the field is invariant. Some books discuss this slightly, but I don't know of any that are clear, at least to me, and I don't know of any that provide physical intuition. I would look in old papers by Victor Weisskopf, perhaps, who had a knack for those kinds of questions.
The best approach might be to try to understand one particle interacting with an identical particle (e.g. electron with electron, or e-e) and then think about the same particle and its antiparticle (e.g. electron and positron, or e-p). As I said, the sign of the Coulomb force for e-e is positive (repulsive) due to the nature of the photon field. Why the e-p interaction has the opposite sign should be comprehensible using Feynman diagrams, which treat the positron as an electron going backward in time. In this case the symmetry is different, and probably some of the diagrams will have to be added with the opposite sign. But I don't know of any books or papers that have that answer. It is easier to understand on the basis of Dirac's hole theory, which explains the positron as a hole in an infinite sea of electrons they fill all available energy states except one (the hole, or positron). As analogy, suppose you are positioned exactly at the center of the earth and somebody dug a big circular hole below the Earth's surface, say about half-way between you and the surface. You would feel a force due to that hole, but it would be a repulsive force - just the opposite of the force of gravitation. The positron's force on an electron is explained exactly the same way in Dirac's theory.


want me to google you anything else?


google is the new religion\science.
ha.

[Cade McNown]

you fail to understand the point. I'll give you this, you picked a dense, not easy to read paragraph, but it still comes down to "It just does." Even if you take it a step past where I left off. Why does mass attract (AKA gravity)? I doubt you understand the passage you just posted. I certainly don't, but I don't think it's explaining "why" these things happen, it is just explaining a way to understand or better yet predict their behavior using diagrams. Why does the exchange of photons create this force? You may be able to predict the force by looking at photon exchange, but it still doesn't say why this magically creates a force.

[Trotskilicious]

BECAUSE OF GOD OK ARE YOU HAPPY IT'S BETTER THAN FAIRY MAN IN THE SKY THAT CAN RUIN YOUR LIFE BECAUSE YOU LOOKED AT A DUDE'S ASS

[Cool As Ice Cream]

Originally Posted by The Omega Concern

Obviously, there is a 1 in 365 chance that this occurrence is a coincidence.

clearly, probability theory is not your strong point. that is a completely false statement, and not obvious at all.

i find it also funny how you link the birth of your nephew on your birthday to the song you performed on his parents wedding a couple of years before and come to the conclusion that this can hardly be a coincidence. almost impossible.
how does that work? same birthday: can be a coincidence. same birthday + singing a song on a wedding: chances of it being a coincidence are suddenly a lot lower. obviously. i can feel it.

i think it's this way of thinking that also makes you interpret spam mail as messages from billy on a paranormal level. email isn't paranormal. that's just completely crazy. oh, look at this, a spam mail that says a number and nothing else. let's check out this page in the book i'm reading right now. oh, it's a completely random line. this proves it! this can't be a coincidence. someone knows what i'm reading right now and is trying to tell me something. obviously.

you just want to see these things. maybe you were at a point in your life where you needed more purpose?
if you really want it, you can link and prove (to people who "get it") whatever you want with this kind of "logic".

do what you want though. as long as you're not hurting anyone.

[tweedyburd]

Everyone realizes this is the same guy who reasons that everyone to the left of Joe Lieberman is a Marxist, right?

[Trotskilicious]

I think everyone to the right of marx is a Reaganista

[T&T]

I used to get lots of spam poetry, but then at the beginning of 2003 it stopped. The last spam poem I received was on jan 27, the day before Zwan released mary star of the sea.
did anyone else used to get spam poetry?
and did it end around the same time?
should we be believe its a sine from billy?
the mystery dug deep.

[The Omega Concern]

originally posted by pavementtune:

So what do you think, why this boy was born on this special day? do you understand this as a sign or something?

It's something that to me doesn't appear to be coincidental. What I haven't written out that well here are the feelings and emotions during the performance. I think how certain people might explain this circumstance:

Micheo Kaku might say I tapped into the God muse aspect of light, sound and frequency.

Evelyn Paglini might say the lyrics cast a spell that angels listened to.

Dr. Louis Turi might say I tapped into the cosmic conciousness.

Stephan Hawking might say it's cosmic coincidence.


......................


Exactly one week before the baby being born (May 5th, a Friday) I was coaching/umpiring this kickball game with a bunch of 5th graders. There was a little scoreboard there to keep score and we played like 6 innings or so before we had to wrap it up. I wasn't really paying attention to the score other than I try fib about the score if the kids aren't paying attention to it (almost never, children always keep score no matter the adults say).

Anyway, sure enough, a few late runs come across the plate just as time was running out on the game and the score-keeping little girls flipped over the last numbers...the score that showed up on the scoreboard was...yup:

05 - 12

That's when I knew the baby would be born on my Birthday and this gut feeling I had about it all started to really stir at that point. I can't explain it, other than some divine providence seemed to be foretelling it to me.

[The Omega Concern]

originally posted Cool as Ice Cream:

clearly, probability theory is not your strong point. that is a completely false statement, and not obvious at all.

thanks, but you didn't explain how it isn't.

There are 365 days in a year, baby will be born on one of those days; before conception, chances any baby is born on any given day is 1/365.

i find it also funny how you link the birth of your nephew on your birthday to the song you performed on his parents wedding a couple of years before and come to the conclusion that this can hardly be a coincidence. almost impossible. how does that work? same birthday: can be a coincidence. same birthday + singing a song on a wedding: chances of it being a coincidence are suddenly a lot lower. obviously. i can feel it.

Fair point on randomness...but enlightenment doesn't come from a book or another person, but the willingness to open the doors of perception and the resulting experience from that.

You didn't write the song or perform it in that moment and thus experience the feelings and emotions therein. It would be impossible for you to interpret this personal experience beyond randomness if you are a closed mind to it being something other than random.

This point is good and healthy cynicism though, I'm not trashing it.

i think it's this way of thinking that also makes you interpret spam mail as messages from billy on a paranormal level. email isn't paranormal. that's just completely crazy. oh, look at this, a spam mail that says a number and nothing else. let's check out this page in the book i'm reading right now. oh, it's a completely random line. this proves it! this can't be a coincidence. someone knows what i'm reading right now and is trying to tell me something. obviously.

What makes you assume the emails were spam?

you just want to see these things. maybe you were at a point in your life where you needed more purpose?
if you really want it, you can link and prove (to people who "get it") whatever you want with this kind of "logic".

Had I never got on the internet and became a member of Netphoria, NONE of this shit would have happened. period. (though I suppose the 1/365 chance would have still been in effect)

do what you want though. as long as you're not hurting anyone.

gracias. You will know I'm really on to something if I'm ever viewed as a menace to society.

[The Omega Concern]

originally posted by Cade McNown:

Interesting tale TOC, and thanks for posting it.

thanks for the taking the time to check it out. The tangential discussions of quantum theory and remote viewing and such is very cool and I'm reading those mini-debates now. rock ons!

[The Omega Concern]

originally posted by pavementtune:

Wow. So what do you think about these explanations? Did you feel like 'tapping in the cosmic consciousness'?

And to the scoreboard: interpreting something as a sign is just a human behaviour pattern. That day your mind was already made up that the 5th would be the date - you might have taken anything as a sign to proof your assumption, a ticket, a scoreboard, the wheater forecast...whatever would go with your birthdate. No?

to clarify...it was a week before the birthday. On 5/5 did the scoreboard read 5/12 and, for months and months knowing the due date was the 10th, something in the pit of my stomach was telling me the whole time the 12th would be the day. I can't explain that. All I can say is that my intuition was correct.

[pavementtune]

Yes, 'your intuition was correct' is a valid conclusion. 'tapping in cosmic consciousness' is just...uhm...esoteric fantasy.

[FoolofaTook]

But have you ever tried mescaline?