Continued Studies - 05/06/2005

PROXIMITY

GESTATION

05/06/2005

Continued Notes

From The

Independent Studies

Of

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

Observations

Pertaining To

Social Consistencies

Within The Idea

Of

Proximity Gestation

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

05-06-2005

Still reading Condorcet – “The Human Mind” – In the “Eighth Epoch” he cites Galileo having been “handed to the inquisition” because of his discovery regarding Earths movement and rotation. He was spared due to “purchase” of his freedom and in submitting an apology of asking “pardon of god” for having taught men better to understand his works….”

The “Church” then “granted permission to maintain the motion of the Earth.”

This is a great example of “mans (human)” failings. The power mongering and attitude which would present such a statement, in such a manner is as bad (if not worse) than any admission of, or commitment of a corruption/body of corruption in any government.

Such a statement in meaning, tone and timbre, is placing the “Church” above even “god” from what I can tell. Placing the “authority” of the “Church” above “god.”

This displays the want of power and influence of humans 9that tendency) within ranks supposedly purged of such.

Where then, is a difference in corruptions?

Where then is it, that corruption should be necessary in any form of worship?

Essentially such a statement suggests not only the tolerance of such corruption – but it suggests as well a necessity of it.

08-18-2006 I am currently exploring the use of various corruptions within the idea and concept of what we know as this third degree of civilization in which we live – as per the human tendency toward such and then the conversion and use of it through social mechanisms, into the well being and health in guaranteed longevity of said societies. Again, I will include more in depth notes on such thoughts at a later point in time.

Why then the separation of “church” and “state?” Again, to preserve a destructive dichotomy? Both ignoring that which is – as is provable, for inefficient corruptions (nearly identical) and despotism?

Further then, the secrecy of the “church,” the mystery – must and cannot be pertaining to discoveries about “god?”

That attitude in and of itself, is of humans and human tendency.

What discovery about omnipotence is there to fear?

Perhaps the change in how it was once depicted and how it now exists?

It (what many have named “god”) to me seems very real in ways I have described pertaining to some larger influence and source upon our existence – however it is explained. To ignore that in both extremes, is a type of ignorance that seems dangerous beyond any discovery of some supposed secret.

That which is, does not require the permission of humans.