Phoenician ships and contributions

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

I just realized that there was alot more to the topic than should be talked about under the Chapter title so I invite others to join me in this pond.

Off and running about Phoenicians! You and your special friend there started this Victoria with the comments about his heritage and the traders and explorers of the ancient world. So here I am going down this particular rabbit hole. Happily I might add! You have fired an interest I have had since a kid and I THOUGHT that I had forgotten.

And even then I knew about a man by the name of Zeno. To make things very simple and very short ... he was a philosopher in Greece but he was not Greek, he was a Phoenician. His name crossed my path again just today , after being lost to me for ( I don't even want to tell you how many) years!

I don't know why I was fascinated about him, but I guess it had something to do with volcanoes and buried treasure of the literary kind. For some reason that meant alot to me then. Long story really short ... here he is again, my old friend.
http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/geo ... /zeno.html

"Zeno was a man of great learning who wrote on a very wide range of topics. It is believed that, among the areas he studied, he contributed to logic, atomic theory, biology, ethics, literary style, oratory, poetry, the theory of knowledge, and to mathematics. Except for the last mentioned two topics, one knows very little about the contributions that he made. Here is a discussion of the only two areas to which Zeno contributed and where details of his contributions are quite well known, namely the theory of knowledge and to mathematics"

And gee, suddenly for some unknown reason I am thinking of Beau Kitselman and wondering with these common interests if Beau ever studied the papers of Zeno?

If Beaus daughters happen to be reading this ... would you know by any chance? For some reason bells are ringing on this end. If something is ringing a bell on your end could you contact Paul? Thanks.

Trickfox, Have you ever read anything attributed to Zeno? I know that he is .... difficult to learn about because he has been basically forgotten. Elizabeth

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Would someone out there far smarter than me please read the last part of this quote and tell me what he is saying?

"When Vesuvius erupted in 79 AD, Herculaneum together with Pompeii and Stabiae, was destroyed. Herculaneum was buried by a compact mass of material about 16 m deep that preserved the city until excavations began in the 18th century. Special conditions of humidity of the ground conserved wood, cloth, food, and in particular Philodemus's papyri.

The papyri contain remarkable information written by Philodemus describing the arguments of his teacher Zeno with the Stoics. Although Zeno's Epicurean philosophy of the desire for pleasure seems the direct opposite of the Stoic's ethic of duty, the consequences on how they lived their lives were quite similar. The arguments described by Philodemus concerned the foundations of knowledge. Von Fritz writes:

In this dispute Zeno defended the old Epicurean doctrine that all human knowledge is derived exclusively from experience. What make it interesting, however, is that he bases his defense on a theory ... that is essentially an anticipation of John Stuart Mill's theory of induction. ... Zeno insisted that all knowledge is fundamentally derived by inference to all cases from a great many cases without observed counter-instance"

ESSENTIALLY AN ANTICIPATION OF .... THEORY OF INDUCTION .... ZENO INSISTED THAT ALL KNOWLEDGE .... FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED .... BY INFERENCE (??????) ..... TO ALL CASES (??????) from a great many cases without observed counter-instance. " WHAT? Elizabeth

[Trickfox]

Ah Yes..... Zeno...

But of course I have read some of his first order math logic.

Let me see if I remember this.... Someone please correct me because I'm proceeding strickly on memory here, and so I'm likely to make a fool of myself.

I think Zeno was the very best and oldest procrastinator in history. His idea was to ponder at everything and reflect upon the impossible and outright obvious conclusions around time and space as conceived by early logical thinking.

Here is one of his arguments:

A person on any journey cannot hope to reach the end of the journey because this same person has to reach the half-way point of the journey, but first, -the same person much reach the half way point to the half-way point. The trouble comes when one must ponder at the marvel that there is allways an infinite number of half way points right down to the submolecular level, and theoretically smaller. Because of the nature of the conclusions, the journey can never be accomplished. (silly thought really)

I also like the flying arrow argument that states that a flying arrow, -at first appearance, -must be a collection of frames of "still" arrows suspended in the air, (which Zeno argued is impossible because the arrow must be in motion in order to fly). He argues that "frozen moments of time" -however possible they are to imagine in the mind, -are impossible realities which cannot possibly exist I suppose.

At first these issues seem silly and out of place in modern science, but they are NOT. We are a point in our understanding of the true nature of the universe, that these silly issues are precisely comfronted in our understanding of "causal forces", and the basic rules of behaviour in Quantum mechanics.

Some of this basic understanding has been pondered upon as far back as Zeno. Can everyone understand how surprising it is to find out that such pondering started as far back as the Epicurean Philosophy.

Trickfox

[twigsnapper]

Remembering here that Zeno was a Phoenician.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes

"Are space and time infinitely divisible?
Another proposed solution to some of the paradoxes is to consider that space and time are not infinitely divisible. Just because our number system enables us to give a number between any two numbers, it does not necessarily follow that there is a point in space between any two different points in space, and the same goes for time.

If space-time is not infinitely divisible (and thus not perfectly continuous), it is "discrete" (composed of “lumpsâ€

[Radomir]

Are you referring to this one, which I believe was J's first post on the forum?

viewtopic.php?p=1011&highlight=#1011

Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:11 pm Post subject: Time travel and puppets.

Do we really know what time is? In an explanation of some of Einstein's Relativity it was said that time is really a man made device to measure the space between events. Such as his scenario of being on the train with the telegraph poles flashing by. As each pole went by it was an event.
As for Elizabeth's statement about puppets. Orwellian philosophy has probably always been going on. Even before a certain writer took the pen name Orwell

I combed through all the posts by Janoshek on this site, and that one seemed most related to this discussion.

Interesting person, our J. Infrequent poster, but always deep & substantive. Where ya been J?

R.

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Radomir,

I believe the FIRST message from J. happened here but I have to admit I find it exceptionally odd that the message that you found was so right on target for the conversation. Again .... how did that happen?" Sometimes its just way, way beyond me.

In any case. If you haven't read this recently and for the benefit of those of you who have perhaps just joined us, I think this might have been the message that Paul was talking about. (I am hoping sometime next week he will be able to post and give his side of things, til then you are sort of stuck with my interpretation!)

https://www.ttbrown.com/defying_gravity/preface.html

Especially this part, though all of it is really interesting considering how much more we know now than we did then. But then ... as the discussion shows, I guess thats all relative too!

I had never heard of Townsend Brown before the night of July 9, 2002. At the time, I was in the midst of putting the finishing touches on my first book, The Boy Who Invented Television — a biography of Philo T. Farnsworth, another obscure 20th century scientist who was, indeed, only 14 years old when he conceived the basic operating principals for the system of sending moving pictures through the air that is still in use throughout the world today.

As I was putting the finishing touches on the Farnsworth biography, I was wondering what I might do for an encore after it was published, when a curious e-mail message showed up in my in-box. The message read:

---------------------------------------------
T. Townsend Brown was another inventor who is forgotten and swept under the rug. .He died on Catalina Island around 1985.

Science in the late 50s said what he did was against physical law, yet the government classified his work. A bunch of government contractors both American and foreign have been working on it ever since.

So where did all the R&D go? If you go out in the desert about 125 miles south west of Las Vegas at night you will see an object flying around in the distance with a bluish haze around it. That’s where it went. Also Sharper Image is selling an air purifier on cable TV for $60. He never collected the royalties for that either."
----------------------------------------

The message was unsigned. The only hint of the sender’s identity was his e-mail address. But I took the bait, and before I knew it I was hooked on a remarkable tale, and found myself wandering off on a twisted journey, a compulsive quest to learn about and tell the story of one of the most remarkable unheralded men of the Twentieth Century."

NO KIDDING. Elizabeth

[Trickfox]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes

The dichotomy paradox
"You cannot even start."

“ That which is in locomotion must arrive at the half-way stage before it arrives at the goal. â€

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Is it technological singularity we are hoping for Trickfox. Or A spritual one?
Or a meeting of both?

And how discouraging it is to read again the arguments of someone who lived thousands of years ago and JUST NOW is beginning to be even the least little bit understood.

And to quote Janosheks first message, Dr. Browns work was just one of which was "swept under the rug". (Thankfully with the work that Paul has accomplished (yes even just this halfway point!) it will keep that from happening.)

I wonder if it hadn't been for the fluke of an overpowering volcano, would we even know about the points that Zeno brought up? And how many others out there have been totally forgotten? Totally "swept under the rug"

But all of these ideas seem now to be "bubbling" to the surface. I don't know why it was important to be " held down" for so long ... or what the mechanism for releasing those "bubbles" has been but now that they are coming to the surface, are we prepared for them? If the only brain we have working is the technological one I think that we might just get ourselves in a WHOLE LOT of trouble. Elizabeth

[ladygrady]

Elizabeth.

You know that I have a splendid high regard for the forum and all that you particularly contribute but ancient Phoenicians? What in the world does that have to do with Townsend Brown?

I am trying to see the connection but you have really lost me here. And what was it that started you down this particular "rabbit hole" anyway? And why does it seem important to you?

I am not being critical here. Just wildly curious. grady

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Grady,

I undrstand the questions . I am just not sure that you will undrstand my answers. How did I get from point A to point B and why is it important? Well, first of all, it might not be. Like I said , maybe I am just going down a strange rabbit hole ant this will be a silly chase. On the other hand, my method of "research" ( which is ,granted, much more intuitive than it could ever be called rational!) is at least DIFFERENT. And sometimes operating outside the norm is what is needed.

Lets see. How did I get to wherever I am. Victoria mentioned a friend whose heritage, she said ... is ancient and had something to do with Phoenicians. Quickly then from Phoenicians to "Sea People" to the legend of Atlantis, which is what strangely Dr. Brown mentioned in his notebook.
But thats just one thread.

There are other threads that make less sense. Like working on finding out more about Peter Wright, in England ... grand spymaster of MI5 ... to the Robert Wright that Paul just posted as that blog ... to last night "happening on" the words of another man ..... named " Erick Wright" Now to some that is call merely coincidence. To me its called " the faint whiff of the fox" No explanations.

Anyway this most recent Erick Wright has much to say and this is just a section .... which ODDLY addresses something else we had been talking about.
JUMPING IN MID DISCUSSION FOUND HERE http://forums.atlantisrising.com/ubb/ul ... 8;t=000002

Not at all; the Mahabharata and other ancient Vedic texts describe such a global civilization. Comparing it to modern civilization in terms of technology can be misleading, particularly when viewed through Theosophic and Edgar Cayce viewpoints (for example). There has been an unfortunate history of European scholars rewriting the history of ancient Asia to fit preconceived moulds -- moulds based on Christian doctrine, in most cases. I have spoken at length with many Hindus (both scholars and lay people) regarding the antiquity of these legends, who date these legends to what we think of as the early Stone Age. They accept the rewriting of their history as just another indignity foisted on them by the British.

This is not to say that the Vedas even mention Atlantis or anything even remotely like Atlantis; they don't (despite Childress' claims). However, they do point to an advanced culture in the Indian subcontinent and certain other areas of the world during the European stone age. We know that not all cultures advance in a parallel technological evolution, and that even during the atomic age that stone age tribes still exist. That humanity's history may have had other cycles of cultural and/or technological advancement in prehistory is only odd to those who have been trained to consider it so. Taken in the measure of the rise and fall of civilizations and technologies throughout recorded history, it is not surprising at all. No, I'm not advancing the theory that the Atlanteans were as Cayce or Blavatsky suggest, or even that the Mahabharata should be taken literally. What I am trying to state is that just because archaeology and history that has been largely influenced by Judeo-Christian bias has not brought to light evidence of civilizations which predate recorded history does not mean that such evidence has not been gathered -- or that such evidence does not exist.

Now I won't go so far as to state that every one of Hancock's premises is a solid fact (nor would I with everything presented from any one viewpoint). Yet to blindly accept the European assertions that all of the ancient legends exagerrated their ages and/or other facts, is akin to accepting Aristotle's assertion that Plato invented Atlantis. Hancock may have gone too far in his extreme (not having paid overmuch attention to his theories, I cannot judge). I would just ask that you would please not go to an opposite extreme by disregarding the possibility that some aspects of academic history may indeed need to be rewritten, particularly when it comes to the histories of other cultures."

ok .... You asked. Elizabeth

[Mikado14]

JUMPING IN MID DISCUSSION FOUND HERE http://forums.atlantisrising.com/ubb/ul ... 8;t=000002

Not at all; the Mahabharata and other ancient Vedic texts describe such a global civilization. Comparing it to modern civilization in terms of technology can be misleading, particularly when viewed through Theosophic and Edgar Cayce viewpoints (for example). There has been an unfortunate history of European scholars rewriting the history of ancient Asia to fit preconceived moulds -- moulds based on Christian doctrine,.............................................................................I would just ask that you would please not go to an opposite extreme by disregarding the possibility that some aspects of academic history may indeed need to be rewritten, particularly when it comes to the histories of other cultures."

ok .... You asked. Elizabeth

An open and objective mind. Is that it in a nutshell?

Mikado

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

I've been thinking Mikado. Watch out. Speaking of Nutshells ......

The captured thought is ...... If all of us are honest we recognize that each of us has our own little versions of "boxes" that we live in. Its our world. We decorate it differently one from the next and whatever concepts we "see" and recognize we treat as paintings on our walls. Each room becomes a "reality" then which differs with each person and thats the beauty of it.

And what I am noting is that whatever observations you might have with an "open" mind, ( all those bright pictures you have painted in your mind) are not going to be accepted by others unless somehow "properly framed" and hung where they can be seen and discussed. Sort of like an art gallery.

And I guess being able to capture those concepts and hang them properly is all part of our discussion about using words properly and communicating respectfully from one gallery to the next.

Maybe if we do this right this forum then will become sort of this wondrous gallery which is open to visitors. Its communication in its purest form maybe? Pictures from your "minds eye" hung out for others to see and consider?

Don't know why I am on this kick but it just seems appropriate.

As much as I hate "being in a frame" or " constructing frames" I understand now that those frames are what makes all of this solid and preserved. So its good to be strict with the requirements of that frame. Its good that Paul, for example, avoids those weasle words and strives to be as historically correct as possible. Without that firm frame the bright pictures are lost. Elizabeth

[grinder]

Thumbing around in that site Elizabeth. Very interesting. especially this:

This is apparently an exchange between Erick Wright (any relationship by the way, I wonder to Peter Wright? Now that would be STRANGE.)

http://forums.atlantisrising.com/cgi-bi ... 000002;p=2
_____________________________________________________________
Please remember that "fantastic claims require fantastic proof".

quote:APPARENTLY FROM ONE OF HIS FORUM MEMBERS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is archaeological evidence all over this planet suggesting that reasonably advanced cultures existed at the same time that stone-age cultures existed. There is evidence that disasters of global proportions have repeatedly happened, as well as evidence that certain military and political factions survived those disasters with their knowledge intact, leaving the peons to fend for themselves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In order to make claims like that, you'll need to be able to substantiate them. In fact, there is absolutely no archaeological evidence that suggests any of the claims you have made. If you are aware of some source for this information that the rest of us are not, then please, share that information. Otherwise, you're claims can only be considered to be baseless and without merit.

Respectfully,

Erick

------------------

Are these the solid frames you talked about Elizabeth? Tough words on his part but there is a sense of rightness about it. Even though I think he is as stuck in not seeing things as his forum might be stuck in seeing things!

Frankly I tend to err on the forum members side, because EVEN NOW there are stone age civilizations trying to live under the marks of contrails in the sky. How can he say that is not the case? And thats right under his nose!

But I do like that " Fantastic Claims require Fantastic Proof"

Good standard to follow. grinder

[Trickfox]

Is it technological singularity we are hoping for Trickfox. Or A spritual one?
Or a meeting of both?
Elizabeth

That is a good question Elizabeth!
Some of us have understood and experienced the "spiritual " aspect of the technological singularity already. It is a completely subjective experience that brings with it "a sense of existential crisis".

Eventually, a rational person accepts the "live, and let live" strategy because that is the natural entropy of the universe.

I think you are correct. What is comming is a meeting of both. (spiritual/technology)

Perhaps even "second generation life" itself.
I think it has alreadystarted with "INTERNET" and now the seed is planted.
So what is all the fuss about "Q"? it's just a reminder of "the looking glass". The concept that a mischeavious entity willl be born out of our second generation computer creations is simply a reflection of our character. Look what has happened with the social woes of the internet already. Would you let a seven to ten year old child loose on the internet without supervision these days?

Whatever it is that's about to happen there is certainly no fear that we can pursue and move forwards without danger providing that we model the outcome reasonably beforehand and establish certain limits for safety.

We obviously know what most of the dangers are, since dozens of science fiction writters spend a lot of time deriving negative and destructive outcomes to all the possible scenarios. (a good example was; the non-existant millenium computer collapse)

I don't know about anyone else here, but I'm ready for it

Bring on the future...... I'm hungry for change

Trickfox

[Trickfox]

viewtopic.php?p=1810#1810

Elizabeth and Mr Twigsnapper, did the two of you just point out that tortoise on the picket fence post that went flying by us on the side of the road (of this golden thread)?

Trickfox