From the Judge-Not-Lest-U-B-Judged-Dept

Too late!!!

Drink whenever you come across someone shaming someone else on social media (of which News is now a part of)

More reasons for everyone to larn meditation n a morality conducive for living with other human beings
https://medium.com/@freddiedeboer/planet...

From the Duty-Honour-Purpose-Dept.

"To death
The best source of life"
--Major Fawcett

So I managed to see "The Lost City of Zed"

After getting over the shock of not having been to a mainstream local theatre in a decade

The movie is a period peice. Wonderful attention to the little details (I heard that the director does this with their films, they want to create a whole world where the characters can inhabit). Ivory Merchant without the dissipation and apathy.

The movie is also a boy's adventure story. Those can be fun
(When I saw a certain scene I laughed because it reminded me so much of a certain famous scene in tbe first Raiders of the Lost Ark movie)

The only issue I had with the movie was with the light. When goinv through the jungle, when sunny, I felt the show was too dim. I had to get up and go to the back to see if it was just my angle. I've been spoiled by Terrence Malik who does amazing things with light in his movies.

Ty DG for serendipitously introducing me to a film I would otherwise never have seen

The Hall of Mirrors

This is what we get for letting our intelligence agencies become black boxes. In the digital realm now there is no way whatsoever to determine who did what to whom when where and how. Bo

"According to WikiLeaks, the UMBRAGE team then “collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation. With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from.”"

WikiLeaks: CIA Uses ‘Stolen’ Malware to ‘Attribute’ Cyberattacks to Nations Like Russia
2776
28

KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP/Getty Images
by LUCAS NOLAN7 Mar 20171,936
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

SUBMIT
Documents released by WikiLeaks show that the CIA kept records of malware attacks supposedly stolen from outside agents, including the Russian government, used to “misdirect attribution” of hacking sources.
“The CIA’s hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the agency,” WikiLeaks explains. “Each technique it has created forms a ‘fingerprint’ that can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different attacks to the same entity.
That’s where the CIA’s UMBRAGE team comes in. WikiLeaks describes UMBRAGE team’s activities:
The UMBRAGE team maintains a library of application development techniques borrowed from in-the-wild malware. The goal of this repository is to provide functional code snippets that can be rapidly combined into custom solutions. Rather than building feature-rich tools, which are often costly and can have significant CI value, this effort focuses on developing smaller and more targeted solutions built to operational specifications.
According to WikiLeaks, the UMBRAGE team then “collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation. With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from.”
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
WikiLeaks ✔@wikileaks
CIA steals other groups virus and malware facilitating false flag attacks #Vault7 https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/
8:18 AM - 7 Mar 2017
4,9174,917 Retweets 4,1744,174 likes
This means that the CIA could use a malware attack originally developed by another country to “misdirect attribution” for the hack away from themselves. Within the UMBRAGE arsenal of malware is a collection of “keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.” A directory of the tools collected by the UMBRAGE team can be found here.

From the Joy-with-Google-Dept.

I typed in learn remote viewing and I got this:

https://www.google.ca/search?client=ms-a...

Huzzah!

Right On

It was absurd then, and it is even more absurd now.

See video

2017: Year of the Grail (Epi-Blogue)

The following is an excerpt (#20 of 20) from:

"Jesus Among the Julio-Claudians"
copyright 2017 Charles N. Pope

Previous attempts at understanding the “Holy Grail” have been frustrated by a general lack of understanding of royal culture. That has now been largely remedied and we can finally achieve a satisfying resolution to the age old “Mystery of the Gospel.” In short, the royal family was responsible for creating messianic figures in every era. Jesus was simply one in a long line of royal set-men.

Around the turn of the year (2017), I came up with the basic concept for comparing the Julio-Claudian dynasty with that of the Ptolemies. I had already done extensive study of both periods in years past. However, many of the details presented in this new study were figured out on the fly (over the past several months as the forum posts were being made). After taking a short break, I’ll likely produce a longer work later this year and make that available.

In the meantime, the following chart can be used for a handy reference to the associations made in this blog series.

Julius Caesar/Emperor Yuan = neo-Alexander III (“The Great”)/Chandra-Gupta

Pompey = neo-Darius III/Oxyathres/Perdiccas

Crassus = neo-Artaxerxes III/Seleucus

Octavius/Augustus = neo-Antiochus I/Ochos

Caesarion/Jihonika = neo-Alexander IV/Antigonus Gonatus/Bindusara

Tiberius = neo-Ptolemy Epigone/Onias

Marc Antony = neo-Ptolemy I (Soter)

Herod the Great = neo-Heracles/Ptolemy Ceraunus

Gaius Caesar = neo-Ptolemy III/Ashoka/Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi
(but later replaced in the role by Lucius Caesar/Emperor Guangwu)

Lucius Caesar = neo-Antiochus III/Xiang Yu
(role usurped by Caesarion/Drusus I/Sejanus)

Germanicus/Emperor Wang Mang = neo-Philip V/Emperor Gaozu
(see note below)

Drusus II = neo-Prince Alexander (posthumous son of Ptolemy II)
(see note below)

Caligula = neo-Ptolemy IV (first 4 years)

Nero = neo-Ptolemy IV (final 13 years)

Torquatus /Kujula Kadphises/Emperor Ming = neo-Ptolemy V & VI/Emperors Wen & Jing

Agrippa II/Herodian = neo-Ptolemy VII

Galba/Lepidus (the Younger) = neo-Ptolemy VIII

Otho/Aristobulus= neo-Ptolemy D/Zoilos/Emperor Wudi

Nerva/Josephus/Vima Kadphises = neo-Ptolemy IX

Hyrcanus/Josue/Kanishka/Emperor An = neo-Ptolemy X

Note: Although Drusus II was younger than Germanicus and was logically in the role of Philip V, it was Drusus II that fulfilled representative elements from the life of Philip V (such as turning against and “striking” the Antiochus the Great figure). Conversely, Germanicus was patterned more after the wide-ranging Prince Alexander of early Ptolemaic times. These roles were essentially crossed, and even as the younger prince, Torquatus, took on the role of mild-mannered Ptolemy VI while the older prince, Galba, was patterned after the aggressive Ptolemy VIII. The important thing was that all of the major roles were played.

Note: Pompey or Cinna likely had a very brief stint as a pharaoh (Ptolemy XI).

Note: Crassus was also known as Ptolemy XII.

Previous blog in the series:
http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

First blog in the series:
http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

The prequel "Heroes of the Hellenistic Age" is posted at the page below: http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index....

robots

So I'm getting into robotics. Why? Because I feel like it. And these days it actually is dirt cheap, I am sure some of you folks know numbers.

I want to make household bots and agricultural bots, things that do stuff that could be considered useful. Like clear the snow, or dig drainage in your garden.
Or help with the gardening.

Looking around, I found the "farmbot", here https://github.com/FarmBot or, if you want to spend money on one, here https://farmbot.io/

Some of you folks are revolutionary types right? And you already make your own farming, agricultural things, like grow food. Right? You knew about this already then. Or you have a more traditional farm, and you don't need the amateur things. Right?

Riiggghhhhht.

The Vulture Stone at Gobekli Tepe

Just after posting my review of Graham Hancock's Magician of the Gods, a related announcement was made by the Engineering Dept. at Edinburgh University in Scotland. According to their analysis, Pillar 43 ("The Vulture Stone") is not predicting a cataclysm but commemorating the cataclysm that initiated the Younger Dryas Period. The Edinburgh team deduced that the ball in the figure represents the summer solstice sun (rather than the Galactic Center as proposed by Hancock) in 10,950 BC, which is very close to the accepted date for the Younger Dryas event.

https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot....

If the catastrophe was related to a cyclical event (such as a comet strike), then keeping track of the elapsed time from that event would have been critical (in order to prepare for future occurrences).

My review of Magicians of the Gods:

http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

Other articles discussing the Edinburgh University announcement:
(each of these articles emphasizes particular details of the Edinburgh study, such as a possible alteration of the Earth's tilt from the impact event)

https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot....
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/3381932/an...
https://phys.org/news/2017-04-ancient-st...
https://www.sciencealert.com/ancient-sto...
http://observer.com/2017/04/scientists-r...
http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/21/ancient-st...
https://www.earth.com/news/new-informati...
http://www.iflscience.com/space/13000yea...

... Until All Things Be Fulfilled

The following is an excerpt (#19 of 20) from:

"Jesus Among the Julio-Claudians"
copyright 2017 Charles N. Pope

The Julio-Claudian emulation of the Ptolemaic Period was nearly complete. The only major roles left to play were those of the childless Ptolemy VII (John Hyrcanus) and his three “sons” – Ptolemy “D” (Aristobulus/Sulla), Ptolemy IX (Antigonus/Cinna) and Ptolemy X (Alexander Jannaeus/Marius).

Almost by definition, the role of John Hyrcanus had to be played by a prince who ruled as king in Jerusalem. The long reign of Agrippa II (“Herodion”) served to fulfill that precedent quite nicely. As Agrippa II was the final king before the fall of Jerusalem, there really are no other candidates. Considering this, we would also expect Agrippa II to have performed at least a token stint as High Priest in order to emulate John Hyrcanus as both High Priest and King of Jerusalem. The most likely alter ego of Agrippa II as High Priest would have been Ananias, son of Nebedaius, 47-55 A.D, appointed during the reign of Emperor Claudius (the former Agrippa I). In this case, Agrippa II was already High Priest when his kingship in Israel began in 53 AD.

The role of the first Hasmonean prince named Aristobulus (a.k.a. Prince Ptolemy “D” of Egypt) was logically played by the last Herodian prince (with any recognized Hasmonean pedigree) by that same name, Aristobulus (“Jesus Justus”) son of Aristobulus of Chalcis. It was determined in Heroes of the Hellenistic Age that the Roman identity of the first Aristobulus was that of Roman Dictator Sulla/Syla (Indo-Bactrian/Greek King Zoilos and long-time king of China, Emperor Wu-Di). Interestingly enough, Emperor Zhang (“Aristobulus”), the successor of Emperor Ming (“Jesus”), was directly compared to Emperor Wu-Di. Each suffered the misfortune of having a capable son that was incapable of continuing a dynastic line due to infertility and bad fortune.

References:
http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Zh...
(See the paragraph, “Late reign,” for the surprising link between Zhang and his role model Wu-di.)

During the Jewish Revolt and Roman siege of Jerusalem, this Aristobulus (son of Aristobulus of Chalcis) assisted Vespasian in suppressing the region of Commagene along the Euphrates, which was justified as a “precautionary measure” against an “expected” Parthian invasion. At the same time a group identified as the “Alans” invaded Media and drove out its king Parcorus/Pacorus. These interlopers also supposedly threatened the king of Armenia, who was still being called Tigranes (II).

The role of Antigonus (from the Ptolemaic/Hasmonean Era associates well with Josephus/Agrippa III. Antigonus (Roman: Cinna) had been the quintessential side-kick to his fellow princes, and particularly Aristobulus (Roman: Sulla). Antigonus/Cinna was best known in Rome as a leading facilitator of dynastic transition from that of Aristobulus/Sulla and his faction to that of Alexander Jannaeus/Marius. In the Ptolemaic Era, Cinna was not first in line for succession, but second (after Sulla/Aristobulus). Similarly, Josephus was next in line after his older brother Aristobulus/Jesus Justus, and known (by his own detailed histories) for diplomacy and close relationships with contemporary mover and shakers.

Note: The name Agrippa (or the Greek analog, Grypos), suggesting “hooked-nose,” appears to have been applied to various princes with that distinctive “bird beak” facial feature, most recently by Marcus Agrippa the Elder and Marcus Agrippa the Younger (who were not literally father and son, but had a shared “profile”).

All of the major Ptolemaic roles are now accounted for, however only with the emergence of a neo-Alexander Jannaeus (Marius) could the grand cycle be considered finished and the Julio-Claudian Dynasty with it. According to the research of Laurence Gardner (Bloodline of the Holy Grail, pp 140, 236), the oldest son of Jesus Justus, namely Galains (or Alain of Grail legend), was unable to sire an heir and the kingly birthright passed to the second son of Jesus, namely Josephes (“Joseph son of Jesus”). This does appear to have been the case, however it can now be understood that the secret lineage of Jesus Christ was not one of a minor or bootleg royal house (if there ever was such a thing), but that of the ruling royal house of the entire known world going forward. Emperor He (“Alain/Galains”), successor of Emperor Zhang, failed to produce any surviving sons and the throne of China (and Great Throne of the world empire) was subsequently passed to a collateral line. Although more study is required, this new dynast, called Emperor An, appears to correspond to Hyrcanus (Josue) the eldest son of Josephus/Agrippa III (Josephes). If so, then it is for this prince that circumstances conspired to place in the role of a new Alexander Jannaeus.

Note: The Grail name Josue makes for a ready Hebrew short-form of another renowned contemporary historian, Suetonius.

Note: The association between Emperor Nerva and Josephus can be made using the following historical details:

1) As Emperor, Nerva emphasized water-works and granaries (the traditional preoccupation of a Joseph-figure).
2) Nerva was renowned for his literary talent, and idolized for it by Nero.
3) In addition to being honored by Nero, Nerva was also made Consul of Rome by both Vespasian and Domitian.
4) Nerva was admired for good looks despite having a large hooked nose.
5) Nerva was the last person interred in the Mausoleum of Augustus
6) The life of Nerva had been threatened and he was unjustly imprisoned. He was released only after the execution of those who conspired to kill the former king (Domitian), his predecessor. (Recall the story of Joseph who was joined in prisoned by a cupbearer and baker accused of poisoning Judah, the crown prince and co-regent.)
7) Nerva was, politically speaking, a Flavian. Josephus was a Flavian by formal adoption.
8) Nerva was hailed with the title, “Father of the Nation,” i.e., Great King. Despite supposedly having died childless, almost all of the emperors of the 2nd Century AD considered him to be their ancestor. (We must suspect that Nerva did have children, but under another name. Josephus had a number of children, including at least three sons.)
9) Nerva reformed the Jewish tax instituted by Vespasian and intensified by Domitian.
10) Nerva, like Cinna, emerged from obscurity to lead Rome in a time of unrest and transition. Nerva summoned Trajan as Cinna had summoned Marius.

Previous blog in the series:
http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

Next blog in the series:
http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

First blog in the series:
http://www.dailygrail.com/blogs/Charles-...

The prequel "Heroes of the Hellenistic Age" is posted at the page below: http://www.domainofman.com/boards/index....

Who Built the Moon? (Reviewed)

In my own research for "Twisted History: Genesis and the Cosmos", I came across very little in the way of a mythological/biblical explanation for the cosmology of our Moon, which is strange considering how important it is to life on Earth. As lucky and improbable as Planet Earth may be, it still required an equally improbable moon to make it complete. It does beg the question as to whether an already well-endowed Earth got further enhancements along the way. It's a great idea for a book and a great way for Knight and Butler to continue showcasing their fabulous work on ancient units of measure. However, I think they were resting on their laurels a bit in this book. Sadly, it didn't even come close to reaching its full potential.

1) The authors mention an early Russian theory related to a hollow moon, but dismiss it as space-race propaganda on the part of the communist regime. Discussion of subsequent English works on the subject would have been very helpful and appreciated.

2) An in-depth discussion on the artificiality of the Moon's cratering (rather than a passing mention) would have been extremely useful. For example, how could the Moon have maintained its incredibly long stabilizing role if it had been rocked by so many impacts over billions of years? Doesn't this imply the need for some type of regular adjustment/intervention rather than a "make it and forsake it" (Deist-esque) approach argued by the authors.

3) If the Universe is 14 billion years old (at the youngest), then was that enough time for intelligent life to already be established by the time our own solar system was forming? Or are there tell-tale signs that the emergence of "intelligent design/god's handiwork" began taking place sometime after the formation of our solar system? For example, the "Cambrian Explosion" of animal life on Earth around 540 million years ago. Or, if the Moon is primarily responsible for plate tectonics (as the authors agree), then that would be a significant clue in determining the date of the Moon's creation. Unfortunately, scientists do not have a clear idea as to when plate tectonics began or how many times that a super-continent has formed and then broke up. Pangaea existed around 300 million years ago, but it may have not been the first. Still, there is reason to think that this process began closer to a billion years ago than over four billion years ago. (Scientists are likely motivated to postulate crustal plate movement further back than is actually justified.)

4) The authors do not satisfactorily deal with the appearance of the very Megalithic measuring system that they have discovered? They don't like the idea of received knowledge from ET. Nor do they even suspect that this knowledge, once established, was transmitted from the Stone Age to Sumerian and Egyptian civilization and again to the more modern English and Metric systems through some type of cultural mechanism. They seem to think that it was reinvented from scratch each time. Strangely, the authors digress into a discussion on how extinct hominoid species probably interbred and passed on their genetic traits to their successors. However, the authors don't seem to fancy the idea of knowledge being transmitted from one time period down to the next, and even between representatives of the same species!

5) If the Moon is artificial, as the authors conclude, then why must we accept that it was created at the same time our solar system was forming? Wouldn't the sweeping up of solar system debris (and especially hazardous materials within Earth's gravity or orbital belt around the Sun) be something that could have been done at any time in the past 4 billion years? Wouldn't an artificial satellite make for an ideal waste dump for such materials? This makes more sense than the author's suggestion that the great oceanic trenches were scooped out and fashioned into the Moon.

6) If the oldest Moon rocks are a billion years older than the oldest Earth rocks, doesn't that tell us something potentially useful. Unfortunately, the authors don't explore that discrepancy.

7) The authors are enamored by the "message-in-a-bottle" meme, i.e., that when mankind became sophisticated enough they would recognized the creator's work. But, they also cling to a more pragmatic motivation for the Moon's existence, i.e., to simply make Earth conducive to life. There is no reason to think that mankind is the species to end all intelligent species on Earth. In fact, we are not even the best or brightest thus far!

8) The climax of the book occurs when the authors declare that Unidentified/Unknown Creative Agents (UCA's), which they had earlier introduced to the reader quite informally, were not responsible for building the Moon, but that we humans ourselves will in the future travel back billions of years in time and do it! Yet, if going back in time is in fact possible, we would only be able to seed some other early solar system and not bring about our very own. Even in a recursive Universe there must be some sense of causality!