(Doomstars) Unable to think of worthwhile title.

[Tony P.]

http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue4/ar4topten.html
7 and 8 fit with stuff mentioned in d. cannon's book i think, along
with the ra material.

[Tony P.]

with the upcoming earth changes, not just the earth, but society in
general such as the economy, entertainment, and so on, one thing that
will be affected is entertainment on television. entertainment on
television, with the exception of certain networks like disney which
i assume is paid for by disneyland or the theme parks to get it free
on basic cable in some/most areas, is supported by commercials during
the shows watched. like baseball games for example, the commercials
come inbetween innings and such. it wouldn't be able to be televised
really without the support of sponsers. now, what happens when people
don't watch the commercials cause they get up and doing something
while waiting, or the commercials don't work, or you are too poor to
pay for anything they advertise, so you are contributing. well,
that's a problem. the only viable solution for that to keep people
watching, more importantly the people who can contribute if the
commercials do work, is to show the sports tickers not in the game
but during commercials. if you watch baseball sometimes, you probably
know what i mean. going on to other things like television shows,
they can also solve the problem by intertwining shows. what i mean by
this is for the 23 minute show or whatever, and the next show, is to
merge the end and the beginning together. like taking the last minute
of every show, they can put it during the first commercial break of
the following show. so the 2nd show starts at maybe 28 after, and the
1st show shows the last minute maybe at 30 after, or so. to keep
audiences watching. this doesn't relate to this message board too
much, but i'm just letting out my ideas rather than not getting heard
at all.

[bjorn_nitmou]

television is like a 45 billion dollar industry right now i think -
when they tell you they need advertising revenue, that is only to
maintain their current profit levels. they dont really need any
commercials at all. im not sure how much it costs to run pbs, but
its not much. the only reason you need so many commercials is so
these companies can make money and so the incredibly creative and
talented cast of friends can make a mill an episode. it doenst have
to be this way. its all run by money, and they make people believe
that they have to make money through tv - if they didnt then who
cares. it doesnt benefit me.


--- in asc2k@y..., "tony p." <doomstars@y...> wrote:
> with the upcoming earth changes, not just the earth, but society in
> general such as the economy, entertainment, and so on, one thing
that
> will be affected is entertainment on television. entertainment on
> television, with the exception of certain networks like disney
which
> i assume is paid for by disneyland or the theme parks to get it
free
> on basic cable in some/most areas, is supported by commercials
during
> the shows watched. like baseball games for example, the commercials
> come inbetween innings and such. it wouldn't be able to be
televised
> really without the support of sponsers. now, what happens when
people
> don't watch the commercials cause they get up and doing something
> while waiting, or the commercials don't work, or you are too poor
to
> pay for anything they advertise, so you are contributing. well,
> that's a problem. the only viable solution for that to keep people
> watching, more importantly the people who can contribute if the
> commercials do work, is to show the sports tickers not in the game
> but during commercials. if you watch baseball sometimes, you
probably
> know what i mean. going on to other things like television shows,
> they can also solve the problem by intertwining shows. what i mean
by
> this is for the 23 minute show or whatever, and the next show, is
to
> merge the end and the beginning together. like taking the last
minute
> of every show, they can put it during the first commercial break of
> the following show. so the 2nd show starts at maybe 28 after, and
the
> 1st show shows the last minute maybe at 30 after, or so. to keep
> audiences watching. this doesn't relate to this message board too
> much, but i'm just letting out my ideas rather than not getting
heard
> at all.

[Tony P.]

kind of weird then if they don't need commercials, but for only more
profit of maintaining there status, when it comes to when they time
compress movies. to my understanding, time compressing movies is
probably like 60 seconds compressed into 59 or something along that
matter, assuming that they can shove more commercials in the extra
two minutes they saved. which might as well be like another $5,000
per showing or whatever. and if the below is true, would that make it
moral to fast forward through commercials? you know, using those
things that can pause t.v. that way, you can pause it during a
commercial, get up, make a sandwhich and use the bathroom, come back,
unpause, fast forward, and watch.

--- in asc2k@y..., "bjorn_nitmou" <bjorn_nitmou@y...> wrote:
> television is like a 45 billion dollar industry right now i think -
> when they tell you they need advertising revenue, that is only to
> maintain their current profit levels. they dont really need any
> commercials at all. im not sure how much it costs to run pbs, but
> its not much. the only reason you need so many commercials is so
> these companies can make money and so the incredibly creative and
> talented cast of friends can make a mill an episode. it doenst
have
> to be this way. its all run by money, and they make people believe
> that they have to make money through tv - if they didnt then who
> cares. it doesnt benefit me.

[Mark Ruenes]

i've heard of this technology, the computer can take out frames that are
similar to each other and thus gain space for another commercial. they
called it time manipulation or something along those lines.

mark


>"to my understanding, time compressing movies is
> probably like 60 seconds compressed into 59 or something along that
> matter, assuming that they can shove more commercials in the extra
> two minutes they saved."

[sol72us]

--- in asc2k@y..., "bjorn_nitmou" <bjorn_nitmou@y...> wrote:
> television is like a 45 billion dollar industry right now
> ...its all run by money, and they make people believe
> that they have to make money through tv - if they didnt
> then who cares. it doesnt benefit me.
>
> --- in asc2k@y..., "tony p." <doomstars@y...> wrote:
> > with the upcoming earth changes, not just the earth,
> > but society in general such as the economy,
> > entertainment, and so on, one thing that
> > will be affected is entertainment on television.

thanks, this was a great subject title...when i think of
thinking, i think rational reasoning which is different
from a perspective of not reasoning - just observing,
kind of like tv. i think this should win a prize for
being so entertaining, very worthwhile title too.

[Tony P.]

just because i can't think of a good enough title doesn't mean you
have to poke fun at it. and some stuff i've read after posting this
agrees with what i said. like the monopolization of t.v. so
advertising can go on. mcmoneagle's "the ultimate time machine" talks
about entertainment and advertisement in it.


> thanks, this was a great subject title...when i think of
> thinking, i think rational reasoning which is different
> from a perspective of not reasoning - just observing,
> kind of like tv. i think this should win a prize for
> being so entertaining, very worthwhile title too.

[chris.hamilton2@...>]

tony wrote:
just because i can't think of a good enough title doesn't mean you
have to poke fun at it.


tony, i don't think sunny meant his remark to make fun of you at all. he is in
california and should see this post soon, and then sunny can comment on your
interpretation. take care chris

[sol72us]

--- in asc2k@y..., <chris.hamilton2@v...> wrote:
> tony wrote:
> just because i can't think of a good enough title doesn't mean you
> have to poke fun at it.
>
>
> tony, i don't think sunny meant his remark to make fun of you at
all. he is in california and should see this post soon, and then
sunny can comment on your interpretation. take care chris

hi tony,

your work here is true genius and
includes a high entertainment value,
hence funny. i agree with you;
sorry for any offense.

some people feel tv is not worthwhile.
so it seems appropriate that it is
given a corresponding subject title.

some people feel that tv does not
promote thinking that is conducive
to solidarity; that it promotes
thinking in which images are decoded
simultaneously so you don't actively
decode yourself, i.e. brainwashing.
this element of "thinking" was also
emphasized in the subject title.

observation of tv in this way is
distinct from observation of your self
which comes from quieting the rational
reasoning centers and elevating to
higher consciousness, a skill that
comes with the practice of meditating.

it is interesting that both the low(tv)
and high(meditation) consciousness
activities involve "observation" which
is appropriately complex and
multi-dimensional, an irony that is
prizeworthily paradoxical. the
distinction lies in who decodes,
the tv or yourself.

pokingly,
pat

[Tony P.]

some stuff on t.v. provokes higher thinking or different thinking.
such as some of the sci-fi stuff, like old twilight zone episodes
that rod serling hosted.


> hi tony,
>
> your work here is true genius and
> includes a high entertainment value,
> hence funny. i agree with you;
> sorry for any offense.

[sol72us]

--- in asc2k@y..., "tony p." <doomstars@y...> wrote:
> some stuff on t.v. provokes higher thinking or different thinking.
> such as some of the sci-fi stuff, like old twilight zone episodes
> that rod serling hosted.

you're right; not fair to generalize; exception to every rule.
a step in the right direction may be throw away our remote
control. the remote control has bred our inordinately short
attention span which has forced advertisers and programming
alike to be as outrageous as possible. your comment about old
twilight zone reminds me of chemtrails. the episode about the
dream where everyone's freezing, then waking up and everyone's
roasting. this ties in with another idea, that of coherent
emotion created by so many simultaneous viewers - approaching
group consciousness...could it sway the way events transpire?

[Tony P.]

i remember one episode where it started out being too hot, then she
awoke from the dream and the earth was spiraling away from the sun or
something, making it freezing. by the way, if all is one, and one is
all, then wouldn't any given person be able to change the world in a
sense by thinking it so?

> you're right; not fair to generalize; exception to every rule.
> a step in the right direction may be throw away our remote
> control. the remote control has bred our inordinately short
> attention span which has forced advertisers and programming
> alike to be as outrageous as possible. your comment about old
> twilight zone reminds me of chemtrails. the episode about the
> dream where everyone's freezing, then waking up and everyone's
> roasting. this ties in with another idea, that of coherent
> emotion created by so many simultaneous viewers - approaching
> group consciousness...could it sway the way events transpire?

[sol72us]

--- in asc2k@y..., "tony p." <doomstars@y...> wrote:
> i remember one episode where it started out being
> too hot, then she awoke from the dream and the
> earth was spiraling away from the sun or
> something, making it freezing. by the way,
> if all is one, and one is all, then wouldn't any
> given person be able to change the world in a
> sense by thinking it so?

yea, that's the episode - eerie.
well, someone once said creation happens twice,
in the mind first and then in matter. i think
that is what goal setting is about. thinking
may be augumented by emotion - tons of voltage
zapping the world into shape with lightning
bolts and the like. tony, quite the poetic
moment there, thanks, inspiring...


chemtrail, chemtrail,
why do we fail?
our ozone holes,
invisibly grows.
our budget of black,
with lawless slack.
shield from light
has taken flight.
our planet's heat,
no spray can beat.
we feel the stings,
of cancer beings.
we pray to fight,
instable plight.
why do we fail,
chemtrail, chemtrail?

[Tony P.]

if you think about the saying "i think therefore i am" that really
says a lot.

> yea, that's the episode - eerie.
> well, someone once said creation happens twice,
> in the mind first and then in matter. i think
> that is what goal setting is about. thinking
> may be augumented by emotion - tons of voltage
> zapping the world into shape with lightning
> bolts and the like. tony, quite the poetic
> moment there, thanks, inspiring...

[peter henry daley]

i say " i am, and i think". you have to be before you can think.
----- original message -----
from: tony p. <doomstars@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=-sdt6fjoo5kft2yq3fskw6xkfsnijmh4dvcjw1fzvmuxkzpkv63 0j6gwyrd1wnbq9cx_khz_r1kfj2xraw)>
to: <asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postid=biz3aocbysduatepqmrcrinw2x7dee7znszhme 6elk61t-73wrio7nnkwivmvloc-oknbas93rp0xpjhcq)>
sent: friday, september 27, 2002 11:23 pm
subject: [asc2k] re: (doomstars) unable to think of worthwhile title.


> if you think about the saying "i think therefore i am" that really
> says a lot.
>
> > yea, that's the episode - eerie.
> > well, someone once said creation happens twice,
> > in the mind first and then in matter. i think
> > that is what goal setting is about. thinking
> > may be augumented by emotion - tons of voltage
> > zapping the world into shape with lightning
> > bolts and the like. tony, quite the poetic
> > moment there, thanks, inspiring...
>
>
>
> to unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postid=5u7pqbvhctouey7klnr6emwykobuygk3yhfwvd l_p8iqwz8hl95mbx18e6_vlpubjlvbd-ujpesqeteztpx68gg9sqomcf_koiw)
>
>
>
> your use of yahoo! groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>