DISCLOSURE
GAIA and losess but also wins and reasons.
by Henryk Szubinski
This theory of Gaia started by representation of her family ,where Apollo
was born. So for Gaia to have lost some of her natural power could be
explained by Gaia losing an argument with Apollo. To define this as the
argument back ,so that Gaia wins, the arguments on either side would have
to be = zero or a draw.
However there are reccurrances of Apollo appearing in history as the SUN king.
This appearance would make a draw possible. The other alternative of there
being another positive side to the draw would be the politics of the SUN kings
other side as the Natural philosophy developing there at that time and gives
an extra 2 points for Gaia to make it back into popularity.
The GAIA goddess of goddess had her losses in the ancient Greek pantheon of popularity. The
first loss
THE SCALE; sets 1,2,3
first set;
1)The basis of having men in the masculine gender supposing that they also could win the Earth.
2)The return of the masculinity in relation to the Earth and power through that.
The SUN king as APOLLO , philosophy and the losses
the second set;
3) That there exists only one masculine type and that it is derived in meaning and appearance to = the Apollo of ancient Greece as
which of the gods that defined GAIA loosing first 1)
4) Sun king as philosophy of the Earth nature existing as the connection to Earth in that it = the only unused reference
to a world untouched by masculinity away from the Earth and away from the Sun .His appearance was to define nature
by gold and jewels and to live among the ritches surrounded by gold with leaves of gold ,lavish decorations and ritual.
The whole thing must have looked very strange. Like a God recreating nature into art . This was not wrong, it was part
of art and the rococo art movement in the age of enlightment.
However it did remind us of something that may have been the opposite of this expression of art:
as the reason GAIA lost the 2) reference of the first set but was able through this to reach set 3.As a historical account;That became
another set opposition to GAIA failure as GAIA sucess.
the 3rd set:
THE POSITIVE reference;
The kindered spirits of politics of GAIA that were elected into;the start of natural philosophy, Descartes , Newton, . at the 1600' s to 17 00's.
5) The other side of the Sun King as the connection to the SUN and the Earth that exists beyond the
smallest distance as NATURE displaces to the SUN and looks back at the Earth by 2 failures that result in
positive Earth as the +2 functions at about the time 1992 and disclosure by Dr Steven Greer (as how to do it).
THE NATURAL END OF THE EARTH BY THE SUN:and ancient dreaming.THE PROTECTIVE SPIRIT.The shamanic goddess;and the
positive , not "warning" but appraisal of the following facts;
spirit failure and spirit success as a = that the first way to elect nature BY REPRESENTATION ;was that none could see the spirit of the sun leaving the Earth.
spirit failure and spirit success b= That the way to elected EARTH REPRESENTATION, on the secondary level also failed but defined the weakness as
the spirit of the Earth leaving the SUN.
as set 1-set 2 +set 3= type 2 or a.b of the 5th.
And in that the basics of the natural LINK between a and b .
first losses 1,2 are answered as being the opposite losses of 3,4 and the
answer then = 5) and a,b.as 2(the 5th) or 3 (the a,b where the b= the 6th ) ,as GAINS.
The following equation of GAIA may be used with any natural interactions.THE TYPE 1,2,3 MENTIONED ARE THE KARDAVESH SCALE OF CIVILIZATIONS
(see the Kardavesh scale for more information).
So the basic natural responses are based on the wind, humidity,water flow, nutrients for it's flora and faun , the sunlight and the generation of more
for the whole of nature as 1 great being = GAIA.
These responses are the
-2 the first 2 losses (in the scale shown above) =as turned to the +2 which defines the type zero civilization (as -2+2=0) that the extra +2 as = type 2 civilization that uses the SCALE 2 as any input of any EARTH functions into the equation:
-2 (x) +2 (y) +2(z) = type 2
the +2z as the free energy.
here is an example of such an equation:
(1 natural responses of 2 humidity ) + 2 (3 sunlight , 4 water flow)= 5 flora and fauna (5+a,b)
The basic interaction of the cause and effect of the prior GAIA losses as having the positive side of it's patterns of failure by the
extra resulting 5th (a,b) as a=generation of oxygen, b) warmth
from WIKIPEDIA
date, 26,07,2016
time , 15:36
Gaia philosophy (named after Gaia, Greek goddess of the Earth) is a broadly inclusive term for related concepts that living organisms on a planet will affect the nature of their environment in order to make the environment more suitable for life. This set of theories holds that all organisms on a life-giving planet regulate the biosphere in such a way as to promote its habitability. Gaia concept draws a connection between the survivability of a species (hence its evolutionary course) and its usefulness to the survival of other species.
While there were a number of precursors to Gaia theory, the first scientific form of this idea was proposed as the Gaia hypothesis by James Lovelock, a UK chemist, in 1970. The Gaia hypothesis deals with the concept of Biological homeostasis, and claims the resident life forms of a host planet coupled with their environment have acted and act like a single, self-regulating system. This system includes the near-surface rocks, the soil, and the atmosphere. Today many scientists consider such ideas to be unsupported by, or at odds with, the available evidence (see recent criticism). These theories are however significant in green politics.
As the set 3 with the 5 +a+b = the Natural philosophy of the year 1992 as when Dr Steven Greer proved the existance of aliens, there were many articles on natural philosophy as an answer to the Descartes and Newton sides where this new philosophy has developed as with the concepts of "pulling energy from the vacuum" in relation to this
article on relativistic space time and Dr Steven Greer's method of the CE5 initiative.
from www.math.cmu.edu
FIVE CONTRIBUTIONS to NATURAL PHILOSOPHY by Walter Noll.
page 10 article 4
date 26,07,2016
time 16:12
4. Relativistic spacetime. Under everyday circumstances, measurements of time lapses and distances are not problematical. They become problematical, however, when it matters that the transmission of information by light or other electromagnetic means is not instantaneous. It should be clear by now that it makes no sense to speak about the speed of light except relative to some frame of reference. Light being a wave phenomenon, this speed should be interpreted as the speed relative to the frame of reference defined by the medium that carries the wave, as is the speed of sound or the speed of water-waves. The physicists of the 19th century knew this, of course, so they invented the “luminiferous ether” as the carrier of light- and electromagnetic waves. The question that immediately arises is this: How does the earth and other astronomical objects move relative to the luminiferous ether. We all have heard of the expensive experiments of Michaelson and Morley that were designed to find out. In the end, it was Einstein who realized that there is no luminiferous ether and that entirely new and counterintuitive spacetime structures are needed to account for what happens in the real world in situations in which the transmission of information cannot
article on relativistic space time and Dr Steven Greer's method of the CE5 initiative.
from www.math.cmu.edu
FIVE CONTRIBUTIONS to NATURAL PHILOSOPHY by Walter Noll.
page 10 article 4
date 26,07,2016
time 16:12
4. Relativistic spacetime. Under everyday circumstances, measurements of time lapses and distances are not problematical. They become problematical, however, when it matters that the transmission of information by light or other electromagnetic means is not instantaneous. It should be clear by now that it makes no sense to speak about the speed of light except relative to some frame of reference. Light being a wave phenomenon, this speed should be interpreted as the speed relative to the frame of reference defined by the medium that carries the wave, as is the speed of sound or the speed of water-waves. The physicists of the 19th century knew this, of course, so they invented the “luminiferous ether” as the carrier of light- and electromagnetic waves. The question that immediately arises is this: How does the earth and other astronomical objects move relative to the luminiferous ether. We all have heard of the expensive experiments of Michaelson and Morley that were designed to find out. In the end, it was Einstein who realized that there is no luminiferous ether and that entirely new and counterintuitive spacetime structures are needed to account for what happens in the real world in situations in which the transmission of information cannot