[DonDonDonPata]

I'm really not much into reading books, but I just concluded The Energy Cure by William Bengston, Ph.D.

It was a really interesting read. Or listen, in my case.

I haven't read the double blind studies. I've confirmed they did happen, and the papers are published. Taking Dr. Bengston at his word, you would then obviously have to entertain that there is something more that exists and is happening with regards to our bodies and our ability for healing. You might even extend it out further beyond just the human body's ability to heal. Some of this stretches into a broader context of whatever reality is and how outcomes are determined. Obviously, if you hold to a rigid scientific understanding of the natural world, then all of this is phooey because countless studies and blah blah blah. But then there is the reality that big pharma creates drugs hoping to land on a concoction that is just barely better, by a sliver, than the placebo. Most of what makes us feel better is purely expectation. How do you grapple with that? The entire cough and flu industry rides on ingredients having no statistical or measurable effect on cough and runny nose. Let it sink in. lol

Well, 2000 years ago Jesus said "take hope, your faith has made you well". Maybe he was on to something.

 

[Optimus]

Well, 2000 years ago Jesus said "take hope, your faith has made you well". Maybe he was on to something.

That's precisely how I've framed the entire Bengston story. I actually don't breathe hardly a word of this to anyone from my church, because the predisposition to anything of this sort is you only need Jesus and anything else is a snare from the devil. Yes, you certainly do only need Jesus, but I feel like the snares are all over the place and trip us up in ways we don't even recognize. For starters, the primary concepts in Bengston's methodology is to get out of the way of whatever is actually taking place. You are not the one doing anything. You are merely facilitating a process we know nothing about. I've adjusted my focus to figuring out what I might do even better when I pray for someone to heal or get well, because I do believe that something such as ego or pride can stand in the way of effective prayer. Approach God in a fully repentant state and pray expectantly. We need to become less while He becomes more.

Of particular relevance to me is that Jesus operated in a manner we totally still don't understand and that He definitely told us we could do and could do even greater things than what he showed us. I'm pretty certain that Jesus demonstrated that matter such as linen and water were capable of storing and transferring some sort of power or information that conveyed healing. It's a subject that Dr. Bengston discusses and they've demonstrated this property as well in their studies.

Always very important to accept that when science attempts to describe things in Christianity, it will almost always come out awkwardly. Bengston believes some sort of information transference is what's actually taking place between the initiator and the object or person being targeted.

I don't agree with all of Bengston's methodology, but there is much there in his repeated blind studies that shows a reproducible effect.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

That's precisely how I've framed the entire Bengston story. I actually don't breathe hardly a word of this to anyone from my church, because the predisposition to anything of this sort is you only need Jesus and anything else is a snare from the devil. Yes, you certainly do only need Jesus, but I feel like the snares are all over the place and trip us up in ways we don't even recognize. For starters, the primary concepts in Bengston's methodology is to get out of the way of whatever is actually taking place. You are not the one doing anything. You are merely facilitating a process we know nothing about. I've adjusted my focus to figuring out what I might do even better when I pray for someone to heal or get well, because I do believe that something such as ego or pride can stand in the way of effective prayer. Approach God in a fully repentant state and pray expectantly. We need to become less while He becomes more.

Of particular relevance to me is that Jesus operated in a manner we totally still don't understand and that He definitely told us we could do and could do even greater things than what he showed us. I'm pretty certain that Jesus demonstrated that matter such as linen and water were capable of storing and transferring some sort of power or information that conveyed healing. It's a subject that Dr. Bengston discusses and they've demonstrated this property as well in their studies.

Always very important to accept that when science attempts to describe things in Christianity, it will almost always come out awkwardly. Bengston believes some sort of information transference is what's actually taking place between the initiator and the object or person being targeted.

I don't agree with all of Bengston's methodology, but there is much there in his repeated blind studies that shows a reproducible effect.

You might enjoy this book:

The premise is that instead of framing our reality in terms of how old a rock is or how long it took for an ecosystem to develop in a certain part of the world, as Christians our reality is that our world has been corrupted by sin — the sin of mankind and the sin of rebellious spirits — and that is the baseline for the phenomenon we experience.

It isn't an anti-evolution book per se though you might question those things by the end. It's more about the proper role of the sciences and how modern culture made an idol out of academia.

 

[Optimus]

You might enjoy this book:

The premise is that instead of framing our reality in terms of how old a rock is or how long it took for an ecosystem to develop in a certain part of the world, as Christians our reality is that our world has been corrupted by sin — the sin of mankind and the sin of rebellious spirits — and that is the baseline for the phenomenon we experience.

It isn't an anti-evolution book per se though you might question those things by the end. It's more about the proper role of the sciences and how modern culture made an idol out of academia.

I'll check it out.

Interestingly, as a tangent, I've begun to notice a sort of shift in thinking with regards to time and how it's measured. There's even a question of whether time actually exists or whether it is just a measurement of something such as entropy. Our sense of time is one thing but as it pertains to understanding the universe, its use as a concept deserves questioning. What I draw from such readings is that when we attempt to say that things on the earth are hundreds of millions of years old or even more than a billion years old, we are describing the entropy that we observe and casting our frame of context upon it to determine a number of years it must have taken to occur.

Even present day AI could tell you how very wrong this can actually be.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

I'll check it out.

Interestingly, as a tangent, I've begun to notice a sort of shift in thinking with regards to time and how it's measured. There's even a question of whether time actually exists or whether it is just a measurement of something such as entropy. Our sense of time is one thing but as it pertains to understanding the universe, its use as a concept deserves questioning. What I draw from such readings is that when we attempt to say that things on the earth are hundreds of millions of years old or even more than a billion years old, we are describing the entropy that we observe and casting our frame of context upon it to determine a number of years it must have taken to occur.

Even present day AI could tell you how very wrong this can actually be.

Well, just go read the history of how we judge time in the sciences: look up James Hutton and the conflict between uniformitarianism and catastrophism. His ideas became widely accepted decades before Darwin and directly influenced the sciences, especially astronomy and evolution.

Hutton denied there was a Great Flood or any other sudden catastrophe that had rapidly shaped the earth. Instead, the earth was shaped by slow processes taking tens of millions of years. He pushed the idea of "deep time" and proposed natural, anthropic mechanisms for the fertility and habitability of our planet.

His ideas came out before science verified numerous great floods and other rapid catastrophes, and his theories were later discredited, yet the underlying idea of "natural progression dumbly marching forward over tens of millions of years" has proliferated through science.

I don't think he was a fraud. As it is with most scientific discoveries, he observed something correctly but drew incorrect conclusions. Modern secular science includes a mix of catastrophism and uniformitarianism.

 

[Arkam]

The Andromeda Strain by Michael Crichton

Was a fun ride that was very much what I have come to expect from Crichton. A slow burn that accelerates to a fevered pace as it approaches the climax, and then just walks off into the night. And like his other works it is jam packed with information that is a mix of real and fiction that is sewn together so well that you are left unsure how to decipher which is which. I was amazed to see when this was written as it feels like it would be at home in the 1980s, but instead it was published in 1969! If you liked Congo or the JP books, you will feel right at home reading Andromeda Strain.


Next I plan to go Crichton adjacent and read Carnosaur by Harry Adam Knight. I just learned this book existed this week and am now VERY intrigued. Went straight to the web and ordered a copy. I remember there being a film in the early 90's but wrote it off as a JP ripoff cashing in....which appears to be far from the case.

 

[Grinchy]

The Andromeda Strain by Michael Crichton

Was a fun ride that was very much what I have come to expect from Crichton. A slow burn that accelerates to a fevered pace as it approaches the climax, and then just walks off into the night. And like his other works it is jam packed with information that is a mix of real and fiction that is sewn together so well that you are left unsure how to decipher which is which. I was amazed to see when this was written as it feels like it would be at home in the 1980s, but instead it was published in 1969! If you liked Congo or the JP books, you will feel right at home reading Andromeda Strain.


Next I plan to go Crichton adjacent and read Carnosaur by Harry Adam Knight. I just learned this book existed this week and am now VERY intrigued. Went straight to the web and ordered a copy. I remember there being a film in the early 90's but wrote it off as a JP ripoff cashing in....which appears to be far from the case.

I really enjoyed it, but what stuck out to me was how much of his own book (this one) he borrowed from when he wrote Sphere. I read Sphere first, many years before reading Andromeda Strain. So when I read it, it felt so familiar.

 

[Arkam]

I also read Sphere before this. Though it was quite a few years ago (maybe 10-15?) and wasn't one of my favorites. Pretty sure I read it right after Congo and was a bit let down so it didn't stick too much. So might be a good thing that I dont remember too much when reading this one.

 

[Arkam]

Carnosour by Harry Adam Knight

As soon as I learned this existed, I knew I had to read it. Immediately I ordered a copy from Amazon. And to my mild surprise (but not disappointment) I received a copy that had been printed the day after my order. Apparently the publisher doesnt keep them in stock and has a print to order setup.

So I was interested in the book because one of my favorite books is Jurassic Park and this supposedly had a very similar premise.... but published six years earlier. So of course I had to read and see how Crichton's work compared and if he 'borrowed' any pieces.

- Some spoilers below, so dont read if you plan to read Canorsaur (or Jurassic Park) for the first time -

Spoiler: Possible spoilers

So first the comparison. Is it better than Jurassic Park? In its totality, no. Jurassic Park has a lot more to it than just teh story about genetically created dinosaurs running amok. It is filled with a copious amount of philosophy, told through the diatribes of Dr Malcom. It also goes in depth on all the science and tech (like all Crichton books). But when it comes to readability, Carnosaur wins hands down. First its a shorter book. Second since it doesnt take those deviations in focus and has less than half as many characters, so its a much more straight forward tale.

Did Crichoton borrow? I have to say yes. The core premise is a rich dude using dinosaur genetic material by applying it to chickens. VERY similar to JP's use of frogs. Instead of getting the material from fossilized amber, they get it from bones that have not been fully fossilized (like one found in bogs). Then here are the dinosaurs that re created. In Carnosaur they recreate a Tarbosaur (a T-Rex), some Deinonychus (raptors), Dilophosaurus (the "spitter") and a few others. But those three carnivores are the main focus...just like in Jurassic Park. And Canosaur (just like JP) makes the Deinonychus (raptor) larger than fossil records indicate.

It also starts the same way with a single Deinonychus (raptors) killing long before the "park" is discovered. And like JP there is a park, that due to the malicious actions of one person, it fails and the dinosaurs get loose and kill a bunch of people. You have the Tarbosaur (T-Rex) chasing a fleeing car carrying injured protagonists ... And probably a dozen more parallels. Its in no way the same story as they tell very different tales with significant deviations, but the overlapping ideas do raise an eye brow.

And there are scenes from the book that were lifted by the JP films. Like so similar that I am picturing the films' scene in my head while reading. So even if Crichton swears he never read Carnosaur, the film writers absolutely did.

Overall I think it was a very good book. It is a little more in the horror genre than Jurassic Park, but not too much (as JP was dark at times too), and it does have some bits of sexuality among the characters. But it all works fairly well and keeps the reader invested til the very end. And it is a fun ending! Its a crime this book is so unknown and gets so little exaltation. Highly Recommended!

 

[DragonsBen]

I've been reading How to Think Like a Roman Emperor by Donald Robertson. I was looking for an introduction to stoicism and saw this recommended across the board. Very interesting and enlightening so far, Aurelius' teachings seem particularly applicable to the modern world in which people seem increasingly unable to think about things logically and with reasoning rather than acting on emotion.

 

[Rock And Roll]

Read Under The Volcano by Malcolm Lowry. Was not a fan. Whole premise is about a dude on a bender so it's written from the drunks perspective. It's pretty long and boring. Needed to be trimmed down substantially.

Started Scoop by Evelyn Waugh and to my surprise, it's pretty enjoyable. Clever writing and surprisingly funny.

 

[Arkam]

Burmese Days by George Orwell

This would be my 6th Orwell book. Most I have rather enjoyed (except A Clergyman's Daughter). Burmese Days falls somewhere in-between like/dislike. On the one hand the story is compelling and draws the reader in. But at the same time, I think I missed the point of it all? Usually I can pick up Orwell's themes with ease, but this one had escaped me.

Am I suppose to have disdain for the British Empire? The follies of men? The Inherent friction of differing cultures? That women are whores (in many ways)? That no good deed goes unpunished (and that bad deeds are rewarded)?

So in short, it was a fun read. Just don't expect to leave with any lingering perspective shifting ideas.