Ethics and the Law of One.

The video today:

Youtube: Melissa Dougherty: I went to a psychic fair, it was NOT what I expected. August 7th 2026.

https://youtu.be/btihYK4wWbE?si=ZK8-bRtGv5Ohz7jX

Firstly, before I go into this. I want to say that I will not, and would not, seriously engage with this woman. I feel that if I were to I would have strong ideas and would engage and debate like men do. Whereas, this is a soft creature that you do not do that with. I mean, technically writing in a blog I might bring some points in that would be confrontational. But it will be in the style of explanation and thoughts. Not opposition. 

The kind of person I would engage with seriously is someone like Ryan Gable. Who I wrote about before. I covered his Law of One video critique but I covered it barely. I have an affection for skeptics since Steven Cambian at Truthseekers, kind of singlehandedly saved me from David Wilcocks schizophrenic ramblings.

This person though, Ryan Gable, is not a good natured skeptic. He is not doing a legitimate search for truth in this area. I believe he is making bad faith and stupid arguments and I covered him very softly before. But I think I should do a more strongly opposing video. He has made certain claims in the notes I have made so far. Such as the idea that 'you have to be super high to write this stuff', which he says at 20 minutes. This was a comment I put on his video.

On the Law of One main website. They do give an explanation of that statement in session 1.0: We communicate now. We, too, have our place. We are not those of the Love [density] or of the Light [density]. We are those who are of the Law of One. This was what they wrote: The word “density” was added here to add clarity to what we believe to be Ra’s intended meaning. The fourth density is the density of love and understanding. The fifth density is the density of light. Ra is of the sixth density where love and light are unified. https://www.llresearch.org/channeling/ra-contact/1 So in the way they see things, the contact sees things. There is a very specific set of densities. Which is repeated a lot throughout the text itself. And they wanted to clarify which one they were from. Even though the statement didn't make a lot of sense when it was first heard. From my understanding I am fifth density, so my signature, if this were the way people were commonly speaking would be: "I am not of the love, I am of the light, I am not of the Law of One".

There we go. I think that is youtube formatting. I have directly referenced what he was complaining about in the Law of One. What happened? He deleted the comment. In about half an hour. Since he has proven bad will, I think that necessitates a more thorough response.  

Anyway, Melissa's video was; well, it had a female easy going style of everything just flows. She talks about talking with an 'aura reader', who is like a classic Law of One type of person. Like the people at Bring4th. Just a messy, not committing to anything kind of person. You bring up a concrete issue or problem you have, even linking it to the Law of One texts. And they. very disrespectfully, ignore you. Just won't engage.

The woman Melissa was talking to would make no commitment that there are things like objective moral rules. The interaction ended with the woman apparently accepting Melissas idea that Jesus is the answer to all these things. Which of course, she just went passive and let Melissa say whatever she wanted, so Melissa says she feels good, but the womans views are unchanged because nothing really gets her. She is totally numb and dissociated; hiding behind a commitment to mysticism and the Law of One.  

It is a very female mindset not dissimilar to a communist. Or the female judges letting criminals walk free to kill again because of some vague attachment to a sense of spiritual egalitarianism. 

I wanted to say, firstly, to praise the video a bit; then what I think of as moral rules. Or how I would answer some of these questions - moral rules and such. Also, how I would handle this 'aura reader'. And then I will move onto challenges to Melissas position. She mentioned at a points he asked the aura reader if they knew the bibles claims. 

So firstly, Melissa offered a very intelligent, in my view, deconstruction of what was wrong with the aura readers views. She makes a case that ethics are objective. If the aura reader was talking to someone doing evil things would she offer any opposition to this? The aura reader said something like everyone is on their own journey. So Melissa said... OK the Nazi's then? Were they objectively evil? They believed they were doing things that were good, at least they stated that. Are the Nazi's on their own journey? Or are they in need of moral correction? The woman offered a kind of vague non answer. 

What I would have said, is what way do you vote? We know, 100% this aura reader woman votes leftist. Then I would say, OK, so you believe we should give infinite resources to immigrants as part of the Law of One to show compassion and such and you are willing to vote, do an action in the real world, to support that? To which she would agree. I would then say that this is against the Law of One. Because it is initiating violence on the taxed native citizens. Many of which were extremely angry when they heard about USAID and recounted stories of not being able to afford their kids food. 

It is against the Law of One and evil in itself to tax said citizens. The taxed citizen is of equal worth to the migrant under the Law of One. Also, women like this are supporting an extremely violent oppressive government regime. Which they are not karmically free of, in my opinion. 

She would ignore this too of course. But this would hit more of a nerve than any of what had happened previously. They sometimes offer an "apology" at this point, for any distress the discussion caused or something like that. But what the apology is is a moral highgrounding apology. "I am sorry you feel that way" (the implication being I am sorry you were unable to accept my more enlightened point of view). I would not accept the apology and inform the woman that her offering it has caused me further offence. It is directly condescending.

Nevermind really. Escalating the conversation to a confrontation might have made a bit more of an impact, but it wouldn't have changed anything. These leftist women sometimes get raped and carry on supporting the left. Women in Sweden have been known to accuse white men because they do not want to be racist by saying a refugee raped them. 

But that is where I would go with the ethical question.

Stefan Molyneux would no doubt hate this. But I see Stefan Molyneuxs Universally Preferable Behaviour as very consistent with the Law of One. One of its first principles is that of universalism, which states that moral laws apply in every circumstance. There is more to it than that but I can't go into this for length reasons. One of the relevant principles is that moral laws are applicable to all situations. We cannot have exceptions in moral laws meaning that they apply sometimes and not others. Because if they apply some times and not others, then there is another thing that supersedes them. Likely a persons will. If their is another persons will superseding them. Then that is more important than the moral law. If it is more important than the moral law. Then the application of the moral law is one of control, not morals.

This applies to a great deal of things and it opens up the conversation to a lot of deconstruction. The government bans violence in its citizens but commits violence, as an example. God in the Old testament, bans murder, and yet he murders. 

Then I would turn on Christianity. The 'claims that the bible makes' and such as she referenced. I don't know specifically what this woman believes. But in my view, mainstream Christianity does not have a leg to stand on.

Even though I am kind of Christian, as in, Christian enough for my own definition. But not from a mainstream Christians definition. I am also critical of Christianity and have a little knowledge on these areas built from people like Aaron Abke, Paul Wallis and Bart Ehrman. 

My essential position and point on the bible is that it is extremely inconsistent. That there is good evidence of it being changed and of non canon books having more validity. That Christianity itself relies on an appeal to authority fallacy. That Christianities moral precepts involve forcing others to submit to its rules when they might not believe in God, and that a true moral system has to be secular in order to get around this issue. 

But like I said, I don't know this womans positions so do not know what conversation I would be facing in this position. 

Anyway, that's all I have for the moment! 

Working with catalyst.

I wanted to do a kind of run down of my understanding of the balancing process given in the Law of One. Understanding (mind), acceptance (body) and forgiveness (spirit).

I am a kind of angry resentful person. And I do not disagree with that part of myself. Of that way that I have become. Following the Law of One. A person experiences "catalyst". Which is that stuff out in the world that we use to change ourselves. So, we see in the world there is something to strive for and we strive for it. Changing ourselves in many ways, including an increase of discipline. 

That is an example of positive catalyst. It could be something more negative. Like we get bullied or something. Each catalyst can give us more positive or negative tendencies and specific weight is given, in the archetypal system. For when we respond to positive catalyst with negative tendencies and vica versa. 

I have started reading Nietzsche recently and I am very happy doing so. It feels incredibly profound. Feels like it is just 'something else'. I wanted to get his work for an understanding of some basic concepts of his that I have thought over. But, I feel now I have the book that it is gaining entry into another thing completely. 

One of the things he says, not even in the text yet, it is excerpted in the introduction. That he dislikes the binary between true - false, good - evil etc. He says that it is very possible that something in between these poles will be life affirming and good. This reminds me of something I have recently begun to feel and understand. I have realised that seeking truth 'in every area', is a bit too much of an energy drain. It came to me as I was thinking over these mental health issues that people have. Autism etc. I had originally believed that a lot of these people were kind of making it up to cover for hedonism and the negative psychological effects of a bad conscience. This was partly from Stefan Molyneux. I do not recall if he said this precisely. But I think I got the idea from listening to him. 

Eventually though I realised, when confronted with people that strongly believe the mental health reasoning, and various other things I have experienced. I realised it doesn't really help me to think of it like this. Whatever the ultimate truth of these peoples issues are. It is easier for me to just accept what they say. It doesn't effect me. I am not going to feel sympathy for their mental health issues or make a whole load of concessions I wouldn't otherwise make. But the additional energy to attempt to prove to myself either that these are legitimate, or that they are spiritual problems. Is not something worth my time; and life will eventually sort that kind of stuff out anyway. As society changes and people improve and add more light to situations like this. 

The reason I took the circuitous route to explain that last paragraph. The idea of accepting a maybe lie, or accepting 'confusion' as a kind of easy way out sometimes. Is that it is directly relevant to my spiritual movement forward I believe. I will have to explain something else first then come back to this.

My current catalyst.

I have travelled a very strange route in this life. As I have explained here before. I have an illness, a physical illness. Which is kind of subtle and invisible. And causes massive amounts of stress and even schizophrenia through effecting brain chemistry. There has been better medical technology recently. Which means for the first time in my life I am kind of clear headed and normal. I can carry a conversation without going off into some weird, highly alienating, thing. 

Nevertheless, my catalyst. I.e. the information I have received from the world. Is a certain way. I have been socially excluded from every single social group I have ever been a part of. I had a group of male friends for a while in school. Before the medical situation really progressed. I was a bit odd and overly stressed then. But it started to grow really bad from my mid twenties on. 

I worked in a supermarket as my first real job. I was completely socially excluded from everyone in the entire, very large, supermarket. They arranged entire outings strategically ostracising me. I then went to Uni. Where I neither got on nor didn't get on with anyone there. I then volunteered in a Buddhist cafe. I then worked in a fast food place, and office for two years, back to fast food, this time with people that could barely speak English, because the bullying at the office was so intense, then I worked in a call centre. 

At each one of these. Every single one. I was socially ostracised. The call centre actually this was not the case technically. They were very big on arranging outings after work for everyone. But I was kept in a team where the only thing I could do was work because the work load was heavier. Even though everyone else managed to socialise in that team (although no one was in the team more than six months while I was permanently there!) I just worked. But outside that. I was socially ostracised everywhere I went. Like, people going for entire social events deliberately excluding me and only me.

This was NOT the extent of the social ostracism. Even in other things in my personal life I have also been ostracised. 

Like I said, and I am also bringing this point out for a later point. While there may be very good reasons for this. I could have said or done things weird that got me socially ostracised at these places. My experience is that I have been socially ostracised. That is the catalyst that I have had. Now my emotional reactions to the world are that of a person that has been socially ostracised constantly. 

A natural dynamic. 

In the world I notice a pattern. If I am in contact with someone. I try and put my best foot forward. My best foot is that I have found value in the kind of things I blog about. The constant pains of the social ostracism has driven me more strongly into spirituality. The amount of catalyst to get me to pray everyday, or at least intend to. Was not small. 

Now, I think I have adapted so well to these things that I am unrecogniseable to the original person I was who wanted to 'fit in'. I recall in a moment where I had felt socially ostracised in my personal life. An additional example. A friend of mine was meeting up with another friend and I was not only feeling socially ostracised but was starting to go into a kind of psychosis. It is something that was a part of my schizophrenic break in 2014. The pains of all this started to get me that badly. (I have mapped out this single thing being responsible for a lot of my psychosis).

But as I was starting to feel this. Actively getting weird with people. I stared at my human design chart. Something I had separated from a little. And it sorted itself out. I connected to something of myself that is higher, and I was suddenly unbothered with the social event I had been very deliberately not invited to. (The person involved here actually tried to involve me in the future and suffered socially for this in a big way. At least in my understanding).

But it goes even further than this. Now that I am interested in the subjects I am interested in. Now that I have started to carve out a life where I am, basically happy largely on my own, and without these larger social groups. In essence, with enough prayer and meditation, reading the Law of One, now philosophy and the gym. I have become, somewhat immune, it feels to me. Either that or the emotion is suppressed. I do not feel bad if I am not invited and I also, do not want to be invited. The smallest incling of disrespect and I am happy to go home, watch Star Trek, and have an early night. I also have the general tendency to avoid the social situation in the first place. To not want to be invited.

Obviously this does not seem healthy. It is hard to even want to spend time with women (it is anyone really, but I use women as an example because they are seen as desireable, they are important for my "biological need to reproduce"). So I must have destroyed a part of myself in some manner. But I cannot make myself want what I don't want. I cannot afford therapy either. 

Everytime someone does try to interact with me, or I with them. In some manner. I kind of do my best. I provide what I think is a good addition to the conversation. But often, this is discouraged or ignored. If someone talks about xyz and I think Law of One type stuff, or Stefan Molyneux type stuff is useful or relevant. I will talk about it. The person will show a bit of interest. Then not be interested somehow. To forget about it. I might also make jokes. 

Eventually with enough ignoring me from the other person. I have to withdraw. This is obvious. You make a joke and someone takes more than 24 hours to respond. Frequently. Then obviously it is logical to withdraw. Without a casual conversation going over Whatsapp, for example. I cannot then casually say does someone want to meet up? I might even doubt myself and say, perhaps I should not be talking about philosophy with people? But, it is in my human design. Personality Mercury 56.2. Design Mercury 24.6. That is just me, what I am about. Sometimes the world/ people, give us feedback that we should change in some manner. But if what it wants us to change is a fixed attribute like that. There is not much we can do. 

The solutions. 

I have noticed one of the biggest changes in my psychology recently. I think this is due to working out in the gym a good deal. Since I have been working out at the gym. There is just something about all this I have begun to accept. 

For years, especially before I went to the two year office job. I just thought that things were going badly from bad luck. The people in the supermarket were an exception etc. I thought it was super strange I had not been out in a mixed gender group my whole life. Not gone out for a drink with say, three women and three men (including me). That because it was so strange that that hadn't happened. It was liable to happen. 

For a while I went through various crazinesses. But I always kind of desired that. Kind of desire that socialising or something in that entire area. But recently, since the gym, all of a sudden I do NOT desire that. I do not look around when walking in town hoping I can strike up a conversation with some chick. It feels like a deep and fundamental acceptance that that has not happened, and it probably isn't going to happen now. And I'm not sure I even want it to happen!

Since the gym though. I have gone from kind of desiring that and still thinking about it. To not thinking about it at all. Just love of gym. Nothing else.  

During the period Mid - late June to Mid - late July where I temporarily went off Communion. I did feel far more emotionally raw. I made this song:

I have the right to resent you. I have the right to feel,

The sun reveals everything, every little piece of you.

And you are love, maybe poison love,

And I am need, that is true.   

I have not been able to make music for a long time and I do not know why. This song was honest about that angry resentment I feel. Which, it exists for a reason and I don't see a problem with it. Like the song says, I do have the right to my emotions and when I was bullied at various workplaces. It was always women doing it. Every single time. 

Since I have gone back onto Communion though. These kinds of words are not coming. I wonder if it is because part of me wants to make a song with higher, more positive or more complex lyrics? Something meaningful in a different way? 

But to be honest. I don't really know the reason for it. When I went off Communion. I could make a song showing how I really feel. When I am on it. No song is made up. I'm just into playing scales and such. 

Perhaps it is a refinement to make a better song later? One with more of the scales that I am practicing? 

The decline of entertainment media.

It's been six days since my last post. I used to post daily! I suppose from one perspective, it is good that because this is set out like it is. Like, it is not attached to any sort of revenue stream. When I don't have anything to say I don't speak. 

Recently, I have really enjoyed some of the older TV shows I have been watching. Star Trek Deep Space Nine. Watched the entire series. Now onto Star Trek Voyager. Watched a bit of Star Trek the Original Series which might be where I go next. Previously rewatched The Mentalist. Older series. 

I recall watching the first Scream and how good it was. For my birthday I watched Scream 7. It was OK. But I didn't really feel anything watching it.

It brings me to this tweet:

There has been a lot of discussion of this kind of thing. There was a paid article by Adrian something or other. Perhaps Adrian Winters. That showed how this has happened. How a lot of Hollywood writing rooms have gone from 80% to 10% white males. 

It makes it harder to find things to watch on TV because a lot of these things are written by women. And women, as leaders of these kinds of things. Have never produced anything that is obviously interesting to me. These women are likely all liberal as well. Recently, as well, even things made by men, such as 'The Boys'. Is so infected with woke, it is unwatchable. 

Scarpetta is a good example. It has a good vibe of a female investigator going for a serial killer and a serial killer from thirty years ago also used the same tactics. There is a LOT of soap opera kind of stuff in this show. Which, might be OK. I watched it thinking perhaps there would be a payoff. Perhaps really engaging with the characters would be relevant as the plot unfolds. 

But, as it ended. As the plot solved. I realised that the soap opera element of the show was really all it had to offer. The serial killer element was clearly an after thought and even though the show was set up to imply that there would be some great relevance to the thirty year gap and the memories. There was not. It was literally a soap opera with a bit of serial killer stuff involved to engage people. The main character for the Mentalist was in this show to further imply an interesting detective angle. 

Another with a similar issue I just started watching yesterday. But have realised now is also terrible in the same way. I watched either one or two episodes of "Walker". I started watching it and there was again, a subtle serial killer plot happening and an emotional angle that might be interesting, provided it is not the only draw of the show. 

So I look up the reviews on youtube. Universally bad and I found just a single guy with low production quality. A source I can trust. Just a guy. Who literally labelled it "Woker". Then I look up who is running it. A woman named Anna. It will be the same thing. So I am not watching it. 

I think this is the problem that has infected basically all of modern screenwriting. I have watched a bit of Walker, and what is it missing? Being that I am in the category of the kind of person banned from the modern writing rooms? Well, it misses a strong male antagonist. Walker, Jared Padalecki, needs someone that could possibly beat him. It would immediately add that adrenalised, distinctly non soap opera like energy. 

But it is written by a woman, so it will just be an ongoing soap opera. Even shows with a lot of emotional stuff in them. Like Star Trek Voyager, that I am now watching. Produced by Rick Berman. But with a female captain. There is a lot of fairly deep emotional themes. But they don't make the show completely lose direction. 

What this has all added up to is that all modern TV is just kind of dull. Wokeness; liberal, female heavy writer rooms are just filled with a kind of directionlessness. It is hard to describe quite what has gone wrong with modern TV. But it is like the life has somehow been taken out of it.

Scream 1 had a very nail biting tension to it. Scream 7 just... didn't. It had all the pieces technically in place. But it just didn't really grab attention.  

In corners of the internet. Various male personalities have carved out a space for themselves best they can by doing things like writing science fiction ebooks. But none of that creative energy can find expression in the actual media that is available for casual viewing. None of it has any support. I also suspect this same problem is the reason why a lot of fields have a similar 'dullness' to them. That until 'God makes his will known' in a sense. Until there are consequences to the liberals for their many crimes. Things will carry on just as they are. 

Insights into a changing world.

This is an important post to me. But a personal one. I am doing what I often do on this blog. I am using introspection to gain insight into what are effective methods to move forward and improve ones life. 

Recently, I have noted a few times. A strong sensation that something has just "worked out" recently. Just flowed. Things just fit. There is a sense of treading water that I had for a long time that is gone.

Now, there are a lot of physical things that could be. I will likely go into these. But the thing that made the most sense was when I looked into the astrology at the moment. We have been undergoing, in mid - late July; this is the Jupiter - Pluto opposition. 

There are a few more specific transits. Jupiter is very soon to cross my natal Sun. From 4th of August it is in the same hexagram as my natal Sun. When this happened before, sometime in or after August 2014. Was when I had a strong schizophrenic episode. So it feels like this time I have navigated that energy properly. In that, I am not a raving madman on this pass. 

The physical reasons I am better. Well it could be one of many, many things. It could be that I had a surgery (biopsy) and got a result that was an OK one, considering how bad it could have been. Maybe that was hanging over me. It could be that I had a few weeks off jobseeking to recover from it. And jobseeking causes a lot of stress. And it never stops. There are no holidays from jobseeking. Every week you do it. I have been unemployed for more than three years. 

It could be that I met up with friends recently. It could be that I have reached a good point in health things like drinking water and going to the gym. It could be that I have properly stayed away from 'transcient' material and I have got the benefit. As my dreams indicated. It could be that some of the things I have talked about here I have properly applied. I am thinking of the first archetype. The Matrix of the Mind. 

Nevertheless, the transit is very compelling. Between dreams and transits of both astrology and human design. It provides a lot of good insight and direction into things. I have not had a great deal of insights outside those resources.  

Reflections on mental health issues and IQ.

Video for today:

Youtube: Shelby Exists and Makes Stuff: My IQ is 135 and I hate it. July 29th 2026:

https://youtu.be/Zk0Zeqy7q1w?si=jhsYb-omKzhxTelh

OK, so what is my IQ firstly? I don't want to reveal it. But I will say two things. One is that when I did take an IQ test, I have only taken one. In person, with Mensa. I was quite ill at the time and I remember intentionally throwing one of the questions because I thought if I answered it correctly the intelligence services might "get me". The second is that, vaguely, my IQ is somewhere between the top of 'average' IQ. So what is thought of as about 110. And the Mensa level. Which is 130 or 150 depending on the test.  

I have kept that vague enough I think to not claim the status of high IQ in this blog entry.  

Idiot in the comments saying that his IQ is 160. It is mid wits that say this kind of thing. Because mid wits keep saying they have 170 something IQ. People think that 130's is not high. But it is in fact, very high. 

The point of this video I think is not IQ though. Two things I have found recently, one of which is shown in this video. Firstly, there is a kind of myth around that mental health disorders like autism are not a real thing. This woman shows that very strongly. I have known people personally that are well acquainted with therapy culture. That also claim these kinds of mental health disorders, suggesting they are a real thing. I do not take the argument, I can see no evidence of. The idea that mental health disorders are the side effects of evil doing. Whose source is being concealed by the person with the disorder.  

Also, not mentioned at all in the video. But I have been told before by such people that marijuana was the only thing to have solved their autism (or similar). I used to not believe that. Partly this was because of my ongoing experience with passive aggressive stoners. But it is something that I have come to accept as... they tell me that's what their experience is. So I am not going to argue with it. 

I got those two viewpoints partly from Stefan Molyneux. Or I had them anyway and his podcasts confirmed what I thought to me. It is really not consistent with the Law of One to be so resistant of what is obviously infront of a person. To assume that amount of lying. Of course there are things that a lot of people lie about. But there is not enough personal information to oppose the idea that these mental health disorders are simply, as the people that claim them, claim them to be. 

I should not continue to think through if the themes of this girls video are relevant to me. I played it through in my mind but I do not think it is interesting for a blog. One small thing that I have noticed about high IQ people that this woman has mentioned. An incredible speed of motion. I knew one guy who was Mensa level IQ at a fast food place. And he was just so incredibly fast.  

Transits of the day.

It took me a little time to get to what I am going to talk about today. Recently, I have seemed to have gotten things right in relation to spirituality and such. Have been having amazing dreams. Part of the dream guidance I interpreted, at least I think, is that a big part of why I am getting this positive increase in energy and 'flow' is because I have genuinely come away from "transcient" material. 

Which makes it annoying then that the main thing I am thinking about today is doing a run down of the Human Design transits which does link to politics. Links to politics more than I want to. Perhaps I am doing it wrong. Or perhaps that is just part of the great unpredictability of life. 

To begin with. In my personal life, as I just alluded to. I struggled for a long time, when I was less well. In bringing up all sorts of things into my conversations with others that would alienate me from them. Politics was chief among these. I do need to still write up on how David Wilcock types of information perverts the desire towards the sublime that would normally be satisfied by the Law of One. 

I used to bring up all the stuff. To do with Islam, immigration etc. In my conversations with people. Had I not found a reason not to, a practical technical reason, I would probably still be doing it. But since then I have really taken more seriously my study of the Law of One, which talks about avoiding 'transcient' information. 

So, not only am I avoiding getting in discussions and conflicts with people. But I am avoiding even looking into those matters. Even where it is just basically news that I would be looking at. This means, that there is no emotion connected to politics so when I talk to people. Rather than wanting to talk about that stuff but not saying it and having that emotion. Having that need to withdraw to conceal. I can actually not be thinking about it. 

Because I know that eventually, this stuff will come to people via the mainstream media. It does not need to come from me. If it is not in the mainstream media, it doesn't exist for a large part of the population. To the extent these people have to deal with you they will have a great deal of emotion about it that will connect to you. Telling them you were right really just sets them through an unproductive loop. 

The post below reminds me of how I have to act. It feels very comfortable to see it this way:

For optics. We need to just not engage with this kind of thing. Even intellectually. 

Anyway, having said that, I am going to go a bit into politics now:

Human Design Transits:

 

North Node gate 30. 

Recently, I said directly to someone I am close to that is very much someone that will never consider anything non mainstream legitimate. That there was a transit coming soon and that it would bring politically relevant information. Specifically, it will reveal something emotionally relevant, and that has been a pattern for a long time (connection to Pluto in the gate 41). From Saturday 27th of July. But a long ish transit so not necessarily perfectly timed. 

That would be, the North Node in the gate 30. The gate 30 is one that I have found correlated very strongly with left wing beliefs. While the left wing is the homogenised reality. I have found that people with the gate 30 have a deep, powerful emotional core that won't compromise and is attached to leftism. (I theorise the strong emotion can go the other way!) It is the kind of intensity where if peoples feelings get railroaded over, if they are won against. It turns to gossip. I have found people without the gate 30 but that are still left wing; mostly I think for social acceptance. They tend to say things about it but just not care about politics. Over time they forget about it. 

Confusingly. The ones that end up talking about it have a different gate. Usually gate 25. The way the body graph works is we are all really meant to get on and so these things get discussed. But the world being sprawled out and disconnected. This doesn't always happen. 

Anyway, as predicted, but unfortunately not publicly before it happened. The North Node went into gate 30 and we have all this Fauci diary stuff. Fauci before some sort of committee etc. It is potentially the beginning of a serious inroad against the left. There have not been any serious inroads against the left. There have been things happening with Trump. Things that go against the left wing agenda on the global level. But not anything that says that they themselves were wrong. That they may have to admit wrongdoing and that goes against one of the lefts deeply held beliefs. Which is that they are morally perfect, beyond reproach, and everyone else. Trump, Charlie Kirk, Ann Widdecombe. Are the bad ones. 

Uranus in gate 20.

Much of what I am talking about here is altogether too vague. Although personally, astrological transits are fairly unequivocable in my life. (I have daily spent time recently wondering what has changed and I have found it to be the Jupiter Pluto opposition. A strong emotional experience!) When I talk about them in the more general sense. A lot of what can be said and reflected on it is just kind of annoyingly vague. A lot of these thoughts on it will be too. 

Uranus is an interesting transit. I have shown it before to correlate with right wing politics in general. When Trump and UKIP suddenly came on the scene originally in 2012 ish when Uranus entered Aries. Then when Uranus entered Taurus, in the same month. Brexit was officially triggered. 

I think it does correlate with a kind of free market style of inventiveness. Of using a lot of intelligence and details to arrive at a positive conclusion as with music. 

When Uranus was in the gate 8. I got huge insights as to what some of my 'conditioning' was, and how it linked to a schizophrenic episode I once had. To general conclusion. (This links to a sense of homogenisation in the new age world!)

Transiting Uranus in gate 20. I have wondered about this transit for a while. Since gate 20 is the beginning of Gemini. It follows on from gate 8 where I had the insight. These things usually do link in a kind of story. So what happens earlier on with an outer planet links to the story of it's later hexagrams. But, for me personally. I have not found any personal attachment to gate 20. Because I do not have it in my chart. I have gate 1 in my chart linking to the gate 8. But I do not have any of the connections to the gate 20:

This is the human design mandala again. As I mentioned Uranus is a planet of impact. It tends to arrive with right wing politics as one example which sets a neat knife through what a lot of people thought reality was. On the integration circuit it links to gate 35, gate 57 and gate 10. It is a generally very animalistic circuit that is a lot of societies animalism and work ethic, through the 34 - 20. 

So I thought as this impacts so many people. And so many animalistic people. Perhaps the type more inclined to working than thinking about stuff. That there would be a huge impact from this transit.

I have not found that. The only thing I think this could correlate to is Andrew Tate going to jail. Whichever way someone sees it. Whether he is guilty and is carrying the energy of the sexuality of the cam girl business and such. Or whether it comes from the energy of false accusations. Which is a place of female sexual power. Him going to jail. With his following being fairly animalistic. Definitely brings these themes to the forefront. 

Jupiter in gate 31, Neptune in gate 17.

These two I have only experienced personally. I do not have a good idea of how they have shown up collectively.  

I am a manifestor in the human design with the gate 7 hanging. Linking to the gate 31. What I have realised about Jupiter in this gate 31, is that when I talked to a friend recently, he said that when we were young, sometimes because of the way I was, if I wanted to talk about something everyone had to talk about it. That is the kind of insight I might get from the conditioning of the gate 31. Because of the manifestor being like they are. There is a natural sense of leadership that does follow from them. But it is subtle. Or at least it can be and probably should be a lot of the time. 

Neptune in gate 17. Neptune is an extremely subtle abstract energy. It is just for me at the moment in the general conversation points and thoughts. The really far out planets Neptune and Pluto tend to effect everyone I think even if you have no connections. Gate 17 I have been talking and thinking about things like first principles way more. And making quite a bit of headway actually. It is not yet applicable enough to put into the blog. But it is something that is relevant to me. 

Conclusion.

Anyway, that's all I have for today.  

Aaron Abke and Paul.

The amount of energy to just get to this point feels huge. The point of finishing up the last of the three posts I set myself.

I did the Ryan Gable one. Then the Stefan Molyneux one. Now I want to write on Aaron Abke. 

Youtube: dallas: Aaron Abke is wrong about Paul: October 17th 2025:

https://youtu.be/ik9JSnS7D60?si=xYe1uEQVLRg20nY0

I realise as I mention this that it might be better for the readers to have knowledge of where I have been with this. The questions I have had about Christianity and what my faith kind of is. But I am not going to go through that now. So when I talk about this it might seem as though there is something missing. 

This video from dallas. Is covering a previous video by Aaron Abke which I watched and enjoyed and still remember. Not just the factual information but the emotional connection to the information. 

Aaron explained by going through some bible quotes this story of how Paul talks about the disciples. That he called them out infront of each other which is not what you are meant to do. That the story Paul puts forward is a certain one but reading between the lines. This might not be what the situation being described is. It might be in fact that Paul is being unpleasant and the other people in the room are responding as though that is the case.

BUT, as dallas points out. Aaron has strategically quoted here. Not strategically quoted in a way that doesn't matter. Strategically quoted in a way that really changes the story.

What Paul actually says is that he had a disagreement with Peter in Jerusalem. Then he doesn't handle it at the time. He handles it later when Peter comes to Antioch. 

This COMPLETELY changes the story. The narrative that Aaron is putting forward.

Also, looking more at what is being said. Before I was under the impression that it was just a conversation and disagreement between peers of a sort. But the actual text when fully quoted is to do with the disciples having a kind of in group preference for those whom are "circumcised". Whereas Paul wants to make clear that even those uncircumcised are 'worthy of Christs love in a sense'. 

This, along with things I have found from other more pro Paul perspectives. Definitely adds a positive dimension to Pauls teachings. 

Take away:

When you are involved in this much abstraction. Which is inevitable with any serious look at biblical sources because there is a LOT of history and context in a lot of the literature. I often find I have to come back to what I know. That I cannot gain any kind of clarity in the mess of such things. Christianity was kind of secondary in my life. It feels like I am trying to get a foothold in it. It is very relevant, and very powerful. But it doesn't quite make sense at the same time. 

What I have valued then, what I fall back on. Is that logically makes sense to me and the Law of One. 

Listening to an Aaron Abke video recently. I decided to stop doing Communion and immediately felt absolutely awful. Like, I just didn't love a lot of the things in life that I know are good for me. I was unmotivated. It was a little bit of a 'death'. 

And Aaron Abke might have been right. It is not clear where the idea of Communion came from but Pauls letters said it before the gospel. Plus, the taking in, drinking, of "holy" material is very much a pagan thing. 

I don't know why it is good though. But I know it is. I do it because it is talked about in the Law of One. Perhaps that is all I need to do. My spirituality is just a trial and error of what works for me. It is also a following of the Law of One. I pray; when I don't, I get ill. So I pray.

This is the same way I feel about most of Christianity. So much of it is just lost and does not make a great deal of sense. I still feel that people that legitimately follow Jesus should be able to energy heal. He told his disciples to do that. They should be able to do it. 

Norse mythology actually satisfies a lot of these same requirements. It has prayer, it has a kind of communion that is done very frequently I think. It does not have Monotheism. Which is heavy in the Law of One. And kind of non negotiable I think. But it does have other things. For instance, it has a list of nine nobel virtues instead of the commandments:

Courage, Truth, Honour, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self Reliance, Perseverence.

It has far less emphasis, perhaps no emphasis. On the pacifist and non violent ways of Jesus. This is a big plus to me. 

Not that this is a serious idea. But it is something worth thinking about I think.