Left Leg Bad Leg Limping King Hephaestos Limping God

lifted garment

left leg = initial naive possibility branching thinking about control and time, having power to steer

https://religion.fandom.com/wiki/Hephaestus

you cant put any weight on your left leg, it cant bear any weight

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 66 Entheogens BTFOd 28:30 –

merry go round

tripppimg along

stumbling over a skyscraper

you can touch the sky with your elastic mind

don’t fall down

– Enjoy Yourself, by Legend:

https://youtu.be/Su5LBwKPKQI

possibilism thinking cant bear any weight

Oedipus the limping king – what is Freud’s lame interpretation that can’t stand up to scrutiny, can’t bear scrutiny?

Max Freakout: Freud gets no respect, but people can take away some weighty ideas from him that bear weight.

Cyberdisciple: I wouldn’t put any weight on it. 😅🙃

Hatsis’s regal claim collapses under the weight when tested, can’t bear any load of scrutiny.

I wouldn’t place any weight on Hatsis’ claim of no msh in Christianity; that claim can’t stand.

When tested, Hatsis’ claim can’t stand up to testing, but collapses under the weight of scrutiny.

The foundation carries no weight, cannot sustain

no basis that can carry the argument

That argument can’t hold up, but collapses under the weight of testing.

there’s no one there to steer

link to my 2016 yahoo thread salamander roasting “dancing man”

The wise man puts his argument on a firm basis that can hold up as a stable basis.

Consider a hypothetical wise man and a fool; wisdom and folly. (Let’s call them Cybermonk & Psychedelic Witch, aka dumber than an ox.)

OMG look what a tiny scene of Lucas Cranach’s painting led to my massive breakthrough! Entire image? compare how I decoded the entire canterbury’s Psalter by starting with John lash severely cropped image of only the mushroom tree number 71 with no surrounding context and I did a pretty fairly thorough Decoding of that tree with no context just by importing my 2016 hypothesis of the roasting Salamander dancing man standing on right leg foot.

not only did I gain the decoding of Canterbury but the benefit flows the other way to it’s always a two-way correlation when the different departments of the explanatory theory cross correlate corroborate each other so also my reward the fact that I was successful at decoding the tree 71 was also served looking the other direction looking back behind me provided the corroboration that I had wanted that I have been looking for ever since I decoded

tentatively the roasting Salamander dancing man in 2016 so if I only have one picture and come up with a hypothesis I can’t really draw conclusions but when I see the same pattern across two pictures now we’re talking now I can cross correlate and increase my proof level B and become more compelling evidence and become stronger Proof by cross interpreting do not do

we take away point when we speak about interpreting one mushroom tree just as Panofsky told us do not interpret one isolated mushroom tree instead interpret the entire set of them and while you’re at it throw in interpreting of all Hellenistic art side-by-side with all Christian art then add in a giant Theory to and all these big things all add up and all cross corroborate each other to reach highly compelling extremely compelling and Proof approaching certainty.

Compare my decoding of the cropped off color blurry no context John lash Hanging and Mushroom tree compared to my black and white Lucas Cranatch’s paintingwhich I’m not sure I thought that the body of the book said that it was that one part of a two part or three part painting and believe it or not I can’t find the original I can’t find a picture of that painting online w

I thought that the body of the book The Power of Myth said that was just one part of a two- or three-part painting

I can’t find a picture of that painting online

in other words the breath of explanatory power breath the broad breath of explanatory power makes one interpretation better than the other interpretation which only has narrow parasol victory explanatory power

Given two competing Interpretations, the more compelling interpretation is going to be the smaller, more elegant theory, that explains a broader range of things.

How the 2013 breakthrough was received and signaled and signal recognized: three anomalies, all regarding {branch}:

Eve holds onto a branch – that’s an anomaly signal.

There is a branch instead of fig leaf in front of her – that is an anomaly signal.

There is a stag with branching antlers behind her – that is an anomaly signal behind her branching legs.

This artwork is absolutely explicit: it might as well have the Bat-Cave sign on it that says “branching equals meaningfulness”.

Just like how the other day I had a big mental headspace reconnection per the conceptual revolutions book, when I stopped seeing mushroom tree branches as “meaningless anomalies and random flaws”, and instead recognized them as the very carrier of the meaning – that changed everything.

In terms of the book Conceptual Revolutions, my recognition of the meaningfulness shifted the whole- that recognition re-contextualized the mushroom trees; a wholesale recontextualization happened.

Eve is standing on rock.

Cranatch painting b/w in conjunction w fritz graf’s aesthetic cover:

jason, Python guarding golden apples of immortality in tree in garden of the Hesperides, non-branching vine tree, sacrificed ram golden fleece, Athena

April 5, 2022 Egodeath Mystery Show, I announced I think a new point about the above from Canterbury:

The sword is coming from inside; he is stabbing his traditional {wound in the right side} from inside of his body pushing outward.

the “control-seizure vulnerability in the {right side}”

perceiving and comprehending the nonbranching worldline of control thoughts pre-existing, is the {spear in the side that kills the king / steersman}.

lifted garment

7:42 am apr 5 2022 doh just noticed lift left leg

The fool erects his argument position entirely on a false basis which collapse when put under the weight of testing.

both feet down God dances you on clouds on both feet when lifted garments, Jesus and Sophia

Amanita is the Fools’ Gold of entheogens.

In Egodeath Mystery Show Episode 99c, Eadwine gives the field of entheogen scholars a severe tongue lashing.

We must put all efforts on psychologically jettisoning, repudiating, and abandoning Amanita, except to frame it as, we’re going to just turn it into a sign; we’re gonna turn it into nothing but a pointer; a symbol of what it wishes it could be, which is Psilocybin, including Re-dosing-Psilocybin.

My official interpretation, as the leading entheogen scholar and the top theorist of the intense mystic altered state:

The Plaincourault branching-message Amanita tree represents Amanita – where Amanita is fully correctly and truly recognized for what it actually was thought to be:

Amanita is a sign, an indicator, a pointer to Psilocybin.

Amanita is a curiosity, a sideshow; and it was understood as such, and everyone who ever went on a mushroom hunt and brought back the good kinds of mushrooms and the bad kinds of mushrooms, there was no uncertainty about this: obviously the Amanias are for desperate fallback that you don’t want.

The object of desire and the benchmark is certainly recognized to be Psilocybin.

Everybody understood that the benchmark – no contest at all – is Psilocybin – that’s why all mushroom trees are depicted as Psilocybin.

To prove that that’s a fact: the exception proves the rule:

There is only one branching-message Amanita tree, and that is Plaincourault, which is deviant, abnormal, atypical, an exception.

Amanita stands in the same subservient pointer function, a mere pointer to something greater than itself, exactly the same as the branching-message Mandrake tree of the Montecassino manuscript, with its *borrowed* non-branching message that’s borrowed from Psilocybin mushroom trees, bows down in imitation of what it wishes it could be.

The Psilocybin-hearkening Mandrake tree, which is in the double painted repetition scene that appears twice in the Monte Cassino Manuscript, Mandrake is pretending it is Psilocybin; giving tribute.

Amanita gives tribute to Psilocybin.

The branching-message Amanita tree of the Plaincourault fresco, with its *borrowed* non-branching message that’s borrowed from Psilocybin mushroom trees, bows down in imitation of what it wishes it could be.

The Plaincourault fresco is Amanita bowing down in tribute to the incomparably greater, one and only benchmark, Psilocybin.

Redosing-Psilocybin is the King of Entheogens 👑, by a long mile.

Greek mythology was invented in the context of the mixed-wine banqueting rounds of mixed wine served in saucer cup kylix with mythology painted on them.

Greek mythology comes specifically from redosing Psilocybin.

Everyone knew, and everyone knows, and everyone today knows fully well that amanita is fourth-rate.

As I said, fifth-rate.

To repeat myself: sixth-rate.

Everybody knows this.

Absolutely nobody wants Amanita.

AMANITA IS FOR LOSERS

PSILOCYBIN IS FOR WINNERS

– in drug policy reform, historical precedent for our Freedom of Religion, and in entheogen historical scholarship.

No one actually wants Amanita, any more than anyone wants to drink urine, because that’s what Amanita is all about.

Amanita is nothing but a beautiful curiosity, and it is its proper role in the light of clear-cut truth, the proper role of Amanita is to point to the real deal, which is Psilocybin.

I officially publish here my interpretation of the Plaincourault fresco: it is a branching-message tree that represents Amanita giving honor and giving tribute to the real thing, which is Psilocybin.

All of the mushroom trees, as a rule, are Psilocybin, *not* Amanita – and not Mandrake.

Everybody understands this.

This is my proof,

This is my battle flag.

This is my battle cry.

This is my allegiance.

This is the team I am on.

this is my philosophy of life:

Everybody knows that Amanita is highly undesirable compared to Psilocybin, which everybody knows is highly desirable.

The situation could not be more black and white, plain and clear, clear-cut, and very simple:

On a scale of 1 to 10, everybody rightly and correctly gives Amanita one 1 of 10.

Everybody rightly and correctly gives Psilocybin 10 out of 10.

Everyone knows that; you know it.

Don’t let any witches confuse you about this any more than you would let a witch persuade you that the deliriant hallucinogen, Mandrake, is the equal of Psilocybin.

In the Montecassino Manuscript in both scenes which show in exactly parallel a Psilocybin tree and a Mandrake tree, we all know which tree is mimicking the other and paying tribute and giving honor and tribute to the other one:

It is the Mandrake tree bowing down and giving tribute and giving honor and serving as a pointer to point to the benchmark, which is everywhere clearly understood to be Psilocybin, of course.

The Montecassino, borrowed branching-message Mandrake tree (doubly portrayed, in both scenes) is crystal clear on what the benchmark is:

The benchmark, obviously, everyone knows the benchmark is branching-message Psilocybin trees; definitely not branching-message Mandrake trees.

Graduate Level Mystery Religion Hierophants Clinic Session Guides Mix the Wine

Egodeath Mystery Show episode 100b ~55:00 poses a big question for the ⚡️ hubristic modern science braggarts who claim already that they are greater than the mixers and servers of mixed wine kraters in kylix saucers with images of Jason Python vine tree & Demeter and the Madness of Heracles driven by the snubbed godess to pile up the banqueting furnature to light on fire and sacrifice his future progeny

🔥🍾🍸🪑🔥⏳👶🛏🥣🍄🕰👶🔥

WHAT SAY YOU, MODERN SCIENCE CLINICIANS, PROFESSIONALLY LICENSED SESSION GUIDES??

https://www.bing.com/search?q=madness+of+heracles

What is the “interpretation” given by the four derby teams re: each of these trees?

Interpretation Teams

The Monks -> The Ardent Advocates

The Salvation Salesmen

The Witches

Dr. Secret

Mushroom trees do not represent mushrooms; rather, mushroom trees represent Psilocybin mushrooms communicating a transformed mental model as and experience of non-branching and a new, stable form of control after being made to relying on the non-branching model of time, possibility, and control.

Branching-message trees normally are Psilocybin trees with added branching features and branching imagery and cut branches features or imagery.

Deviant, atypical exceptions are Amanita tree, mandrake tree, or photorealistic tree.

Eustace Window Pilzbaum Pairs Clover Pairs Water Feet Problem Child Mountain Valley

Serpent with Legs Canterbury

Plaincourault

Brinkmann Y Tree of Knowledge

Canterbury tree 71

Cranach tree in Power of Myth

John Rush – Moses’ Y branching trees

Mandrake tree – Manuscript Double Image of Parallel

Jason Serpent Kylix Vine Tree with Athena

Tree: Roasting Salamander Dancing Man in Bestiary

Heading

During Egodeath Mystery Show Episode 100 last night, I formed the phrase “branching-message tree”, which nicely connects back to the later art by Cranach, in which Eve knows about branching vs nonbranching, which knowledge she communicated to me in the great breakthrough of Thanksgiving week 2013; that was my great breakthrough number two, as I have designated.

See my photograph here at this website of the black-and-white page of Joseph Campbell’s book where I have handwritten date timestamp at which the branching message tree communicated to me the great breakthrough

My receiving of Cranach’s branching message also was communicated side-by-side via the Hellenistic art of Jason serpent vine tree Athena on the cover a Fritz Graaf book photograph at this website.

I think at the same webpage as my photograph of my handwritten notes within Joseph Campbell book

What is not there is the cover of the Joseph Campbell book.

What is there is a photograph of the cover of Fritz graph book Greek myth and a photograph of the black-and-white Cranitch portion of his painting with my notes written on it ; handwritten date time stamp to know the exact time at which I had a great breakthrough number two.

My January 11, 1988 great breakthrough #1 was that the real nature of ego transcendence (against the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology / Wilber) is loose cognitive association to transform the mental model to block universe with pre-existing control thoughts.

My great breakthrough number 3 was November 17 +/- a day, 2020: I decoded mushroom tree number 71 balancing and hanging initiates in Great Canterbury Psalter.

My Idea Development pages eg 1-11 here at this site have many dates/time stamps as I proceeded to decode the top row of that panel of the Great Canterbury Psalter.

salamander roasting partial decoding , of Right Leg = eternalism stable control around 2016, decoded msh tree 2020/21

For all practical purposes, I received the salamander roasting dancing man image from Hatsis’ article, and I decoded at least the “standing on right foot” aspect around 2016.

I tentatively decoded some aspects of the salamander roasting image in 2016.

Find “salamander” at egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com to see how far I got in decoding the salamander roasting back then in 2016, because I must have known about fire, that fire is light, which transforms the mental model.

In 2020, I finished decoding the salamander mushroom tree image, especially on how the straightened salamander after roasting was able to contrast himself against the branching tree.

We have non-branching snake contrasted against branching mushroom tree, which I decoded in the era November 2020 – February 2021, decoding on the tree itself and not focusing as much on the dancing man, but matched with Dionysus’ lifted garment per John Rush.

Standing on the right foot equals comprehending the contrast between the non-Branching snake versus the branching mushroom tree.

Decoding flows two ways between two different branching tree images: first I decoded the Salamander image, concentrating on the right foot decoding, then I applied that hypthosis four years later to decode Canterbury’s branching, non-branching, L & R feet & hands.

I proved that the dancing man mushroom tree is proved thereby to be mushrooms, by now reimporting or back-importing or maybe “cross-importing” my decoding from Canterbury, which the salamander image right foot hypothesis enabled decoding.

Through decoding Canterbury tree #71, I have proved that every branching-message mushroom tree by all the artists all of the hundreds of them are hereby proved to be psilocybin mushrooms across Panofsky’s entire type (Including the lone Amanita branching message mushroom tree so not all trees depict Psilocybin even though they all are based in the Psilocybe and Revelation and they serve to communicate and reflect that.

somewhat against Panofsky, not all mushroom trees are the same, because they’re all psilocybin except for Plaincourault

and theres a Mandrake pair exception as well in Montec.

And in Cranatch’s Eve painting, we see no psychoactive plant explicitly indicated, but only a photorealistic tree, serving to communicate the same message I’ve psilocybin state-based experience of non-branching as the condition for reaching stable control in the Psilocybin altered state of loose cognitive binding.

I have proved it for the entire category of all mushroom trees including the salamander roasting dancing man in agreement with my other entheogen scholars before me, Samorini, Bennett and Irvin, I have proved that their identification of the bestiary’s mushroom tree as mushroom is correct.

I have proved that their *identification* ( or inarticulate thumbs up on that “yes it is a mushroom” vote, sans Transcendent Knowledge comprehension of the carried message of nonbranching/ per eternalism model ) is correct ; however, they have not done any actual interpretation.

Dr. Brown needs to raise the criteria for so-called “interpretation”, or differentiate between mere identification assertion (“it’s a mushroom”) vs. adequate interpretation of the message of non-branching and conditional control stability if you adopt as your basis the non-branching model of time, possibility, & control.

The only way to have a sound interpretation that really is an appropriate & adequate type of “interpretation” in the strong sense, in the broader sense, you have to have to have an adult level of interpretation indicating comprehension, and not just a stupid thumbs up vote sans comprehension that “yes it is mushroom”;

you have to descend from the land of the gods, at which point you not only achieve merely certainty that this art depicts a mushroom, but you also have wisdom, gnosis, satori, enlightenment, revelation, unveiling, making mind perceptible, transmogrification, completion of initiation, regeneration, salvation, etc.

to prove the little point – that the mushroom tree represents a mushroom – in fact it does not just represent mushroom; it represents the principle of non-branching, which is ultimate profundity,

you have to comprehend all about non-branching for stable control, and only then you have proof that the entire set of branching-message mushroom trees, every one of them is represents and is equal and in fact symbolizes we have proved that the motif of the branching message mushroom tree symbolizes none other than transcendent knowledge.

Only then can you come down from the heavens and prove the seemingly trivial or small upward thumb that “yes this is mushrooms”.

I have proved that anomalous branching imagery on a mushroom tree specifically represents knowledge of psilocybin changing the mental model to the non-branching model.

I know that it is mushrooms for a fact, because it has anomalous branching imagery, combined with other motives from this cluster including standing on right foot fire and non-branching or salamander placed side-by-side with the branching mushroom tree – the cluster of typically ASC associated features proves that it is a psilocybin msh.

QED, mofos!

I need to read my 2016 decoding of the dancing man how reconstructed

did I use the mushroom to figure out that his right foot I feel that I use the contacts of mushroom so here’s how I read it back then I did not probably have a good reading of the branching of the Mushroom tree but the sheer existence of mushroom indicated to me standing on the right foot would probably mean your basis of control and so given that you have 2 feet it maybe it was a hypothesis in 2016 maybe

here’s how I generated the hypothesis but note that that hypothesis was held gently and

I did write about Hephaestos the god of the smith of the underworld the limp God limping guard with one leg and … as of today and as of November 2020 I can tell you with more certainty than in 2016 but I probably posted it which leg of the guard is limp it would be the bad leg is the left leg your left leg is your bad leg because it is your possibility Branching premised basis for personal control which is unstable so a bad leg bad leg

there’s a little bit new there this is today is April 4 2022 , so the above paragraph has a little bit of new , maybe one or two Paul Thagard connection points that I get granted there. However if I go look at the archives I probably posted that all those points in 2016 when I first decoded that image that I got from Tom Hatsis the salamander Roasting dancing man image but I guess what’s new definitely is a stronger feeling I I speak now with the great certainty see that’s the difference in 2016 I posted that as a tentative hypothesis but now in contrast I state that with a very routine matter of fact certainty everybody knows his left like it’s a bad leg of course your left leg is your bad like everybody knows that just like everybody knows that a branching Message Mushroom tree means psilocybin switching from unstable Branching premised control model to reality-based nonbranching premised control model to get control stability in the altered state from Psilocybin, duh

you’d have to be a fool not know that, but anyone who is wise knows the above

anyone who has wisdom and is no longer foolish

like foolishly declaring that these mushrooms aren’t mushrooms, the same mushrooms which have left and right foot imagery and which have anomalous branching features which prove and definitely indicate that they certainly are Psilocybin mushrooms.

but identifying them as Mushrooms is kind of the small story that’s the cat stuck in the street in a tree story the real story is cat stuck in a tree leads to enlightenment and revelation and wisdom and knowing all things becoming one of those on the inside becoming like god so you become like a God and know all things and then Tom ask you is it a Mushroom by the time you can answer definitively yes

The question feels almost like it’s been transcended and becomes kind of unimportant in a way by the time that you’re able to prove that yes obviously of course

the Tom Salamander picture might as well have big text on it that says “Psilocybin Mushroom” ; that is how strong the indicators are

this is the language but Tom like entheogen scholars is illiterate so far, or has been illiterate of this, which is the standard coherent language

we consistently decode and receive the message coherently intelligently consistently transmitted and received and labeled

The tree in the salamander image, because if it’s the image depicts the genre-standard themes of based on / resting on your right foot, and fire (altered state) , and snake compared to the tree that has added branching anomalies, the tree and image scene might as well have a big Bat Cave sign on it that says “Psilocybin Mushroom and non-branching mental model to achieve stable control”.

You simply read the text right off the picture, explicitly communicated in the standard language of ASC pictures.

you simply read the picture: does it have non-branching contrasted against branching?

does it have mushroom Imagery?

does it have standard language of standard themes of right foot stable, left foot powerless?

if so , that is the same as it say you have a spear in a picture with Latin text that reads “this is a spear”.

that is the degree of plain workaday routine certainty that the picture depicts a Psilocybin mushroom, together with the message about branching control and conditional stability, as surely as you can see a three dimensional picture encoded –

But easier because you don’t have to focus your eyes strangely it’s just explicitly labeled this is the language this is how you read the language these things explain what they are by their use of the standard motives like for example the John Rush’s lifted Garment says “loose cognitive association state”.

Read the signs in the bat cave and don’t get hung up on Robin the amanita sideshow minor distraction.

I posted several posts about this in I guess 2016 and I reasoned given that there’s a Mushroom an Tom Hatsis picture and he is the fourth Entheogens scholar to analyze the picture and all three entheogens scholars before him assert that it is mushrooms and he says that it is not and I am the fifth Entheogens scholar to attempt to interpret the salamander image.

but I am so much more than that I am the theorist of Transcendent Knowledge, and so entheogen scholarship is only one of my fields that I have integrated successfully and powerfully.

Against Hatsis, I have proved that Samorini was right about the salamander mushroom tree, and I proved that my colleague Chris Bennett whatever he said is probably right, and I’ve proved that my colleague Jan Irvin is right, and I proved that Hatsis is wrong.

Hatsis status: ⚡️ROASTED⚡️to completion.

the decoding sequence went:

1) decode the right foot of the dancing man then (held as the kind of a weak but sensible hypothesis interpretation awaiting more instances in art to corroborate the hypothesis, which would come four years later, in Canterbury).

2) 4 years later, decode the Canterbury Hanging Balancing tree.

3) use that proof in order to come back to hatsis’ salamander mushroom tree dancing man picture and prove that it to therefore follows the same pattern as canterbury especially tree number 71

given that I proved that Canterbury is Cubensis and I go very deep and also prove the transcendent meaning of non-Branching for stable control.

then I brought that proof and I am right now April 4- fourth 2022 announcing that this constitutes Proof the Thomas Hatsis is picture of the mushroom tree salamander dancing man is hereby proved through evidence combined with reasoning combined with experience combined with Christian art art crossing between multiple pieces of art with some Hellenistic art thrown in there as well Hellenistic.

I am now announcing that this constitutes proof

I have now proved and reasoned out

here is how I have proved that Thomas Hatsis’s picture is definitely confirmed to be psilocybin psychoactive Mushrooms in the salamander dancing man image.

QED

Gaslight that, mofos!! 💪

The mushroom that you see is not a mushroom.

Gas & Light Inc.

it happens that I most vividly really for all practical purposes received the salamander roasting dancing man image from Tom Hatsis by reading his articles and I decode it at least the dancing right foot aspect around 2016 but but really I think I think I believe that I decoded the tree and branching and I don’t know check my post from 2016 to see if I that’s how far I got in decoding the salamander roasting back then because I am I must have known about fire that fire is light which transforms the mental model

plainc fresco I followed Dr. Brown’s lead a couple days ago and made some bona fide interpretation not the stupid thumbs up that it means mushrooms but real adult level interpretation of her Branching rib cage and her bones equal underlying now perceived now perceptible eternalism/ thinking But I also did as soon as I read his book the day that it came out the date of that shipped of course when I read his interpretation or he’s pointing down the correct path he says to us we need to interpret down in this direction and he lead the way a little bit and even back then I started critiquing and expanding on his I started expanding Dr. Brown’s Decoding and then a couple days ago I did more

John lash I believe uploaded Mushroom tree number 71 of Canterbury we call this Canterbury the word canterbury is exactly parallel to the word Plaincourault this is one of our five trees though I really would want to add another tree from John Rush the awesome awesome Moses burning bush why why oh why God Hawaii branching Y shaped Mushroom Trees awesome picture like this webpage could be the top 10 branching Message tr TreesJohn lash I believe uploaded Mushroom tree number 71 of Canterbury we call this Canterbury the word canterbury is exactly parallel to the word Plaincourault this is one of our five trees though I really would want to add another tree from John Rush the awesome awesome Moses burning bush why why oh why God Hawaii branching Y shaped Mushroom Trees awesome picture like this webpage could be the top 10 branching Message Trees

then another extremely valuable Branching Message Mushroom tree is the mandrake tree double picture of double trees double proof of compelling evidence Montecassino manuscript a failed Tom Hatsis Mandrake Trees with Branching defects and mutated failure of a mandrake tree because everybody knows Mandrake does not have a tree trunk side-by-side with my identified by the Carl rock gang on the left but the car working failed to identify Mandrake tree on th right

thethen another extremely valuable Branching Message Mushroom tree is the mandrake tree double picture of double trees double proof of compelling evidence Montecassino manuscript a failed Tom Hatsis Mandrake Trees with Branching defects and mutated failure of a mandrake tree because everybody knows Mandrake does not have a tree trunk side-by-side with my identified by the Carl rock gang on the left but the car working failed to identify Mandrake tree on the

and the Carl rock gang failed to even try to identify as a Mandrake tree on the right

so I am the one who read their published work and identified Mandrake tree on the right

and then a couple days ago had my breakthrough the very highly significant standout breakthrough and very memorable

when I said I am better than Tom Hatsis at identifying Mandrake and then I thought wait a minute hold up hold on wait doesn’t include cut branches

Eureka Branching Message Entheogens tree and then last night April 3 2022 generalized even more “branching message tree” which closes the loop back to Lucas Cranach painter thanksgiving 2013 in the book power of myth by Joseph Campbell and Fritz graph book Greek myths cover art Jason serpent Athena and Charlie Brown pathetic scrawny vine nonbranching tree

and that tree that tree may be a candidate for the top 10 branching message trees

I was disgusted/ dissatisfied/ fed up with entheogen theory Ruck’s gang’s December 2000 book Apples of Apollo – “what the fck is this sht?!”

What I wanted in 2000 is Dr. Jerry Brown’s book The Psychedelic Gospels, not the Apples of Apollo by the Ruck gang paradigm, because Brown says that the middle ages did *not* forget, or 50% forget.

Dr. Brown draws a high Forgot Plot in the middle ages, like I do.

but Carl Ruck and gang draws a 50% down forgot plot in the middle ages.

he’s wrong they are wrong

Dr. Brown is right.

My 2002 division into maximal, Moderate, and Minimal theories was done correctly, but it was done confusingly.

The book in which i’m pull-quoted in big font saying like mixed wine is “mushroom” wine, i failed probably to say “psilocybin” wine:

I discovered last night an opportunity to make it – to replace that model by a clearer model where you have two main branches and then after that, 4 sub- branches.

Last night I made a major historical switch to the 1,2,4 branching morpholgy; see msh tree #123, which will instruct you of this taxonomy.

just as I placed the half-baked entheogens Scholars on the upper half of the Minimal entheogen theory and I called that the “moderate” theory, which (the Ruck theory premises) was ultimately a failure of a theory.

similarly, last night I placed my 2007 version of the maximal entheogen theory on and correspondingly my 2007 version of the mytheme theory on a newly bifurcated, lower branch of the upper main branch.

in 2010, I began the superior version of the mytheme theory by forming the hypothesis tentative hypothesis that branching versus nonbranching was a major important key theme in Hellenistic mythology I I resumed posting to ego death Yahoo group in September 2011.

i used inferior term “determinism” in 2006, superior term “eternalism” in the 2010-2020 era.

I started my ego death theory.wordpress.com website in 2016 but started it for real in 2020 , all informed by –

that entire period was informed more or less thoroughly by grokking recognizing comprehending and developing mytheme and theory of nonbranching ; the contrast between branching versus nonbranching

all of that stands strikingly separate from Egodeath.com 2007 main article website and theory which wholy pretty consistently lacks the word ‘branch’ and probably has the roots of the idea, but does not explicitly have a focus spotlight on the master mytheme of branching versus nonbranching.

also egodeath.com presents a version of the maximal entheogens theory which is the inferior version, as I recognized last night

there a good thing about this realization is I discovered the opportunity to clarify a confusing aspect of my 3-level scheme of maximal /moderate / minimal entheogens theories

In 2002 I only bifurcated the lower, Minimal Branch (into the moderate, Carl Ruck version versus the minimal, T-total abstinence theories)

I did not bifurcate yet the upper, maximal branch of the entheogen Theory of religion.

so my scheme was confusing but also kind of appropriate

my thinking was indeed fuzzy between 2002 until 2007 and indeed,

until last night April 3, 2022, my thinking was hazy or rather ,

until I gave my stern lecture against Amanita the night before last, until that point, my thinking was too fuzzy about the maximal entheogen theory

I permitted too much non-targeted visionary plants that were distracting and inferior and did not have the correct targeted effects of loose cognitive binding

when I became hard-core insistent and we specifically want that-

we specifically demand targeted cognitive loosener Psilocybin, not a bunch of garbage inefficient side effects

as certainly as I reject inefficient meditation I rejected two nights ago Amanita and Acacia and cannabis and on and on and on , all this confusing junk noise garbage , dilution of our energies

a dilution of our focus

a dilution of our mission of

what the hell are we trying to accomplish here

get it straight guys

are we trying to accomplish Amanita

and what are we trying to accomplish Psilocybin

Clearly we need to make up our damn minds and focus on what deserves focusing.

and that is definitely psilocybin and very definitely not Avenita and not cannabis and not acacia Syrian rule and not 10 million other irrelevant distracting confusing weak-ass inefficient unfocused distractions, burdens slowing us down and preventing victory and making us forget what we want.

our greedy attention to the whole set of all entheogens caused us to forget and lose sight of our mission.

we cannot succeed with such a diffuse attention and carrying a confusing burden.

We have to jettison the broad entheogen theory.

reject entheogens; concentrate all of our investment / attn on psilocybin exclusively if we want to succeed at revealing to the world that:

mixed wine equals Eucharist equals Mushroom Trees equals Meditation equals Psilocybin

not all of that inferior vague distracting burden of all the other random effects that do not target loose cognitive association binding like psilocybin does with its excellent and ideal amenable to reducing quality better than One hour or 12 hour substances the six hour is optimal and ideal

the 6-hour duration of psilocybin’s cognitive loosening inherently involves or invites redosing: the rounds of mixed wine at Banquet.

“rounds of mixed wine” – look that up, rounds of mixed wine –

The ancients did not use a round of mixed wine

what the ancient ingested was rounds of mixed wine

you have to have their redosing technique to flatten and broaden the peak window to be efficient ,

to have practical ideal optimal control over the height and duration the intensity of loosening and the duration of loosening to be in control of it

the one entheogen that does that that facilitates reducing on the optimal scale is psilocybin.

not amanita

I always demoted Carl Ruck in 2002 to the upper half of the lower half, but I did not bifurcate the upper half, which is the maximal entheogen theory.

but last night I finally bifurcated the upper half.

I bifurcated the maximal entheogens theory into a superior and an inferior sub-branch.

which is far clearer and wonderfully gives me a place to demote Amanita and demote acacia Syrian Rue and demote cannabis onto that lower half of the upper branch.

so now we clearly see exactly where Carl rock sits; I always placed him sitting balancing on the upper subbranch of the lower branch ; the upper part of the minimal entheogen Theory of religion.

The superior branch of upper branch equals the Maximal entheogen theory, which is the specifically Psilocybin version of the entheogen theory, the upper part of the upper branch.

Newly differentiated from that branch or bifurcated is the lower version of the maximal entheogen theory and corresponding to the inferior version of the myttheme theory of 2007 which fails to grok nonbranching.

I merely said in Carl rocks book “mixed wine is mushroom wine” , that’s bad, I failed to say the superior pronouncement that mixed wine is Psilocybin wine.

below that, we have the superior sub-branch of the inferior main branch we have coral rock’s Moderate entheogens Theory , which is the upper half of the lower half

we could possibly number this branch number two out of four in a one, two, four branching morphology

please see mushroom tree diagram this tree this tree this mushroom tree number whatever out of 75 from the Salter will demonstrate and instruct you on the morphology of the old version of my maximal entheogens Theory break out into maximal moderate and minimal

this mushroom tree will instruct you by its shape

notice how it first the main stem branches into two , and then notice the inferior branch branches into two.

1 of 4 (lowest) Finally the most inferior branch is the t-total abstinence

the total naysayers say that religion has nothing to do with visionary plants

this is the inferior branch of the minimal entheogens theory which contrasts with Carl Ruck but but both it and they are two versions of the minimal entheogen theory.

announcing a new branching of Maximal entheogen theory of religion: this matches how in 2002 , i branched the Entheogens theory into the MIN major branch (t-total naysayers and Ruck gang) & the Max branch.

now apr 3 2022 i discovered the merit of similarly branching the Maximal entheogen th into Superior & Inferior lvls. Psil superior, vague Entheogens /Amanita/ AcaciaRue too diffuse.

The Mytheme theory of Egodeath.com = 2007 main article fails, it is Inferior, it fails to grok non-branching, which is the Master Mytheme.

my beloved episode covers this puzzle of In which way is the Egodeath theory binary vs a kind of seeming trinary?

it was never trinary; it was binary and then the lower branch, only, split into superior (Ruck) versionof the Minimal entheogen th vs the t-total ,

Inferior version of the Minimal entheogen th.

my beloved episode 2021-02-07 Plastic cloud at 47:00 discusses 3 positions as: McKenna lowest Forgot Plot; then Ruck middle Forgot Plot falloff curve; then Cybermonk is highest Forgot Plot.

Against Ruck’s Carl Ruck says we forgot our infusions and historical period before middle ages and by the middle ages we only had 50% remembering of our intelligence; I sharply disagree w Ruck!

I proved that in the middle ages we retained complete understanding of entheogens and that we only forgot our entheogens after the middle ages

so my Forgot Plot is high in the middle ages , but Carl rocks forgot plot is 50% in the middle ages.

RUCK IS WRONG!

important :

I was disgusted dissatisfied fed up with entheogen theory Ruck’s gang’s DECEMBER 2000 book Apples of Apollo – “what the fck is this sht?!”

That book is the reason why in October 2002 I created the Maximal Entheogen Theory Religion and now, April 3, 2022, I define the Maximal Psilocybe Theory of religion.

every time I try to read this book I try to pinpoint: why does this book suck ?

why is this book a massive failure?

in 2002 I was disgusted and I rejected the book the apples of Apollo and I rejected the Carl Ruck paradigm and I demoted him to become the upper branch of the lower main branch

I demoted him to a version of the Minimal entheogen theory called the “Moderate entheogen theory”.

last night I divided, I branched the 2002 through 2007 maximal entheogen theory similarly into 2, where the superior branch of the maximal theory is Psilocybin focused strongly exclusively

for example Mushroom trees in the middle ages and rejecting Amanita firmly

Amanita is strictly honorary only

amanita is only valuable as a pointer to Psilocybin , no more

it is only a symbol

then last night, I divided the Maximal entheogen theory into also a more inferior branch which is where I demote Amanita and Acacia and Syrian Roo acacia with Syrian Roo and random Chris Bennett a Cannabis all get demoted and Mandrake gets demoted into the inferior branch of the maximal entheogen theory of religion.

similarly last night I split the mytheme theory in 2

2007 main article is inferior it lacks nonbranching

egodeath.com lacks non-branching

it sits on the inferior branch

the part of the upper branch where we have a one, two, four branching morphology taxonomy scheme

just as that mushroom expert Paul Stamets discusses the debates about psilocybin genus taxonomy categorization schemes

the word ‘Psilocybe’ is problematic and ambiguous because there are multiple different taxonomy schemes

many mushrooms which contain Psilocybin are not a member of the Psilocybe genus branch.

failure to be maximal in 2002 that’s why I formed the maximum theory

I always placed current rock within a branch of the minimal entheogen theory

I called that upper branch of the lower main branch sotthey “moderate”.

important:

the moderate entheogen theory was always part of the Minimal Major branch; it was never in the middle of a trident morphology

my overall model the inclusive system called the maximal entheogens and Theory was never a trident

The moderate entheogens and Theory was never the middle tine (branch) of a trident Branching.

my scheme when i created the Max entheogens th was never 3 equal branches; it had a primary bifurcation branching into Max vs Min and then Min branched into Moderate Ruck theory vs Minimal entheogen theory

Corrault Ruck’s was always demoted into a sub branch sub branch of the minimal entheogens and Theory because I rejected the coral rock gang paradigm when I was disappointed with the book apples of a polo because it failed to try to succeed I asked why is Carl rock failing to aim high?? I am going to have to contrast against him he is like exoteric esotericism

in an exactly parallel way remember recently I said that popular esotericism is not at all esoteric but it remains Exoteric but now with last night new branching into each one, two, four classification scheme it is clear a clear classification scheme clearer than 2002 confusing break out into Maximo versus Minimal

and then bifurcation only of the lower branch and not bifurcating the upper branch but last night I clarified it and got rid of the confusion by bifurcating the upper branch as well giving a one, two, four much clearer Branching and also that gives a way of demoting Egodeath theory of 2007 with its feeble hazy unfocused

use of the bad word in the Hudgins instead of the good word the superior word Psilocybin and 2007 failed to cover and grok nonbranching which is the master mytheme so egodeath.com is inferior entheogens theory and inferior mytheme theory so it sits on branch number three of four counting from the bottom of a “one, two, four” mushroom Branching tree morphology

Number 4: the superior branch of the maximal entheogens theory, grokked last night, is the Psilocybin theory of religion. and corresponds with the discovery of non-Branching as the master mytheme which began 2010 on this side of the dividing lineseparatingegodeath.com 2007 versus Egodeath theory.wordpress.com which kind of started 2016 and 2020 and lead to the mandrake tree breakthrough a few

days ago March 2X 2022 when I created the breakthrough phrase ” Branching message mushroom tree” then immed ” Branching Message Mandrake tree” then ” Branching message infusion tree” then April 3 the breakthrough phrase “Branching message tree” , which elegantly beautifully connects back loops back to Thanksgiving 2013 Cranitch painting Eve serpent stag apple branches holding branches non-Mushroom tree enlightenment

1a 1b 2a 2b

1a 1b 2; Max Mod & Min entheogen th’s BUT not trident!! <– key! Moderate & Minimal entheogen th’s were ALWAYS grouped together & contrasted against Max entheogen th. then on fateful providential day a few hours ago April 3 2022 holyday grokday i for the first time while recording Egodeath Mystery Show ep100 assigned the Max entheogen th of 2007 Egodeath.com to a LOWER branch (a new branching!) of the Max entheogen theory, the newly freshly branches higher superior branch of Max entheogen th = Exclusive focus on THE MAXIMAL PSILOCYBIN THEORY OF RELIGION as contrasted against I FERIOR, “entheogen” theory of rel that i ignorantly used to hold when i ALSO was ignorant of nonbranching mytheme.

heres shape of max entheogen theory 2002-2021: 2 1b 1a

4/2022 – levels 1a 1b 2a 2b – solved last night the jan 20 2021 “my followers” question of is the Egodeath theory 2-lev or 3-lvl??

solved during Egodeath Mystery Show ep100 last night

onion of relevance is 4-level scale yet actually binary too – flexible. core vs periph then subdiv core into two, peri into 2. inner CORE, outer CORE, i PERI, o PERI

mushroom tree branching morphology ies – 1,2,4 vs 1,4 . max entheogen theory 2002-2001 wasnt 1,3 it was 1,2,asym3

now for useful clarity subdivide the Max branch into two, easy to express and avoid the confusion.

lower Max theory = egodeath.com 2007 (failed to focus Psil, failed to grok nonbranching).

upper Max theory branch started Oct 2010 and fruition April 3 2022 last night when i went … “branching-msg tree” eg thx 2013 Cranach non-msh tree + Jason ivy tree

might designate Apr 3 2022 ep100 as holyday for egodeath community to represent the day i figured grokked Mandrake tree branching-msg entheogens tree motif in dbl Montecassino. that was the march 2x, 2022 Montecass breakthrough was the distinctive memorable surprise DOH OF COURSE MANDRAKE TREE HAS CUT BRANCHES!!! realization immed after i formed the “BREAKTHRU PHRASE ” “branching-message msh tree ” announced at fbk

like thx 2013 vs dec 3 2013 , a multiday holyday season for the Egodeath theory

one fateful providential day mar 2x 2022 i grokked motif “brch-msg msh tree” then immedly jackpotted as “brch-msg MANDRAKE tree” along w montecass’s concept “br-msg entheogen tree” then apr 3 2022 “br-msh tree” (no msh req’d; nov thx 2013 involved no msh, cranach’s photoreal tree with eves knowing smile holding branch over crotch branching legs w stag behind

and if i designate the grokkiday as mar 2x 2022 / Apr 3 2022 that can include the high brkthru consciousness of past few days getting SUCH CLARITY on “we must go ALL IN on Psil-only” & win all fronts, go big (go narrowly Psilocybin theory history, reject Aman etc) or go home

in the midst of a jackpot week u never know which day to singlecout as the grokkiday if it involvesmt mult days – here is perfect example: was canterbury psalter, on what day did i have my Canterb brkthru???? a smear across 2+ weeks

Contents:

• Intro
• The Teams
  • The Monks
  • The Salvation Salesmen
  • The Witches
  • Dr. Secret
• Reference

Intro

Competing interpretations of mushroom imagery in Christian art

Author: Cybermonk. These characterizations are sketchy and extremely unapproved.

Here are the groups who are submitting one actual interpretation (the Monks) and two bunk cover-up stories (the Salvation Salesmen & the Witches) in support of a crooked business plan, along with one interpretation (Dr. Secret) that shows how the presence of mushrooms all throughout Christendom proves that there’s no mushrooms in Christianity.

The Monks

• Cybermonk
• Max Freakout
• Cyberdisciple
• Dr. Jerry Brown
• Religious artists (Eadwine)
• The mycologists (A Curious Fungus: Ramsbottom, Rolfe, Brightman).

The interpretation they put forth: mushrooms in Christian art mean Psilocybin. Amanita is a pointer to Psilocybin (“honorary”); Amanita is merely a symbol for Psilocybin but is not important in itself.

The Monks team holds that the Psilocybin referent is proved by anomalous branching and cut-branch features.

The Monks provide an elaborate, yet simple and compactly summarized theory that added 80 more art pieces to the database just during the course of writing their interpretation article submission, including positive identification of a balancing Amanita fountain in a heavily Psilocybe-filled Hellenistic mosaic, as proved by their own specimen photographs of a double Holy Grail fountain configuration (along with two branching-message mandrake trees).

We had to duck out when they wouldn’t stop spinning out their interpretation theory in exhaustive (and exhausting), endless detail, showing isomorphism among an endless stream of Christian and Hellenistic art images that their theory enabled perceiving, collecting, and organizing.

They also hold that mixed wine & the Eucharist are Psilocybin, and that meditation is based in Psilocybin.

Also they hold a view regarding the other teams’ interpretation: this team’s thesis explains why the other teams’ (the Salvation Salesmen & the Witches) interpretation is transparently obviously a bad-faith cover story, not actually a sincere interpretation, but rather, an interpretation designed to hide and obscure the real, true interpretation, so it’s kind of a pseudo-interpretation, used as a smokescreen.

The Salvation Salesmen

• The pope
• His bankster Wasson, head of megacorp Public Relations
• The art historians (Brinckmann, Panofsky)
• The Meditation Hucksters

aka the Presupposers, the Question Beggars.

Business Model

Business plan; business model, mission statement, and conflict of interest strategic product plan:

Hide the fact that mixed wine, the Eucharist, mushroom trees, and meditation are psilocybin, and replace that by our placebo salvation by installment plan.

This team’s submitted interpretation is that all of the mushroom trees in Christian art are intended to mean Italian umbrella pines that grow in Italy and happen to be the trees which we managed to post-hoc scrape together that happened to look down closest like mushrooms that we were able to find to prop up our bullsht cover story in order to hide and obscure the obvious truth that the mushroom trees (only one of which is Amanita shaped) obviously refer to Psilocybin mushrooms, and also they are trying to cover over the awkwardly explicit artists’ term that comes from the artists, the term “mushroom trees”, which has to be somehow twisted to mean not mushrooms.

We never actually meant mushrooms when we said “mushroom trees”; we merely meant that all of these mushroom trees look exactly identical to mushrooms all around all of the regions in which they were drawn.

But of course all of these regional artists intended to draw Italian Mushroom Pines I mean oops I mean to say Italian umbrella pines which look the most like mushrooms that we were able to post-hoc patch together our flimsy cover story and try to foist and frame it as a so-called “interpretation” a.k.a. a criminal’s lie, to speak frankly.

Because most of these regional mushroom tree art shops had zero Italian umbrella pines in their region, that explains why they had to import distorted templates that, on the long journey from Italy, always consistently came to look exactly like the mushrooms, which do grow in every region of every one of these mushroom tree art shops, in fact they’re growing right in the backyard of each of the shops, but that’s not what they were trying to draw.

All of these art shops and all of these widespread regions were specifically trying to draw the kind of tree in Italy which is famous for looking the closest like a mushroom to any kind of tree.

So you see, it all makes sense.

But the mushroom tree artists were not trying to draw their local mushrooms which grow right out behind the Christian artists’ shops, but rather, they were trying to draw the italian trees from 1000 miles away that are widely renowned for looking just like mushrooms; therefore, they did not intend to draw mushrooms.

QED

The Witches

• Letcher Hatsis

Startup Business Plan

Cover over and hide and replace Psilocybin in the Eucharist and in Christian art by the cheap high, mind-scrambling hallucinogen deliriant scopolamine plants, and become famous as the disprover of mushrooms in Christianity, which is easy because all you have to do is show there was no secret Amanita cult propagation, and then you’ve covered the entire theory.

If there are any other minor little aspects which we have not found yet, in our several hours of researching the mushroom theory of Christianity, it’ll be easy to extend our same story to cover any other little details of perspectives in the little pop theory that we’re taking down.

Basically if we can just attack Jan Irvin who has left the field only a couple decades ago, personally attack him hard enough, and there’s really no one else on the horizon in 2016 that you need to appear to disprove.

So we have a very high expectation that this business plan is sound, because we spent several hours researching it.

Our startup company is presently going through a re-branding from Psychedelic Witch to “Psychedelic Historian”, but no one will notice this superficial re-branding – just be sure to aggressively personally attack and taunt everyone (the standard ways of conducting yourself among professional historians and in roller derby) and lecture them and burn up all your word-count lecturing them about our sound, tried-and-true historical criteria exemplary historiographical methodology, rather than actually delivering any great method, or bothering to state specifically what our historical criteria are; just go see somewhere(?) in our online amateur blogger articles that we threw together.

We also worked equally carefully on the timing of our going public; we timed it exactly so that our online amateur blogger articles would come out just before Dr. Brown publishes his book The Psychedelic Gospels which we are unaware of, that’s coming out from the same publisher, Park Street Press, that published our work on deliriant scopolamine plants.

We don’t think there will be a gigantic freight train collision trainwreck; we expect to come out looking great, because we checked for several minutes as soon as we released our articles in 2015.

We checked and saw that there were no books on the horizon such as by a entheogenic cultural anthropologist teaching college course on that subject since 1975 who’s about to release a book called The Psychedelic Gospels, so everything’s looking great and green-light for the new rebranding, to appear to be a historian.

His submitted interpretation is: Anything But Mushrooms.

When pressed for specific referents for various instances of the hundreds of mushroom trees, Letcher Hatsis mumbles something lackadaisical and half-hearted like “parasols of victory, or whatever; stop being anachronistic”.

The top historian of art, Panofsky, wrote that the #1 historiographical consideration for interpreting the Plaincourault fresco is that there is nothing special or unique about this instance of the commonplace “mushroom tree” motif in Christian art.

Therefore, our high-profile attack article that will make our corporate brand famous at the Graham Hancock site is going to restrict itself to exclusively talking about the Plaincourault fresco in complete isolation and avoid mentioning the existence of the hundreds of mushroom trees which the top historian emphasized is the #1 consideration for interpreting this fresco.

The Monks expect this team to steal credit from the Monks’ discoveries that are due to the Monks’ superior interpretation and authentic interpretation: “mushroom trees” are actually branching-message mandrake trees, like with cut branches, shown parallel to the parasol of victory that’s shown twice in the Montecassino manuscript.

Dr. Secret

• John Allegro 1970
• Ruck 1975
• M. Hoffman
• Jan Irvin

Their submitted interpretation of mushroom shapes in Christian art is that they are actually hidden & secret, designed to prevent communication, and proves that the normal, real Eucharist is separate from & alien to Psilocybin.

The presence of mushrooms all throughout Christendom proves that there’s no mushrooms in Christianity, but that mushrooms are completely alien to real, normal Christianity, as proved by writing a couple additional books each year, adding to the tower of books proving the presence of evidence for the absence of mushrooms in real Christianity and that mushrooms only appear exclusively in pseudo-Christianity, impinging on real Christianity from a secret, alien, outside source.

This team holds the the secrecy premise, which implies that “normally” the Eucharist is not Psilocybin – in sharp opposition to the Monks’ interpretation, which is that the normal Eucharist was understood to be Psilocybin and that mushrooms were explicitly, openly depicted and were intended to be recognized as mushrooms, along with efficiently and elegantly communicating their “non-branching” message, representing mental transformation to the non-branching model of time, possibility, and control.

Reference

• https://www.bing.com/search?q=rules+of+academic+debate

• https://www.bing.com/search?q=rules+of+roller+derby
• https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=roller+derby

Great content in both part a and b.

Check idea development page 13 to see if I summarize some points about this episode there.

Errata

Part B has many dropped words. As unhappy as I am about Part B’s dropped words, part A is all-around great and almost completely clean; part A only has a few dropped words; it’s not really a problem.

I am able to follow part B, and you are able to follow most of it; you just have to mentally fill in the gaps. That should be easy after hearing part A.

I don’t know about spending time to redo the production on part B to fix dropped words.

Solution to prevent mixing off-topic passages with the on-topic content

Part B at 10 minutes, I accidentally left in about five minutes of discussion of mic & voice technique.

I’ve most recently been developing some better policies where I don’t allow a given recording to contain multiple types of content such as warm up practice; instead, I stop recording and make a separate recording to do that now.

That’s my latest technique to make life so much easier during production, to prevent accidentally shipping off-topic content.

Improving “Criteria of Proof” Article

The episode is couched in terms of writing the paper submitted for Dr. Brown’s class to presenting the paper, and how much of it should be metatheory, and how much of it should be evidence and demonstrating how our interpretation is compelling – but take a contrasting take a binary approach.

Not only show how our interpretation is good, but also show how the other interpretation is bad.

That’s what we don’t do; currently, we don’t show how the other interpretation is a cover-up operation and an insincere lie and fraudulent pseudo-Interpretation in bad faith to cover up their criminal-like motives.

Our team, the Monks.

The episode is couched in terms of writing the paper submitted for Dr. Brown’s class about presenting the paper and how much of it should be metatheory and how much of it should be evidence and demonstrating how our interpretation is compelling AND how the crayon-drawn, transparently obvious cover-up, pseudo-“interpretation” is not compelling.

The team called the Monks, who also have on board the artists and mycologists, we should add a chapter about exposing that the other teams interpretation is clearly not a real interpretation, but it’s clearly And transparently obvious that it’s just just a cover-up operation and a conflict of interest in order to protect their corporate strategy of replacing Psilocybin and eucharist by an inferior product, and try to become famous best-selling writer re-branding himself instead of psychedelic which rebranding his product being himself being his reputation as a supposed historian to sell books and try to make a name for himself becoming famous his ploy his business strategy we are exposing we have exposed his crooked business strategy or at least a deluded delusional business strategy that is bound to fail.

he what he is attempting to do as he’s trying to make a name for himself as the famous historian who debunked Mushrooms in Christianity but a huge problem is he has the most tiny one dimensional notion of what the mushrooms in Christianity thesis is he doesn’t even understand what the thesis is

Hatsis so far has been operating under the delusion due to being woefully uninformed he’s been laboring under the delusion that the theory of mushrooms and Christianity is strictly Allegro and Amanita Secret Culture propagation just like Andy Letcher imagines and fights against in a totally great example tilting at windmills and our paper also adds section on fallacies hell these dirty

We could teach a college course about fallacious arguments drawing are examples from these two teams given that they both have to lie and misrepresent and fabricate cover stories and flimsy Interpretations, naturally they commit every fallacious argument in the book.

We provide compelling evidence of this transparently obvious conflict of interest cover up operation that they try to foist off as “interpretations”.

Explain the evidence that that the other team is insincere and should probably be like kicked out of the class.

Conflict of interest and what their dirty strategy is to try to hide the fact and lie to people and replace Psilocybin Eucharist by a substitute, for their own dishonest profit. both of these businesses our employ the strategy of replacing the flesh of Christ by which we are saved by a phony substitute that is designed not to cause mental transformation either replacing the genuine product by an inert product that does nothing, or by a product that provides inferior effects: actual hallucinations and delirium, instead of effectuating Christian mental and spiritual transformation about our model of the world and ourselves.

One team is trying to set up a business or protect an existing business the salvation Salesmen.

That team is trying to replace well their strategy is to replace Psilocybin eucharist by a placebo eucharist and make a business out of that selling people salvation that can never possibly work so that they can sell people salvation in increments, none of which have any effect, and in fact that entrench deluded egoic thinking, and so do the very opposite of what the actual Eucharist does, to give enlightenment and transformation and salvation.

Those teams have a business strategy that that’s a conflict of interest because both of them are trying variations of the same strategy replace the Psilocybin Eucharist by a false substitute, either by a placebo or scopolamine.

The other dishonest team that has infiltrated the class and it’s turning in an insincere pseudo Interpretation cover story their strategy their business strategy for the Hatsis mega corporation industries witches supply company.

Their dirty dishonest anti-enlightenmemt strategy for giving their false, lying pseudo-interpretation flimsy cover story is, they are trying to replace the Psilocybin Eucharist by a deliriant scopolamine substitute psychoactive, which is very inefficient and is not targeted at loose cognitive association binding, which is required for fast, efficient, complete, coherent, and clear-thinking mental transformation.

The Salvation Salesmen team and the Witches team should definitely given an F for bad faith contribution of a interpretation that they don’t even believe in themselves. they’re both trying the same strategy the one team is trying to the witches are trying to replace Psilocybin in the eucharist by the deliriant scopolamine plants which is different than the Salvation Salesmen team.

and what their their ploy their strategy the covert strategy is to replace the psilocybin eucharist by pure placebo but other than that practically both teams are making the same move and so practically they’re both putting for the same flimsy bluff Insincere lying pseudo Interpretations one of them is half heartedly they’re both very halfhearted

in the interpretations that they put forth or so half hearted because the only purpose of their interpretations is to displace the true interpretation that they’re putting forth hazy inconsistent underspecified crayon drawn waffling such as parasols of victory but no that’s not my then they say no that’s not my position but it is but it isn’tin the interpretations that they put forth or so half hearted because the only purpose of their interpretations is to displace the true interpretation that they’re putting forth hazy inconsistent underspecified crayon drawn waffling such as parasols of victory but no that’s not my then they say no that’s not my position but it is but it isn’t

but if you want to know my reading on each of these mushroom trees of course there’s only a single mushroom tree which is plain curl but if we were to if you were to force me against my will to admit that there exists other mushroom trees I would try to make the excuse and cover story of parasols of victory as much as I could,

but whatever I don’t give a fck what you call them , so long as you adhere to my actual interpretation which is essentially negative what they are in fact is anything but mushrooms so it really doesn’t matter it’s irrelevant whether we waive them away “easily explained away” by employing “sound, tried-and-true historical criteria” (by which I mean, ways of lying and fabricating false history fake History fayke pseudo History).

if you really force me against my will to acknowledge is there exist any other mushroom cheese other than the fresco which uniquely shows Amanita unlike any other then I will try to designate as many as I can in my completely lackadaisical half hearted way too wave them away and deflect the evidence I will try to label as many as possible as parasols Victory which I really couldn’t care less about and then the other ones or you see it let me explain in detail my analysis of each instanceif you really force me against my will to acknowledge is there exist any other mushroom cheese other than the fresco which uniquely shows Amanita unlike any other then I will try to designate as many as I can in my completely lackadaisical half hearted way too wave them away and deflect the evidence I will try to label as many as possible as parasols Victory which I really couldn’t care less about and then the other ones or you see it let me explain in detail my analysis of each instance

my interpretation is that there parasols a victory except for the ones that you won’t believe my bluff on and so I actually to be specific my theory is that they’re not all parasols a victory that’s my explanation please see my please go away and look at my online amateur blogger articles where I lay out somewhere my sound tried and true historical criteria by which I expect easily explain away all of them are parasols a victory

except for the mushroom trees that are not foistable off as parasols of victory, in which case those are something else – whatever, I couldn’t care less what you call them, but I guarantee you this though: I will specify here that they are definitely not mushrooms; they are anything but mushrooms.

my positive specific identification of those other mushroom trees that I can’t pretend are parasols of victory, I specifically interpret them as: Anything But Mushrooms.

but I’m not gonna tell you because you would be convinced if I were to tell you both what my criteria are and what the hell the other trees are mushroom trees the ones that I can’t Bluffview and claim that their parasols a victory rest assured I do have explanation interpretation of those other mushroom trees that I can’t pretend are parasols of victory, but I’m not going to tell you what those interpretations of mine are.

but if I were to tell you what my interpretations are , the only reason you don’t believe me is because you are unaware of my arguments, which I’m not going to tell you, but see my online amateur blogger articles – it’s somewhere in there, but I don’t really care enough to bother citing them.

that they’re trying to lie

their whole interpretation is really a lie, is what it comes down to

a lie and a cover-up operation; they’re trying to prevent the whole assignment

they are trying to disrupt

The other teams in this class or trying to prevent the success of the investigation.

they’re trying to prevent correct interpretation

they’re trying to force the incorrect interpretation.

they’re deliberately trying to misinterpret.

their deliberately trying to do the opposite of what Dr. Brown is asking for.

they’re trying to prevent everything that the instructor is striving to accomplish

related to page: Insincere “Interpretations”, but want to try an additional page/angle/fresh take on this very important perspective and direction for assessment/coverage.

Dr. Jerry Brown asks “write about what kind of thing would constitute compelling evidence & criteria for proof for interpg msh shapes in art”, but, the motivation for the Anything But Mushrooms “interp” is purely cover-up attempt.

They are against Brown asking too many questions: they say “Stop looking into it, heres a cover story now go away and shut down your investigation, Dr. Brown/ mycologists.”

You people need to STOP THINKING ABOUT MUSHROOMS AT THE HEART OF Christianity.

The Salvation Salesmen and the Witches teams are trying to prevent, head off, discourage investigation of mushroom trees and psilocybin eucharist.

Their motivation for pushing an interpretation is negative, to block understanding.

Wasson censors Brinckmann’s book: STOP ASKING QUESTIONS.

They don’t want to investigate compelling evidence & criteria of truth.

They dont want to contribute a paper about how to rightly interp msh trees, they are defending against looking into it.

Stop bringing up topic of hundreds of other mushroom trees; restrict your attention, pay attention only to plaincourault fresco, cordone it off.

Refrain from gathering evidence. Their motive is to prevent looking into it. They are against Dr. Brown’s assignment they are against looking into this whole matter

The less analysis, the better, as far as they’re concerned.

How can we prevent Dr. Brown from asking these questions, looking into these matters?

We need to head off and shut down and deflect his attempt to investigate these things.

Halt at our cover story, do not look into it further.

They try to block the correct interp, it is exactly specifically the superior more compelling evidence that they’re trying to block.

it is precisely proof that they’re trying to impede and resist and steer away from.

They are trying to prevent proof they are trying to prevent getting a good view and treatment of the evidence.

They are trying to cause a bad handling of the evidence.

They are trying to prevent from reaching proof.

they’re trying to stop for reaching the truth

how can we prevent Dr. Brown from reaching the truth

that’s the motive they’re trying

these are like rogue students who are trying to make the professor’s research fail.

Tthey are the enemy within the gates.

They are against everything that Dr. Brown is trying to reveal and expose.

They are against this whole investigation and are trying to derail it and shut it down and prevent it from succeeding.

Their goal is to prevent Dr. Brown’s investigation from succeeding and reaching the truth.

not symmetrical

insincere pseudo interp anti-interp

Only the Monks team pushes ahead to assemble the data to look at it.

The witches & salvation salemen teams are reluctant, balking, trying to avoid, an interp whose purpose is to not understand , to prevent understanding, to mislead.

We have opposite motives for contributing an “interp”, bad faith “interp”.

They are trying to cover up and throw off the investigation attempts.

Their “interpretation” is nothing but a cover-up op.

MIXED WINE IS PSILOCYBIN

THE EUCHARIST IS PSILOCYBIN

MUSHROOM TREES ARE PSILOCYBIN

MEDITATION IS BASED IN PSILOCYBIN

AMANITA IS HONORARY PSILOCYBIN

Download this episode of the Egodeath Mystery Show for 1 week, from:
“Ep99 Psilocybin Wins Everything.mp3” – April 2, 2022 – outline of points w/ timestamps is expected to be there.

Instructions on What You Must Do to Win Everything, or Else Win Nothing, from Eadwine to Entheogen Scholars

If you follow my directions, you’ll win everything.

If you run off being suckered into defending Amanita, we will win nothing, and continue to lose everything.

From the illuminated manuscript shop, a message for you all in entheogen scholarship – recording number three of the day 56 minutes long , mic: CAD M 39 Omnidirectional polar pattern.

If you commit exclusively to psilocybin and firmly disavow Amanita, then you will win everything: mixed wine, mushroom trees, the Eucharist, and meditation.

Amanita is fools gold. If you defend Amanita, you will win nothing; you will not connect Psilocybin to mushroom trees or mixed wine or the Eucharist or meditation. You will entirely fail on all fronts, instead of succeeding on all fronts.

If you commit exclusively to defending Psilocybin and nothing else, you will win everything; on all fronts: a worldwide derby shutout; complete victory in all games, if you absolutely disavow Amanita

The beginning of recording three today begins with the monks team chant which is:

Mixed wine is psilocybin not Amanita

The Eucharist is psilocybin not amanita

Mushroom trees are psilocybin not amanita

Meditation is Psilocybin not Amanita

This is the victory chant:

mixed wine is psilocybin not amanita

the Eucharist is Psilocybin not Amanita

Mushroom Trees are Psilocybin not Amanita

Meditation is Psilocybin not Amanita

Salvation and regeneration is through Psilocybin not Amanita

Amanita is only valuable as an honorary Psilocybe and as a sign that serves to point to the real deal, which is psilocybin.

Amanita is the ersatz Mushroom.

Psilocybin is the genuine authentic Mushroom of Salvation and targeted cognitive efficiency it is the only type of mushroom worth any attention to defend we disavow defusing and watering down arent area that we have to defend.

Amanita is nothing but a liability; we disavow it.

we will win or lose everything, depending on whether we get distracted being suckered into defending Amanita, or keep our eye on the ball and firmly commit exclusively & solely to psilocybin, and stay faithful and true, only defending Psilocybin, and rejecting and disavowing defending Amanita.

Amanita must fend for itself, and we – as a firm principle – reject defending it, As vehemently as we disavow and reject the secrecy Premise, which is the premise that psilocybin does not come from the Eucharist but per Carl rock is an alien intrusion into real Christianity an exception a deviation doesn’t count.

oh my God it’s filled with mushrooms the maximal entheogens the maximal Psilocybin theory of religion not the maximal Mushroom theory not the maximum maximum Psilocybe theory because there are taxonomy confusions that dissipate focus we must commit to defending a single defensible absolutely perfect and certain and guaranteed rocksolid single plant consisting of

A single-plant fallacy which consists of 350 species – that is the single plant fallacy thats worth defending; The name of the plant is Psilocybin. (And is most certainly and definitely, absolutely not amanita and Muscimol.) amanita is in no way worth defending we refuse on principle to defend Amanita.

Conversely, Psilocybin is absolutely rock solid, guaranteed, reliable, focused, targeted in its cognitive effects; it is the true object of desire & devotion.

Amanita is fools’ gold.

we firmly disavow Amanita and we refuse to defend Amanita at all

The only possible value and purpose of Amanita is as a pointer to psilocybin; nothing more.

Images of Amanita do not represent ingesting amanita; Amanita represents ingesting Psilocybin. End of discussion; nonnegotiable.

By this chant, this victory chant, this war chant, we shall win the parasol of victory, which is psilocybin and not amanita.

amanita must be chained down into only a subservient role of decoration and only a sign pointing to psilocybin, which is incomparably superior.

and unlike the pussies and wusses , the conventional moderate weak, effete, usual unimaginative failing losers, the usual entheogens scholar losers bringing their loser week fools’ gold perspective that’s causing us to lose, that is the CAUSE of us losing.

after Brown published his copy of his Hatsis retort article at Academia.edu , I shoved aside all the pussies and wusses and unimaginative entheogen scholars who are losers causing us to lose, and I wrote some thing actually worth saying and worth reading.

I posted publicly I declared on behalf of all of us I spoke truth I am no slave of small minded “evidence”

what’s more important, truth or “evidence”, couched in a diminishing and dismissive deflect Deflecting Way – which is the only thing that “evidence” is good for, it seems.

evidence thats isolated from interpretive framework is worthless and in fact is like putting out a fire by pouring gasoline on it

it only makes the problem worse; you instead have to couch the evidence in the right framework; the framework is everything.

we have to leverage evidence effectually in an effectual manner to make it go where it needs to go, and not let someone steer it in the wrong direction.

we need to post truth with vigor and not be unimaginative.

we need to state truth and be ready to respond when Dr. Brown asks “citation needed, on what basis did you assert “whenever you see a Amanita an Christian Art it always means psilocybin; it never means amanita ingesting”?

and I had NO problem at all answering his question, which I posted in my idea development 13.

do you have to have vigor and imagination and commitment

which truth are you committed to – The inconsequential truth that amanita has a tiny bit of minuscule value? or the gigantic truth, that psilocybin is actually worth caring about?

you need to boldly assert the truth and then do whatever it takes to defend that truth

don’t be tricked into beginning from a position of weakness, where the enemy defines the framing of the “evidence”; the so-called “Evidence”.

here is the story by which we will win or lose if you say the amanita an Christian Art means amanita you are a traitor you will cause us to lose you will win nothing we will win nothing

conversely if you insist that amanita specifically serves as a pointer to psilocybin and you stick to that committed position we will win everything we will win Mushroom trees we will win mixed wine we will win the Eucharist and we will win meditation we will win worldwide shut out of the salvation Salesmen if we disavow reading Amanita as Amanita

amanita is fools gold it’s only purpose is to serve as a pointer to psilocybin which is 1 million times more desirable incomparably more desirable and worth fighting for and I am in need of which is absolutely not worth fighting for at all we disavow defending Amanita and we refuse to let the witches try to trick us into defending a false target.

in my recording number three today I severely lecture and I this is what you call absolutely this is the come to Jesus moment you have to decide are you going to defend the harlot the fools gold or are you going to put 100% of your energy and focus on defending and asserting Psilocybin make up your damn mind which do you desire do you desire Amanita or do you desire Psilocybin if you go all in on psilocybin you will win everything we will win everything if not not nothing we will win nothing if you let yourself your eyes drift off to the harlot the pretty red and white mushroom and you spend your time defending that we will win nothing we must disavow and let amanita fend for usin my recording number three today I severely lecture and I this is what you call absolutely this is the come to Jesus moment you have to decide are you going to defend the harlot the fools gold or are you going to put 100% of your energy and focus on defending and asserting Psilocybin make up your damn mind which do you desire do you desire Amanita or do you desire Psilocybin if you go all in on psilocybin you will win everything we will win everything if not not nothing we will win nothing if you let yourself your eyes drift off to the harlot the pretty red and white kiddies mushroom and you spend your time defending that, we will win nothing

we must disavow and let amanita fend for itself.

we commit 0% of our resources defending Amanita and in fact the more firmly that you refuse to defend Amanita the more surely we will win all derby matches around the world all of them through the strategy of firmly D committing from and detaching from Amanita and we will employer amanita exclusively and only for soul Simon you must adopt the dogma Eadwine told you I am channeling Eadwine and I am telling you you must adopt this dog man that the only meaning of amanita is a pointer to psilocybin if you adhere to that dogma you will win everything we will win everything otherwise nothing, & continued total loss.

Basically the reason that we’re losing – or haven’t been the reason that we haven’t been winning, is because we haven’t been thinking big enough and aggressively enough

we need to go teach what maximal thinking is all about :

we damn well are absolutely willing to assert that every last one of the mushroom trees certainly is proven to be definitely psilocybin

and ditto for mixed wine

and double ditto for Eucharist especially above all

and the same thing goes for the East too, mofos!!! Meditation Hucksters (eastern division), frauds, lying anti-Christs of the east!

GO BIG OR GO HOME

WORLD-WIDE SHUT-OUT, by the Monks, of the Salvation Salesmen and their demonic brothers in the East, the Meditation Hucksters.

Panofsky, you don’t get to sit there and one-way transmit to us covertly implicitly, presumptuously declare and dictate what our position is that we mycologist are willing to hold / defend/ assert; you don’t get to dictate our position, that’s called strawmanning; that’s called Hatsis’ only move.

in this recording I make a breakthrough successful argument leveraging Panofsky’s argument from consistency against him big time and it completely blows up in his face on a global scale across every era.

The reason why you know there cannot be mushrooms anywhere in religion anywhere in the world in any era is because from the Panofsky argument from consistency, you either have to consistently say that mushroom Trees and eucharist and mixed wine are all mushrooms, and also Eastern religion is mushrooms

The reason why you know there cannot be mushrooms anywhere in religion anywhere in the world in any era is because,

from the Panofsky valid argument from consistency, combined with the invalid covert fallacious strawman presuming your opponent’s position, without explicitly asking their position, without explicitly stating that you are presuming their position, you simply implicitly declare (quickly & silently) what their position is – but do so in a sneaky, covert way, and then argue on that basis that they therefore have to choose the alternative.

Combined with the invalid covert fallacious strawman presuming & implicitly declaring your opponent’s position & Arguing on that silently covertly assumed position that your opponent allegedly holds

silently covertly assumed position that your opponent allegedly holds

you either have to consistently say that mushroom Trees and eucharist and mixed wine or all mushrooms and also Eastern religion as mushrooms,

OR

you must assert that mushroom trees are not mushrooms and mixed wine is not mushrooms and Eucharist is not mushrooms and eastern religion is not mushrooms

AND given my covert premise which I am

not going to mention out loud but I am going to silently attribute to you what your position is,

[be sure to rush over the next step as quickly as possible and as quietly as possible ; do not read out loud the next step ; it’s very hush-hush – do not look behind the curtain in the next step]

I implicitly and covertly dictate to you that you are not willing to hold the position that all of those things are mushrooms and therefore now I am going to say out loud the next step

THEREFORE

you must pick the other alternative that none of these things are mushrooms because you’re not willing to assert that all of them are mushrooms

QED

I have successfully reasoned out your position for you and have dictated what positions you are willing to assert and therefore you are forced to pick the choice that I command you (covertly and silently and dictate implicitly) what position you hold.

therefore because you are not willing to assert [Because I covertly assume and dictate what your position is]

that all of these things are mushrooms, the [actually] valid argument from consistency dictates therefore you must give a thumbs down to all of these positions.

I just finished the second recording of the day which is one hour 10 minutes awesome material solid progress several new substantial points

Strategy: get the Witches & Dr. Secret to defect from the Salvation Salesmen team, [I think this point is continued after the below diversion announcing we’ve taken over victory in the east]

Strategy: get the witches to defect from the Salvation Salesmen (& Meditation Huckters team [Very important implication tucked in here , don’t miss it right here we are not only taking over mixed wine and Eucharist and mushroom trees we are also dictating victory declaring victory worldwide just as we defeated

just as we defeated the salvation salesman and we got the witches to defect to the monks side and we got Dr. secret to defect to the monks side similarly in the east we have also made it game over for the meditation Hucksters because if you agree if you hold the plane crawl is mushrooms that means that you hold that all mushroom trees are mushrooms and similarly if you hold that

mixed wine is mushrooms and that mushroom trees are mushrooms and that the Eucharist is mushrooms then by the force of consistency you are also obliged to uphold the position and I am dictating to you that you are not holding this position and therefore there are no mushrooms in religion anywhere in the world and the reason you know

that there are no mushrooms and religion anywhere in the world is because if you assert that the Eucharist and mixed wine and mushroom trees are mushrooms then for consistency you must also assert that eastern religion comes from mushrooms which I am dictating to you what position you hold and I am commanding you to hold the position that you are not willing to assert those so therefore I am telling you that you are forced to agree that there are no mushrooms in religion anywhere in the world west or east. 😑

… and join the monks roller derby team and similarly with Dr. Secret, get them to abandon the idea that psilocybin is divorced from Eucharist

Surprising observation that plane crawl is unique: it is the only branching Message Mushroom tree that is amanita . I have dust proved that normally all mushroom trees are psilocybin not an Amanita

Meditation Hucksters (eastern division derby team, allies w the Salvation Salesmen team)

please prove me wrong, show me an Amanita Mushroom tree Branching Message Mushroom tree other than planecorral fresco.

I leveraged a good and valid step of Panofsky’s argument the argument from consistency of interpretation I leverage that against him that by the same token if you agree mixed wine is psilocybin you must also agree that mushroom trees are psilocybin and you must also agree that the Eucharist a Psilocybin

Also I made a pretty huge realization breakthrough:

I managed to identify a massive strawman implicit step in Panofsky’s argument!

just like hats is dictates that we follow allegro and the secret Premise and hatsis refuses to argue against our actual held Position; similarly,

Panofsky implicitly dictates to the mycologists that they are not willing to hold the position that all mushroom trees are mushrooms.

Panofsky never asks the mycologists if, given the existence of hundreds of mushroom trees are you my colleges going to assert that all mushroom trees mean mushrooms he never asks them he implicitly in dishonest ConMan fashion he tells them implicitly what their position is that they are willing to hold now that they know that there are hundreds of mushroom trees

it’s always a one-way transmission, Panofsky presumes to sit on God’s throne: and he simply declares and presumes and dictates and covertly attributes to the mycologists what position the mycologists are willing to assert and defend and hold!

I finished the first hour and 15 minutes card and 39 Omni directional Mike CAD Emma 39M 39M 39M 39 I am 39 very solid content advanced the ideas of the breakout I have discovered that a binary

system Break out is not opposed to a three-way division because regarding the specific subject of Eucharist Carl rocks position on Eucharist as distinct from his position on mixed wine and on mushroom trees well maybe the supplies to mushroom trees his position on that although there is a distinction on the one hand there really is a difference between the moderate versus the minimal position however regarding the most important point there is not a distinction between those and therefore

it actually there is not necessarily opposition between a two-way break out versus a three-way break out

Moderate Entheogen Theory Is a Version of Minimal Position; so the Apparently 3-fold Breakout Is Actually Binary

• the Maximal entheogen theory – psilocybin = mixed wine = Eucharist = mushroom trees = meditation.
  
• Minimal entheogen theories/variants
  • Minimal entheogen theory #1: Ruck, the moderate entheogen theory: entheogens are widespread yet rare in Christendom, and are alien to the real, normal Eucharist & Christianity.
  • the Minimal entheogen theory: entheogens are rare in Christendom and extremely deviant and heretical and alien.

I have managed to accommodate a three-way break out within the Max Freakout 2-way to wait binary break out

because I do I’m trying to reduce the number of roller derby teams we have officially incorporated artists and my colleges into the monks who are the maximal Mushroom theory I have also tripled the scope to discuss Ubiquitous Psilocybin mixed wine equals Ubiquitous Psilocybin eucharist equals Ubiquitous Psilocybin Mushroom Trees the artists are on board with our maximal view of all three of these

And the mycologist as stated by rolfe and Rolfe, in harmony with Brown and Brown , have stated in a romance in The Romance of the Fungus World, in section A Curious Myth, the mycologists Rolfe, Rolfe, and Ramsbottom have stated the position

on behalf of all mycollegeists : Plaincourault = Mushroom trees = mushrooms, whether the primary type Witch and Psilocybin , or the honorary type which is Amanita, like Robin to Batman. The other roller derby team the art historians Brinckmann and Panofsky have described the mycologist as a group and have explained that the mycologist as a group have consistently identified and wanted and tried to identify plaincrawled as mushrooms therefore we have very solid footing on a stable base we are standing on a stable base touching a firm basis on which to declare that in general as a strong inclusive generalization statement that mycologists agree with Roth and Ramsbottom

the art historians describe as a single thing and they describe as a single group that the mycologist or a single roller derby team they are they work together they hold the same view and so we rest on a solid basis when we declare I am declaring that role is position to declare with Ramsbottom on behalf of mycologist in general they declare that we mycologist interpret plaincrawled as Mushrooms again

The fathers of my college he Ramsbottom and Roth declare on behalf of my colleges and so does their journal before the 1925 book declares that mycologist believe as is stated by Panofsky who talks about mycologist as a group as a uniform group who holds a uniform interpretation the uniformly mycologist uniformly hold that plane crawl is mushrooms and I extend that despite Pulaski’s assertion

despite against against Panofsky’s manner of arguing I also proclaim in in line with those mycologist regarding the mushroom I proclaim that role against Panofsky also asserts that all mushroom trees are mushrooms because the same logic that Ramsbottom and Rolf used to declare Panofsky is plaincourault is Mushrooms there same logic dictates as Panofsky warned that all mushrooms or any mushroom tree is mushrooms I am going to presume and assume on the premisedespite against against Panofsky’s manner of arguing I also proclaim in in line with those mycologist regarding the mushroom I proclaim that role against Panofsky also asserts that all mushroom trees are mushrooms because the same logic that Ramsbottom and Rolf used to declare Panofsky is plaincourault is Mushrooms there same logic dictates as Panofsky warned that all mushrooms or any mushroom tree is mushrooms I am going to presume and assume on the premise

I have no idea if this piece of sht voice recorder is catching my words or not it’s like I can’t even tell how bad it’s feeling like it’s failing and screwing up but I can’t tell how bad

Panofsky told us that we face a fork in the road we have a choice if we realize and learn from Panofsky that plane crawled is the same type as many hundreds of mushroom trees then we arrive at the forking choice we have to either choose his argument goes he points out

we mycologist are faced with a choice Panofsky declares that one choice is unthinkable and therefore we are forced to take the other fork a number in the road

Panofsky plays his card which is good for one time only he can only play at once he says you chose to interpret it because you didn’t know fact X I am now telling you fact ask so you are no longer ignorant of fact ask now that I tell you

now that I tell you that plain curl is not unique but matches and that you must identify you must interpret plaincourault the same way that you interpret all mushrooms Trees

Panofsky in effect gives my colleges let’s say gives us mycologist a choice and he gives us the conclusion he tells us that we are forced to choose branch be rather than branch air he first tells us that we have a choice but then he dictates what our choice is forced to be

good question here as soon as mycollegesists learned thTf mushroom Trees in the plaincourault is not unique here is a good question for you did they continue to maintain plaincourault is Mushrooms??

if so they have in effect implicitly asserted that all mushroom trees are mushrooms

let us consider brightman close to 1950 he let himself be bullied by Pulaski and he tentatively mentioned the theory the interpretation of plain girl being mushrooms he is a mycologist would you say that Brightman was absolutely convinced by Panofsky’s argument I would say no I gauge that Brightman did not find did not agree with Panofsky that we are forced to take the path in the forking Choice that Panofsky claimed we are forced

are forced to take either Brightman does not agree the plane crawl is the same as other mushroom trees or he did not agree with Panofsky that we are forced to conclude that none of them are mushrooms rather than the other conclusion they are all mushrooms

so I hereby announce that my colleges were not convinced by Panofsky claim that we are forced to turn towards the darkness instead of towards the light mycologist were not persuaded when Pulaski played his card that was only good for one time only his ignorance card you are ignorant of fact X which I’m going to now tell you

when he played that card it failed he failed to persuade people mycologist either that plain crawl was the same as all other mushroom trees or he failed to convince my colleges that they are forced to take the direction that he claimed that they are forced to take

in such on such a argumentation basis I hereby pronounce that mycologist rejected Panofsky’s bank logic his false claim that we are forced to say Mushroom trees are not mushrooms

The way I see it Panofsky played his low value card the argument from ignorance and it failed; we didn’t buy it ; mycologist failed to take the bait

in such a manner I hereby proclaim that artists are on the side of the monks and that mycologist are on the side of the monks regarding all three for consistency that mixed wine is exactly Psilocybin wine and that the Eucharist is exactly Psilocybin and Mushroom Trees are exactly Psilocybin we have a massive blowout win 3 to 03 versus zero blow out game over for the liars The con artist these salvation salesman and their fellow travelers regardless of whether Dr. secret moderate entheogen theory or on the same side of the major split the historian fabricators the engineers of pseudo History called the historians professional fabricators working in there forgery factories, to quote Edwin Johnson.

why am I threefold system is actually a binary Max Freakout system because the major split is between the maximal Theory versus the moderate and minimal theories so it is twofold binary contrast even though within the benighted interpreters there is a minor only a minor split which is Dr. Secret

The secrecy premise agrees with the anything but mushroom view held by the poops team the Salvation Salesmen Ruck’s agrees with a Salvation Salesmen that the Eucharist was not psilocybin he says instead that psilocybin was alien and impinged on and made inroads towards the Eucharist because it does not come from the normal Eucharist Ruck’s says that psilocybin is abnormal for the Eucharist Ruck’s says the normal eucharist is not psilocybin

ruck’s and the sale Salvation Salesmen Dr Secret andro Salvation Salesmen both agree that the Eucharist is not psilocybin the normal Eucharist they say they are in agreement in asserting the view the claim the assumption or the story Panofsky and rock agree but the normal eucharist is not psilocybin

I have expanded the scope of what Dr. Brown is telling us to interpret we are to interpret three things because the only way we can give a sound and adequate interpretation of mushroom trees is if we simultaneously interlock our interpretation of the Eucharist and the word Eucharist in texts and mixed wine like Pulaski I declare that these three things are isomorphic

The only reason you don’t agree with me is that being an ignorant mycologist you are not aware of the fact I’m about to tell you that fact is which I am now going to tell you:

mushroom trees are the exact same type of which there are hundreds of other instances three instances of the same thing are mixed wine Mushroom Trees and eucharist and so I am telling you that you face a fork a choice and I’m going to dictate to you of which direction you have to turn on that fork

you cannot assert that mixed wine it’s all Simon because if you did you would also be forced to assert that mushroom trees are psilocybin and you would also be forced to assert that the Eucharist a Psilocybin this is a Panofsky argument which comes packaged together with I am going to make your decision for you I am offering you a choice and I am removing that choice from you you have no choice but to make the choice that I command you to make which is a thumbs down in a downward direction choice that you have you are forced to make the choice that I tell you that you’re forced to make

now that you have become aware that mushroom trees are not unique but are merely one member of a type which we art historians actually refer to as Psilocybin shaped mythemes but we in no way mean to imply that they’re actually psilocybin , these three type of logically isomorphic instances which are: mushroom trees eucharist and mix wine mixed wine

using Panofsky’s bank reasoning I am commanding you to turn the direction that I command you in this choice which I give you no choice but I’m telling you you have to the reason why you have to interpret mushroom trees as anything but mushrooms it’s because mushroom trees are isomorphic with the Eucharist and with mixed wine and it would logically be implied

that if you give thumbs up on mushroom trees you would also be forced to give a thumbs up on Eucharist and mixed wine also as being Psilocybin

but we know that definitely not to be the case because of begging the question circular reasoning circular argument assuming that which is to be approved or a key part of that which is to be approved and therefore mushroom trees cannot mean mushrooms because if they did then also the Eucharist and also mixed wine would have to be mushrooms and that cannot be that is not permissible and therefore you have to choose the way that I dictate that you choose because we are the question beggars and you have to

turn the way that we command and dictate that you choose to turn when you confront this choice in the fork in the road

either you have to assert (along with the mycologists and the artists) and the Monks that mushroom trees are psilocybin AND the Eucharist is psilocybin AND mixed wine is psilocybin

OR

Mushroom trees are not psilocybin, AND Eucharist is not psilocybin, AND mixed wine is not psilocybin

QED , which is to say , you are forced to decide the way that I command you to decide , which is three thumbs down, because circular reasoning, circular argument, begging the question, assuming a key part of that which is to be proved ; therefore, I have proved why I have forced you to declare that none of these three isomorphic things can possibly be mushrooms. 😑

QED

Signed,

– the Salvation Salesmen, including the Witches, and Dr. Secret regarding the subject of the Eucharist