If you're stuck in a browser frame - click here to view this same page in Quantonics!

— The Quantonics Society News for 2005 - December
TQS News Archive of Prior Years' News

This is our December, 2005 editorial

Go directly to 2005 December News

Bush is an acronym for Bu()sh()!

Did you see Batty Puchanan on Hardball 1 Dec 2005?

BPuchanan showed us indelibly that his right wing 'principles' are simply and unjustly corrupt!

Republican politicians go to Hell!

We cannot trust Bu()sh()'s administration. Now they unwant us to distrust a US Bu()sh() administration's propagandized world press.

Puchanan (naaa nanananaaaa....) wants to pay US $ to disinform middle East folk, via news organizations that our "war" in Iraq is going well!

He he, ha ha, ho ho, hey hey --- they're coming to take us away hey hey...

Dump this absolutely corrupt administration and all its mindless ...uchannot... 'fellows.'

Compare Bu()sh()'s NYT disinformation campaign on Plame (and other topics) to what they're doing in Iraq!!!!!

These dialectic-soaked testosterone-swolen-cahone DIQheads are attempting to disinform everyone.

Get this if you get anything: Terrorism is NOT "war" in a classical sense. Terrorism is about non nationals attempting to disrupt nations. War can bring a nation into servitude. War cannot bring terrorists into servitude. Worse, "war" against terrorism creates terrorists! Those sound like putatives, normatives, however, they are believable realisms!

We must learn to omnistinguish social endeavor vis-à-vis individual behavior.

A hive (social aggregation, herd thingk, common sense, tragedy of commons, etc.) is a social pattern of value. Stinging can be an individual pattern of value.

Notice how terrorists use IED stinging so effectively against USA's ingrained and 'con-form-all' social patterns of value. And we want to have international news organizations print more 'gosh spell' about how smart we are and how well "the (rather, our) war" is going? Bu()sh()!!!

Hives cannot sting. Individuals can sting, if they individually believe in stinging, if they individually are taught by other individuals to sting. Those who do stinging shall be stung. "Whatever one soweth that shall one also reap."

Terrorists are disaggregated yet sometimes networked groups of individuals. They are knowings how to hop their networkings: on then off, random patterns of shifting, random means of changing, random coversion techniques... And most key of all: individuals are more highly evolved and evolving than societies and nations. Societies and nations cannot defeat terrorism using "war." "War" is an antique social pattern of value based upon a posteriori know-ledges. Only networked and networking individual nonterrorists, against individual terrorists, can mitigate terrorism, but there will always be terrorism. Using Bu()sh()'s logic that means USA will always be in Iraq! It means USA will always be doing harm to Iraq!

See Doug's separate and later, April, 2007 editorial on "insecurity requirements."

Victory against terrorism simply isn't in the cards, regardless what Bu()sh() says, not now not ever.

That is why we have been saying for years that this Iraqi "war" is societal stupidity: a social pattern of value.

Some undisinformation...

Doug's opinions. 1Dec2005.

Jesus Barabbas
Jesus bar Rabbi
Jesus bar Abba(s)

Sang Real

"(We found the) Holy Blood, (now where's the) Holy Grail..."

Is it:

dichon(Holy_Blood, Holy_Grail)?


"One modern writer [D. Joyce. 1975] has proposed an intriguing and plausible explanation. He suggests that Barabbas was the son of Jesus and that Jesus was a legitimate [tribe of Judah, house of (Beth) David (pronounced Dahveed)] king. If this was the case, the choice of Barabbas would suddenly make sense. One must imagine an [anti-pagan, i.e., anti-rural, Roman-, pre Catholic-, pre OSFA-universal-] -oppressed [mostly Jewish and Muslim] populace confronted with the imminent extermination of their spiritual and political ruler—the Messiah [(Jews saw Christ as a human potential-King-leader; carrying both good and bad implications for Judaism.) and a prophet (Muslims saw christ as merely a human prophet)], whose advent had formerly promised so much. In such circumstances would not the dynasty be more important than the individual? Would not the preservation of the bloodline be paramount, taking precedence over everything else? Would not a people, faced with the dreadful choice, prefer to see their king sacrificed in order that his offspring and his line might survive? If the line survived, there would at least be hope for the future.

"It is certainly not impossible that Barabbas was Jesus' son. Jesus is generally believed to have been born around 6 B.C. The Crucifixion occurred no later than A.D. 36, which would make Jesus, at most, forty-two years of age. But even if he was only thirty-three when he died, he might still have fathered a son. In accordance with the customs of the time, he might have married as early as sixteen or seventeen. Yet even if he did not marry until age twenty, he might still have had a son aged thirteen—who by Judaic custom would have been considered a man. And, of course, there may well have been other children too. Such children could have been conceived at any point up to within a day or so of the Crucifixion." Our brackets, our italics, our bold. Effaced footnote 24.

Quoted from Holy Blood, Holy Grail,
p. 352 of 489 total pages,
by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln, AKA BLL,
1982, Delta paperpack 2004 ed.

Doug - 9Nov2005.

"If we cannot prove our conclusion [rather, BLL's hypothesis: a holy blood line, existing today in 2005, from Jesus is real, and it is 'not' Christian, period...], however, we have received abundant evidence—from both their documents and their representatives—that the Prieuré de Sion [apparently pronounced "zion"] can." Our brackets.

Quoted from Holy Blood, Holy Grail,
p. 399 of 489 total pages,
by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln,
1982, Delta paperpack 2004 ed.

That is our motivation to apply Quantonics' QTMs to Priori de Sion.

We believe we can further show why their (BLL's hypothesis) literally shatters Roman Catholic Christianity and its Protestant offshoots.

Read all of that page to grasp a true depth of depravity which Roman Catholic-constructed Christianity sank to hide "the rest of the story." It reads like The Sopranos. Fitting!

Doug - 19Nov2005.

We just heard (1Nov2005, ~06:15 CDT) Bush, on Imus say that Iraqi insurgents "hate freedom."

No, Mr. Bush they hate Western Imperialist hegemony and fascism imposed by your 'administration.' They, God-fearing Muslims, hate what you and your consanguineous broad-ax 'Christian' bunglers are doing to them! They hate your attempts to take control.

There isn't a dime's worth of 'di' fference twixt you who are killing them and those who are killing us. Get it dude? Look in da' mirror! War mongers all!

Turn our situation around and ask yourself what you would do if China declared "War on USA," and invaded US. Then what would you be doing? Would you be developing US' insurgency capabilities against "Chinese terrorists?"

Imposed dialectical democracy is hegemony! Imposed dialectical democracy is dichon(majority, minority); dichon(win, lose), EOOO(win, lose).

"Dialectic," as Heraclitus told us about 2500 years ago, "is war."

Democracy, like secular Husseinism, finds its bases in dialectic. Mr. Bush, your incredible lack of judgment, ineptness, and stupidity find their bases in dialectic!

Bush, if you are really an American, one who believes in constitutional constraints, why 'not' impose a three-way(Kurd, sunni, shiia) Federated Republic on Iraq instead of "democracy?"

If you call what you are doing, "freedom in Iraq," in our view, it's just another of your unending lies.

If you really are an advocate of freedom, why would you want a conservative Supreme Court, and a conservative Senate, and a conservative House of Representatives? Is freedom hegemony? Is freedom balance? Bush, you lie again! You do not want freedom, you want control! Is freedom what you want? Is freedom what Muslims want? Is freedom an "either one or other?" Is freedom a "both all while and many?" Is freedom "one size (yours) fits all?" Which is more important: what you want? What Muslims want? Can "democracy" resolve that oxymoronic dilemma? Isn't that what a Federated Republic is all about?

Those insurgents do 'not' hate freedom, Mr. Bush. They hate your war against them! They hate what you are doing to them...!

Doug - 1Nov2005.

"Do you find it profoundly revealing that classical universal pretenders of Good call their contrived good's antithesis 'The Devil?'"

By-the-way, and dialectically, "their contrived good's antithesis" is "everyone else!" Irenaeus', Aquinas', and Mohammed's "heretical, antidogmatic infidels."

Religious dialectic at its par d' excellence.

Universally then, anti-dogma The Devil!

Read chapter 13 of Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Doug - 11Nov2005.

An Ideal Bushagain Republican US Supreme Court: Seven Singing One Note Sopranos.

Six paters preying.

Five Catholic Mullahs.

One burning Bush.

And a gaulden US goose laying broken eggs.

With Humpty Rovety smiling porcine pride at what he hath wrought.

Another contract for America: Fundamental Religion's Evangelical Irenæun and Constantinian re engineered "Gosh Spell" Zombiesque $hlock and flAwe Stux Sux Mindmux Brainfux.
(See Baigent, Leigh, & Lincoln's Holy Blood, Holy Grail,
Chapters 12 and 13, Delta paperback, especially p. 322 of 489 including index,
paragraph beginning, "The Gospel of Mark thus provides...")

"I bring not peace but a sword," Jesus in Gospel of Matthew.
"Kill all the infidels!" 'Christian' Crusades and Inquisitions.

But, but, but, we are their "infidels" too!

Bushwhackagain now. 'Da Bush buck stops after all 'da Bushwhacking is 'done.'

Recall Bush! All Earth concurs: "Bush is Earth's 'infidel,' Earth's dark 'angel.'"

Doug - 1-20Nov2005.

Have you noticed enormous similarities twixt Bu()sh()'s "War on Iraq," and Catholic Crusades and Inquisitions?

Bushagain's indefinite seige of Islam! Conversion of pagans into democrats. Sound familiar?

Roman 'catholic' Inquisitional Terrorists used it against Jews, Muslims, Merovingians, Templars, Cathars, witches, heretics (based upon Irenæus' Five Books against Heresies (against choices; against freedom!)), and on and on and on...

Doug - 4-22Nov2005.

"Dialectism is a mental disease! Dialectic is to thought as cocaine is to addiction. Dialectic is an bicameral hallucinogen of consciousness."

Doug - 7Nov2005.

Dick Cheney, if your administration "didn't twist pre-war intelligence," prove it, do n¤t say it, prove it! Prove it to US!!!

Doug - 22Nov2005.

2005 TQS News
December, 2004 through November, 2005



You are here:

Topics: tsunamis,
quantum WJS,
Forrester, etc.
global warming rant,
what is democracy?,
fav flicks list & why?
  & vPod,
our fav TV ad,
Apple's Itunes & IPod,
  gravidation videos,
Banesh on de Broglie,
Who likes Quantonics?,
why we cannot
 fix global warming,
a GW last jab,
social security,
cell chips,
Michael Lynch
on Where Is
Liberal Passion?

Relook at EU,
& Questions
from Mitch...
A sound track,
Quantonics OS X,
A silly GW fix,
computer pathologies,
Doug rants on
Intelligent Design,
Status on
Quantum Holography,
Doug offers his best
expectation of global
warmings' current cyclings
Russert, Katrina, &
Dialectical Christ
Murtha gets it, Libby's foot?,
Why WJS hated religion,
Still a Republican?
"Rewrite History?,"
A Sting WinWinWin,
Admin calls US 'the people,'
Talk/Walk vis-à-vis Walk/Talk,
Confidentiality of News: Society vis-à-vis Individual?,
Technologies vis-à-vis Quantologies,
Can meaning be unambiguous?, and
Our Earthshaker!,

December, 2005 News:

Again we find ourselves at year end, nearly eight years of Quantonics publication under our belts. What an experience! We are treating this issue of our TQS News as very special. We want to share with our community and our readers our heuristic of our interpretation and hermeneutics of The Grail Secret.

Doug - 18Nov2005.

Murtha gets it...

Bravo! Murtha!

We have been suggesting for years that we do not need a 'War on Terror,' rather we need to learn how to carefully, individually, almost anti-virally terrorize terrorists. Treat terrorism as a social virus based upon small viral cells and individuals which are clearly beneath any need for national-level 'war' conflict. But ponder how what we are suggesting is a classical approach: we have inverted Pirsig's Intellect over Society. Why? Our world still practices Society over Intellect: Society over Individual! Our world is predominately a dialectical world. So, indeed, our suggestion emerges in that classical context. But, notice how 'effective' terrorism IS against society. That is a tell that Pirsig has noodled well nature's hierarchy with intellect above society. Until society learns to respect individuals as more highly evolved than society, society will call individual agents of change "unorthodox heretical terrorists."

Will you permit us to offer an 'classical' approach similar what Murtha is suggesting?

How do we terrorize terrorists while forgoing battalionesque war?

We create a network!

What kind of network? A distributed, preferably mobile one, though our interim approach is both mobile and 'not.' Here, mobility is an advantage and classically apparent 'immobility' is an advantage. That combination works for us. It allows us to remain 'effective' in Iraq while lowering personnel requirements about 50% almost immediately.

An approach...

How big is Iraq? 169,240 square miles. That's a square 411.39 miles on a side. It isn't shaped like Iraq, but it is a simple model which facilitates our communicating our suggestion.

Let's put 5000, for a better word 'bunkers,' around and just inside Iraq's perimiter. In our imagination these would be super bunkers using special concrete like Hitler's personal bunker in Germany only improved by modern technology. We imagine say kevlar lamination of exposed parts and or appearance disappearance of potentially exposed parts. They would be modular, mass producible, but probably only in situ due major component: sand. In situ work, to our advantage, is like an attractant, like a fly strip, with lots of stinging opportunities apparent. Insect-fogging might work well here. Just pack 'em in, pick 'em up and put 'em in a jar.

5000 at, just inside perimeter gives approximately, 0.25 mile, about 400 meter bunker spacing.

Now let's do our square's diagonals. 581.8 miles long times two diagonals (1163.6 miles) with bunkers spaced at ~0.5 mile, 800 meter, intervals. Total 2500 bunkers.

Our diagonals form four triangles. Let's put 625 bunkers in each of those triangles. Both randomly and strategically place these. 2500 total bunkers.

That's 10,000 Iraqi bunkers.

Incrementally 'redeploy' to them.

Assume each bunker costs 7.2 million dollars (lots of electronics and fly-swatting and catching weaponry). That totals 72 billion dollars. How many B-stealths is that? That is cost of one current year's operational deployment.

Tacticians can choose better than we how to use those bunkers, but we can see almost unlimited ways to use them. Bunkers, with tightly managed civilian and military curfews, can real-time-networked IFF-32 blysspluss local turkey activities and ask for RDF responses and air support. All bunkers netted as one. Any one can become tentative master. Multiple masters can emerge dynamically, evolutionarily.

We have no idea how to populate them, but if we assume five specialists per bunker, that's 50,000 people. When we add carrier and RDF support that may add another 10-15,000 people. That's about half of personnel we have deployed in Iraq today.

Hemingwayesque, we left out lots of very flexible detail: power (this is the big one; portanux), antennae (critical success factor), C3-4, land comm (preferably lineless quantum, antiquely VLF ground), entry-exit-supplies-detritus-etc. ("how to tame a feral horse" methods work great, i.e., covertly and transparently, here), staff rotation individual and group, emergency evac, weaponry, balance of bunker-bunker-C3 independence and dependence, etc.

Casualty count should drop to near zero. Performance, in our view, would jump to 10x current chaotic, relativistic approach. Comparative ROI is at least 10s of $B per year. Iraqi parliament could be protected like this, and police enforcement could use this approach. It may work in countless other scenarios too.

Gradually, US could integrate 'trusted' Iraqis into bunker deployment. Initially, say 1 out of 5.

But those teams of five would need frequent rotation, we believe.

Anyway it's an adjunct meme for what Murtha is suggesting. And it helps that exemplary gentleman show what a real military approach can do. ('We' should not have gone to 'war;' however, since 'we' did, 'we' should have been doing something like this from scratch. Doug's opinion. Yes, hindsight is nearly perfect... Ugh! Yes, we're playing Monday morning quarterback... What are our alternatives? "More gravy." Doug has been saying long prior many others we should not declare war on Iraq. Ugh!)

Hope we didn't offend any military theoreticians. We respect you folk too much to want to do that. (It's the politicians who suck! Doug's opinion.)

We see this project as a lot like building a super high rise building. Plan for installing 10-20 or more bunkers per day (30 per day could finish in less than one year; imagine this field ops capability as generic, hmmm...?). This would allow incremental delivery and assessment of capability of our meme. Just allowing terrorists to know what we are planning should TERneSanCdertAltRORheEllIZE them! Con(m)sider too, lazy-bee-stinging, and neutron pscythe potentia. (See bees on Plantard crest below, near page bottom. Fully high BW, geosynched, networked, distributed hives... Mobile killer bees... Part mobile and dynamic, part stable and static. Sound familiar? Stindyanic? MSP in tendentious.)


Just Checkin'...Libby's foot that is...

Any copies of X-Rays of ILL's foot? Is it really broken, or is this a play on American subjective sympathies?

Why did WJS hate religion, and why did his brilliant parents teach him to distrust and hate religion?...

Some of Doug's recently, 2005, altered opinions here...strong stuff. Skip it if you are a dialectical Christian.

They studied, learned and knew religious history. If you are a WJS fan and find yourselves frequently rereading Amy Wallace's The Prodigy, you must read, first published in 1982, Holy Blood Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln. You will be stunned! In our perspective, now (2005qings) revised, especially Christianity borne of dialectic thought is awful (worse than awful), and it appears to have started out, at its core, that way. If your time is precious, read part three (chapters 11-15) first, but if you do, realize you are missing much of foundational history built up by BLL. For us, this is must reading for every person on Earth!!! Also see a video entitled 'Origins of the Da Vinci Code,' featuring Henry Lincoln. Latter is crammed with essentials to what Doug is researching regarding Priori de Sion, and Holy Grail. See our progress decoding Plantard (in French apparently 'd' is silent) family crest at bottom of this page. You must read all of HBHG to perpend our efforts there.

Early Romans and later Roman Catholics attempted to destroy all belief systems except theirs!!! 'Heretical' Jews, Muslims, Gnostics, Arians, Cathars, and so on. They murdered millions of people in their hate-filled 2000 year reign of terror and set up precisely world conditions we see in play today!!! Why do some Muslims call USA "satan?" Now, at least partially, Doug understands why. In Doug's opinion, Catholicism appears genuinely satanic, really! It appears to us as though Catholicism is guilty of Muslims' claims.

We are stunned at our own words...but we would n¤t emit them if we didn't believe them.

Look at what da Bush administration has been doing for five years. It is so close to what Romans were doing nearly 2000 years ago! It hasn't stopped! It is still in progress, and we are electing them and appointing them (i.e., 'Christian,' fundamentalist right wing fascists) to our highest courts!!! Catholicism means OSFA folks! It is a size Doug wants naught to fit.

Christianity, especially Catholicism is essentially orthodox classical social pattern of value:

individual minds. The Church makes the people. Fascist zombi orthodox clones! Ugh!

Some species of Protest_against_Catholics_antism aren't much better. Doug's opinions!!! N¤t the opinions, Doug's opinions!

But religion isn't their-our problem, folks! Dialectic is!!!

Just like our current GWBushagain 'christian' administration, Christianity is a child of terrorism, violence, hatred, countless lies, broken promises, unending hypocrisies, reengineering of history ("rewrite history" should sound familiar to you late in 2005; it's their own tool and they know how to do it better than ones whom they accuse of doing it), rewriting history to fit a Roman (n¤n Jewish) social pattern, and millennia-long attempted destruction of Jews themselves. Terror too, like religion, adheres dialectic.

Should WJS hate religion? Did he have a good reason? Indeed! But he should have realized, and didn't, that dialectic is Earth's major thing-king problematic.

Still a Re Publican?...

Are you still a Republican?

We used to be...however, after last five years of GWBushagain's 'administration,' we are n¤t, and due religious considerations above we shall naught return. Actually, we have been Independent for decades, but we almost always voted Republican. Interestingly, after slick and slimey ("we need another shower") WJC, we felt we didn't have any choice! (And if we needed lots of showers under slick; we'll have to just stay in d' shower with PHP as president (Porcelain Hillarious Princess)) Now we have a n¤vel and even more difficult choice: vote for Democrats and their dialectically stupid social pogroms ¤r do n¤t vote at all. We need a third choice which has yet to enter existence, one which places individual above, while respecting, (a n¤n dialectical) society. (Our remediation and use of 'respect' here is n¤n trivial.)

Our opinion is that Republican right wing fundamentalism, let's call it Reprigwifun, is just and simply Roman-classically and Greco-dialectically evil. Why do we say that? Our list is long. W's 'administration' Wifunning Reprigs, in our opinion, we allege they are, taken as a social group predominately:

All of which, again in our view, goes against any grain of what we might call "being an American." Could individual people who claim to believe-in, love, and fear God have-be-do any-all of those 'traits' and remain viable as 'public servants?' Americans who elect and defend folk of that ilk, to our ways of thinking, are anti-American and have earned disrespect which we and many of our global neighbors now share for them.

We'll say it again: We've admitted our mistake of believing in Republicans. It's time we all admit our mistake of electing this administration. Recall Bush first. Then impose one | two term limits on all 'public servants.' Legislate an expedient recall process for all 'public servants.' Doug doesn't know about your feelings, but he does n¤t want to see Bush as our 'president' for another three years. A neat side effect is it will put Cheney in lime's light. We can see him for what he really is. Too, we can watch a USA soap opera of Republicans trying to figure out how to keep Cheney from running so they can launch Con 'di.' (That's 'dichon' syllabically-reversed. J)

However, if Bush does remain in office, that too is a gift. We shall see three more years of mismanagement and nearly total destruction of Republican party 'ethics.' (Assuming they don't take USA down with them.)

On politically correct republican speech...

Have you noticed that it is OK for Bush's 'administration' to call all of us, "the people," but they get really huffy when we call them, "the administration?"

Lot's more to say here...

Talk/Walk vis-à-vis Walk/Talk...

In Doug's first entrepreneurial adventure we said, "Performance equals Walk divided by Talk, and non performance equals Talk divided by Walk."

How do you assess Bush and his cronies? We see them as P=T/W!

Classically, P=W/T. Quantumly, PIndividual/Social.

Confidentiality of News: Society vis-à-vis Individual?...

Has this whole blow-up with Woodward and The Post bothered your own sensibilities?

What is confidentiality?

Is confidentiality a social pattern of value?

Is confidentiality an individual pattern of value?

How can any group of three or more maintain confidentiality?

Isn't comfidentiality limited to trusted, individual patterns of value twixt two individuals?

Bob Woodward understands this. Many others simply do not. Bob as an individual is above The Washington Post. Individual pattern of value above social pattern of value! Bob is acting like an individual. In this case, larger picture, what is good for Bob is above what is good for TWP. Most socialized journalists see it upside down: society above individual. Social 'leadership' has carefully trained them to dialectically thingk that way. It keeps society 'in control.' Societal hegemony is antithetical individual free will. And confidentiality! Bob is showing us that he understands all this, quite well, as a matter of apparent 'fact.' Bob Woodward may be Earth's first genuine quantum~journalist. Bravo!

Can meaning be unambiguous?...

In Quantonics we claim all meaning is quantum, thus wavic, thus stochastic, thus quantum~likelihood~omnistributionings, thus subjectiv.

All meaning then is triquantonic(pastings,nowing,futurings) likelihoodistic. See our recent pastings, nowings, futurings.

As a result we have recommended that Google "go subjective."

In that light, there is a new VC sponsored company, whose CTO is a brilliant female. Said company is Meaning Masters. Check 'em out.

Too, there is this recently emerged itsy bitsy company which needs to understand in depth what we just wrote. It's called, fabulously and very quantumly "Zentangle."

Doug will be writing much more about what we have to do to go quantum. Quantonics adepts should already grasp essentials here: middle~inclusion, BAWAM, REIMAR, QLOs, etc. Big issue is, without genuine quantum computing, how do we use today's classical-mechanical tools to M¤Q~up a quantum subjective reality? We do what quantum mechanics has had to do: use probability techniques while recognizing that probability is a causal-effective a posteriori notion and we need a more quantum approach which recursively and recapitulatively mixes:

with quantum cohera and entropa.

Of course impending quantum quantologies will offer those quantum memeos implicitly.

On classical technologies vav quantum quantologies...

It is fascinating to recall evolution of technology(ies) as we understand them late in 2005. It is even more fascinating to ponder, first, how they might have evolved, and second, how they may evolve.

A rough Doug recall of some old PBS material:

On Plantard Family's Crest ...

We believe that Quantonics offers its community quantum perspectives of all that humans peruse, including both actuality and n¤nactuality (latter what SOMites claim "objectively does 'not' exist").

Our own quantum~ostentation (from any classical, dialectical conspective: "...nonsense, pretense, hubristic-prodigality, prevarication, equivocation, etc.") offers heuristics and hermeneutics which are indeed, "quantum~extraordinary, ~sophist and ~elite." We assume quantum reality and we assume that quantum reality is absolutely animate, and n¤t classically concrete.

If you want to share entendres with us here in this December, 2005 TQS News page, at a bare minimum you must read Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's (BLL's) Holy Blood Holy Grail, watch disinformation's 2005 video (DVD) 'Origins of the Da Vinci Code,' and have a modicum of depth in your studies of Quantonics. Prior that we recommend you read Dan Brown's (1st) Demons and Angels, then his (2nd) The Da Vinci Code. See HBHG's bibliography for other texts. If you are serious, do not content yourself with a single read of HBHG. Beth and Doug are recapitulating both book and video frequently.

Doug aside - 19-26Nov2005:

Again, we sense a need to tell you and to a lesser extent attempt to show you what we believe:

We are religiously partisan. Again, and louder, "We are religiously partisan." Again, Doug, "What do you mean by that?"

Simply, to us religion based in dialectic is harmful to humanity. Religion which claims to know absolutely what is either good or bad, either right or wrong, either true or false, harms and stultifies humanity!

These works with which we have spent significant effort show us that Christianity, as practiced for centuries since anti-choice, anti-heresy Irenæus and later Sun (day) worshiper Constantine, is dialectically Greco-Roman-catholic-contrived perturbations of more ancient Old Testament and Judaic traditions which find their bases in even more ancient 'systems' of thought. They show us that Romans coopted and reengineered Christianity to their own anti Judao-Christian pre-Christ and living-Christ views. Nearly two millennia later, many folk of Western culture live with their causal, dialectical, concrete evils, their warped and deceptive contrivances, today! (Said contrivances are well-studied and -documented, and most serious students and historians agree. Most who disagree are neocon (neo-notsees living "at dialectic's 'edge of no'"), SaS-ERP-blindered religious hegemonists.)

BLL in their HBHG show us that their interpretations of what Jesus believed was in many respects antithetical his own Judaism, and emphatically what Jesus believed was antithetical what Roman Catholics subsequently, and for their own political convenience they turned Christ's own beliefs into what they believed and what they wanted. (Our bold emphasizes our own beliefs that what we call "Christianity" today simply is n¤t Christ's own belief system! We now believe that Irenæus and Constantine (Romans), et al., mangled and distorted Christ's teachings.) BLL also show us that Jesus was n¤ divinity, n¤r did he adhere 'notions' (quantum memeos) of politics as in any way beneficent, affectionate ¤r caring. Messiah means, in its original use in Jesus' time, high level human official, power broker, king: n¤t divine n¤r divinity.

Romans subsequently went on to declare themselves capable of naming and declaring both kings and divinities. We see this blatant arrogance and stupidity in Catholicism's current naming of and declaring humans as 'Saints.' Similarly they declared Jesus 'divine.' He wasn't and isn't! Jesus was human. Mary was human. Anne was human. Magdalen was human. They may have had (bloodline) and carried (grail) very unusual, more general, less specific, and notably quantum DNA, but they were still only human.

One year ago, we did n¤t believe what those previous paragraphs desnouer. One year ago, we saw Jesus more in light of potentially divine, perhaps even more so than each of us other human beings. One year ago we thought Christianity was a reasonable historical quasi-reality. Now we believe we have been intellectually abused and raped by self-interested and self-aggrandizing religious politicians. Worse, these scum bag religious politicians are still trying to cover up what their satanic ancestors did. Why? "Status quo is the way to go! We want to retain hegemony over our religious flock!" Buzz off degenerate ne'erdowells!

Doug was raised and baptised Methodist. When Doug was five, and this is remembered lucidly: he had an epiphany of his own corporate (i.e., quanton(mind,body)) impermanence: a vision of his own, what classicists call radically, finally "death." Shortly after, Doug was baptised. He hated it, yet in many ways didn't understand why. He thought everyone involved were role-playing pseudo actors. He still does. To Doug his own baptism at that young age was hocus bogus. But he has believed as long as he can remember that Jesus was divine, and represented what we all are: children of God. (For over 25 years, since at least 15 years prior Quantonics, Doug has somehow intuited that G¤d issi ihn us and wæ aræ ihn G¤d.) In that sense Doug believes in God, but he immensely distrusts organized, dialectical, 'common sense' OSFA belief religions. To Doug there isn't a dime's worth of difference twixt organized dialectical religion and vigilantes. Middle Ages dialectical Catholics called their vigilantism 'Inquisition' based upon a conceived need to banish and destroy all heretics (according and abiding Irenæus' dialectical dogma), today's equivalent of 'ethnic cleansing.' As it turns out modern Christianity has become radical mechanism fenced by radical finalism. See Bergson's Creative Evolution chapters 7 and 8. Recent USA 'wars' are vivid exemplars of what has been going on for millennia, based upon both naïve dialectical realism and naïve dialectical localism borne of Greek Attic dialectic. Classicists take their 'local reality' and call it the reality. It, even after nearly two millennia, yet and only distills to $hlock and Flawe Bu()sh()! OGT in OGC! Religions' fundamentalist-fascist bat scat: coprolytic legacy thing-king.

During 2005 we have come to believe that Jesus is and was n¤t divine, Jesus was n¤t crucified (Judao-Greco-Roman role playing (planned and instigated by Jesus himself) and (subsequent, primarily Roman) subterfuge involved here; read chapters 11-15 of HBHG), Jesus was in some sense a terrorist himself (I bring not peace, but a sword: 10, 34 Matthew). It appears to us, and for us this is more of a feeling, that Mary Magdalene carried the Holy Blood (in a sense of a specific, cloaked and protected, genetically unique yet more (in 2005 we would say "quantum~") general, Judaic heritage) and in that sense she was a Holy Grail (tribe of Benjamin). For us Magdalene represents a genuine sacred feminine, which we have intuited since pre-adolescence, and is what some ancients believed in and adhered via some matrilineal families.

(Multiversal quantum~genericity is outside any scope of our Earth-centric discussion here.)

(Romans denigratingly called ancients "pagans" and attempted total eradication of them, especially women whom they labeled 'witches.' Roman paternal rule was and is, since just after Constantine, patently against maternal parity let alone maternal rule. Throughout post Constantinian history women have been denigrated as lesser beings than men. Since about late 19th century it has been starting to become obvious that they are at least men's equals.)

"Being against anything is a classical act. Being for and with a quantum commingling, emerging, ascending reality is a 'class' act." Doug - in his 2001 review of Clifford Geertz' Available Light.

Plantard's crest covers and coverts 'elite' encryptions which show us, perhaps in a more modern and even quantum perspective, what the Holy Grail is. We offer here a, in our evolving text our own, tentative and tendentious, devastating quantum~assessment.

Our view is important. Why? Look at what is happening in America today, and our world, and among Muslims and Christians. Is that Good? How can God love that? Our view is that in order for God to love that, God has to be a dialectician!

Doug's view of a nondialectical quantum G¤d, i.e., Doug's personal belief about an ineffable deity, sees war among religions as evil, d'evil, satanic, Satan he-rself. But Christ and Mohammed advocate "kill the infidels war-like-violence" as we have quoted from both Kuran and Bible. It seems to us that something's terribly awry! Did you get that? We do n¤t see quantum~religion as evil, rather, we see (especially and predominately) dialectic, war, and terrorism among dialectical religions as evil. And by 'evil' we intend "n¤t better." All of us want better, yet better is a local perspective isn't it? Your better and our better are always omnifferings and changings. So for plural perspectives to co reside in Earth, we need to respect one another and tolerate one another. We disavow and abhor any 'notions' of killing 'the infidels' as a | the means to better. Where concrete dialectical monism and monasticism induce war, animate coinsident quantum pluralism mitigates it.

Doug aside on an evolved complementarospective of respect and tolerance:

Since Doug wrote that bold violet text just above, Doug's view of respect and tolerance has evolved. Let's share it.

Respect is a non trivial meme. Without derivation and detail let's bottom line it here.

All entities, to Doug, have omnique local rights (both innate (locally evolved) and intrinsic (naturally nascent)). Individuals have rights, men have rights, women have rights, humans have rights, fetuses have rights, families have rights, cities have rights, states have rights, nations have rights, planets have rights, solar systems have rights, and so on...

A fine affine: we must learn to co respect entities' rights while allowing entities' to disrespect aspects of what others do.

Thence, we must learn to balance respect for entity rights and tolerance of others' local pragma. It's a quantum BAWAM.

It is disrespectful to impose one entities' beliefs~pragma on any other(s) entity.

A lot of detail is missing here. Doug assumes a quantum~spun M¤Q "level of evolution" hierarchy of (top: most highly evolved) Individual, Society, Biology, and Atomic~Inorganic (bottom: least highly evolved).

See intotic, sociotic, inotic, and antintotic, antisociotic, antinotic.

Doug - 15May2007.

End respect and tolerance aside.

End aside.

BLL tell us that protagonists, during Jesus' life, dialectically confused "the message," with "adherents of the message." Similarly, it is easy to confuse "the Holy Blood line" with "the carriers-bearers of the Holy Grail." More quantum~specifically earth-chauvinistically we view DNA as Holy Blood ("the message"), and hu~both~wo~and~mans as "carriers (adherents) of the DNA." We have felt this since late 1980s but prior hadn't, until now (2005qings), expressed it that way. Also, if one studies biology, one cannot escape an implicit intuition that DNA is quantum: it self~refers, recurses, emerges, evolves, superluminally quantum~c¤hæræs; it is animate, unstoppable, wholly mutable, middle~inclusive, stochastic, both adiabatic and superadiabatic, quatro~coherent (see cohera), quatro~entropic (see entropa), everywhere~associative, and so on...

Doug aside - 27Nov2005:


  1. An old and revered classical idiom, "Quantitatively follow the money trail," has transformed into
  2. A novel quantum avatar, "Qualitatively follow DNA~geneticity and DNA~genealogy."

We have been able to adhere number one since human-recorded chronology began on Earth. Why? Some said "Money is the root of all evil." But quantum reality changes all that. It is in quantum~processings of showing us that "Dialectic is (CTMs are) the root of all evil, and quantum biological evolution empirically and experio-sensually (æxpærih¤~sænsually) shows us it is so. We call that memeotic quantum~s¤~næss, 'quantum~factings, quantum truthings.'"

Culturally, we have only been capable of adopting and adapting to number two since near-end of Millennium II and now very early into Millennium III. Problematically, our bibliotheca and classically socialized and institutionalized academic corpus (in any classical sense of 'body of knowledge') are still predominately 'dialectical.'

Number two plays a major role in issues regarding any efforts to uncloak and desnouer both a sang réal or sang raal and a san graal: quanton(san_graal,sang_raal). Especially in a classical regard that end of Millennium II historians see 'history' as a monotemporal unithread: an identical recall of an ideal OSFA unit-history. In quantum~reality there are unlimited both local and nonlocal multiversal histories! Quantum reality is, quantum~uncertainly, bottom to top, multi-tasking, multithreading, with each task and thread having its own multitemporal sensory bandwidth perspicacious and perspicuous 'standards.'

Millennial evolution: MII to MIII:

Pisces to Aquarius.

Social Monistic Theocracy to Individual Omniplex Veritas.

Either-Or to Both~And

Truth over Good to Good over Truth

Sanguine to Indigo.

Push to Pull.

Dichon to Quanton.

Static to Dynamic.

Stux to Flux.

One to Many.

Concrete to Phenomena

XX or XY to XX...,XY... and XX...,XX...

Exclusion to Inclusion.

Orthodoxy to Hætær¤d¤xy.

Cathedral to Bazaar.

Certainty to Ihndeterminacy. DIQ to QIC.
Effect to Affect.

Analytic Dissociation to C¤herent Ass¤ciati¤n.

State to Pr¤cess.

Manufacture to Emerscenture.

Architecture to Emerscitecture.

One Life Centrism to Unending Ontic Reiterationings.

Tragedy of Commons Sense to Avatars of Individual Extra¤rdinary Sense.
Homo sapien to Neo sapien

Closed to Open

Social Hegemony to Ihndihvihdual Frææ Will.

See DIQ and QIC.

In our work just below, you shall see ample evidence of Priori de Sion's apparent awareness in quantum tells used as 'elite' artistic and semantic semaphores.

End aside.

A Plantard Portcullis:

As of 12Jul2008 Doug is adding red text markups below to extend more recent perceptions gathered from David Woods' Genisis. See red markups below... Doug - 12Jul2008.

Allow us to start our hermeneutics of Plantard's crest here and maintain it here (also compare Château les Rennes' crest: a Star of David whose portcullis has 32 strips):

To keep this, initially anyway, simple allow us to make a list of Plantard Crest's constituents:

How many list items have we? Three. What about three? It is numerically prime. It is sum of one and two. One is first odd prime. Two is first and only even prime. One, two and three form a series, a very special series: the Fibonacci series, the natural number series, the golden rectangle series, the phi series, the 'God number' series, the

(Need Wingdings font (Apple and Win$Tel versions may be omnifferings.) to see special characters in that line. E.g., five as a rose with five petals.)

We can also show superpositionings (quantum plussings) of these Fibonacci numbers, symbolically:

Doug's Fibonacci Rendition of Plantard Crest's Fleur de Lis.

When we saw this Fleur de Lis in Plantard's Crest, we said to Beth, "That is a blatant symbol for hermaphrodicity, no less ambiguous than a phallus! Could this be symbolic of Holy Blood Holy Grail?" It is, to Doug, both a major vagina and a minor vagina and a major penis and a minor penis shown integrally. It is bound by a Da Vinci triple foreskin. See Serge Bramly's Leonardo, p. 120, Da Vinci sketch of 'The External Genitalia and Vagina.' It is also double sets: 1 (bipolar penis, hemipenis), 2 (mirrored 2s as labia), 3 (foreskin triple moat). It may be more obvious in this color version from HBHG Illustrated Edition:

Arcas and Callisto

From Holy Blood, Holy Grail, Illustrated Edition.
A Fleur de Lis using Bears (Arthurs).

In this case we see Arcas and Callisto as a hermaphroditic mother~son integral bound by a circumstrip. Search WWW for <arcas callisto>. Some of those descriptions appear to us to hint at a grail notion of holy DNA as truly, genetically hermaphroditic. Merry XX-XY,XX-XXness!
Classically 'ideal' specific-humans are formally EOOO dichon(female, male), and no perturbations allowed!

Perhaps quantum genuine, generic humans are truly quantum~coherent quanton(female,male) hermaphroditic...hmmm...? That perspective aligns our own perceptions of quantum reality.

Recall Gospel of Thomas (GoT), 105, Jesus said, "Whoever knows the father and the mother will be called the child of a whore." Who is that? Jesus!
Why? Mary was a virgin. Yet she had a child. Father, as believed in that ancient Judaic culture, is God and mother is Mary, but Mary is married to Joseph.
Magdalen's hermaphroditic spawn, from any classical conspective, make her a whore and her children, "children of a whore."

Whoever knows God as Jesus' father and Mary as Jesus' mother has to call Jesus, classically, "child of a whore."

And GoT, 106, Jesus said, "When you make the two into one, you will become children of Adam..." and 111, And does not Jesus say,
"Those who have found themselves, of them the world is not worthy?"

And 114 added later, Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her a male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

Finally, from GoT, 15, Jesus said, "When you see one who was not born of woman, fall on your faces and worship. That one is your Father."

And 22, "...when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, ...then you will [enter the kingdom}."

Quotes taken from the Thomas Homepage. By Stephen Patterson and Marvin Meyer.

Merry Quanton(female,male)ness!!!


...1, 2, 3...

And this from Frances A. Yates' Giordano Bruno, Yates' own hermeneutics from Pimander complement of Hermes Trismegistus' opus in five Hermetic writings (based partially upon Festugière and partly upon Ficino), "Nature from her union with Man brought forth seven men...being both male and female and rising up towards the sky." Our bold and ellipsis. See Yates' Giordano Bruno, p. 24 of 466 total including index, CUP, 1991 paperback.

So ancient hermetic Egyptians too saw true hermaphrodicity as essential to Godliness.

In our view, this goes a long way toward explaining many enigma and apparent paradoxes in Nag Hammadi's Gospel of Thomas and our Genesis 1, 27 quote just above.

It, too, enlightens a tight quantum~included~middle intracomplementation among Priori de Sion and ancient Hermetic beliefs, especially Egyptian hermetics. If one studies David Wood's Genisis, one finds that 'Sion' may stand for Egyptian first letters of Set, Isis, Osiris, and Nephthys! This is apparently an strong gnostic affine. Doug - 12Jul2008.

And then in accordance with our MoQ and quantum memes of individual above society, "Pimander gives Trismegistus advice," ... "He is to know himself, because 'he who knows himself goes towards himself,' that is towards his true nature." ... "Only the man who has intellect (not all men have it) can thus know himself." Pimander further explains to Trismegistus that at death one's SQ (Nature) goes back to DQ ('ogdoatic' nature)." And Trismegistus 'engraved within himself the benefit of Pimander.'1" Ibid, p. 25.

"1 'Ego autem Pimandri beneficium inscripsi penetralibus animi...'"

And that Latin footnote is almost full Quantonicsese, almost quantum~h¤listic, "inscripsi penetralibus animi" as "compenetrating animacy." Wow!!

We have to mitigate our "Wow!" In Chapter XXI of Yates' Giordano Bruno opus she shows us that Hermes Trismegistus' ancient, perhaps even pre Moses, provenance was disproven by Isaac Casaubon in 1614. Casaubon (a Swiss Protestant prodigy) used philological analysis (~kin of Doug's approach criticizing EPR's EPR) to date Hermes Trismegistus as Post Christian! Potential references here consume a whole library on their own. Yates suggests The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics, by J. Doresse, London, 1960.

Doug - 24May2006.

Doug - 4-8Dec2005.

What is special about Fibonacci's series? It is a non negative additive quantum~coherent recursion. What is quantum reality? A n¤n negative probability~wave additive quantum~coherent recursion. A quantum fractal series! The Fibonacci series' terms are additively prime. No other factors except those preceding any term in a Fibonacci series can factor said term without creating an alias of said term. For example 8' = 4 + 4 is an alias of a Fibonacci '8' since it does not use terms from Fibonacci's series to factor it (this is of enormous importance in various systems, including encryption and ancient means of encoding texts, maps, and graphics, antialiasing, etc.). Fibonacci series terms are additively unique: genius, one-of-a-kind! 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377,610,987,1597... is parent of phi AKA "the God number."

Explicitly, "Weings, both one and many of kindings, are quantum~fractally ihn G¤dings, and G¤dings, both one and many of kindings are quantum~fractally ihn us." That is Doug's kind of quantum~religion.

In Fibonacci series, a numerical limit last term divided by previous approaches a limit described by:

N = N+1/N and

N2 - N - 1 = 0 (positive root of this quadratic)

1.618... (1597/987 is approximately phi; irrational limit accuracy improves with each fractal iteration; see quanta)

Priori de Sion knows much about phi! That is an understatement of multiversal proportions.

Allow us to further expand our list:


We also need to discuss 1.618... more, especially significance of six (+1 is seven) and eight (-1 is seven). Note how 69 may be viewed as hermaphroditic and much similar Schrödinger's hermaphroditic hydrogen atom model. Our quantum research has made it abundantly clear that quantum reality is partheno~emergent, self~referent, recursive, fractal, EIMA, everywhere~recapitulative and thus quantum~hermaphroditic. Quantum reality is an hermaphroditic reality!!! See our coinage of parthenofluxis and see our parthenofluxic emergence of quarks and fermions in our fuzzon to fermion ontology. Quantum_Realityn+1 Quantum_Realityn

Notice how 8 can be two partheno~complemented sixes. Lay it down to desnouer its apparent infinity. Fold it to make a fermion! Break it apart to make two 'o's.' Align them to make a concentric moat-doughnut-torus. Overlap them to make a Venn. Imagine an 8 as both a Möbius and n¤n Möbius ribbon. Superpose a pentacle and see what ancient Sions did in France: see David Wood's Genisis. Ask some questions: is a circle a circle? Why? Why not? Is a circle infinitely reducible? Why? Why not? Is constant? Why? Why not? When? When not? How? How not? Where? Where not? Change all those classical 'nots' to quantum n¤ts. Ask your queries again. See our QELRs of circle, line, point. Ask yourself what is better way to monitor a circle's quantum~n¤n~circleness. Hint: fluid turbulence! Ask yourself "Why do Saturn's 'rings' appear to n¤t exhibit fluid turbulence?" Hint: quantum~comtext.

So reader, you see we have a very interesting Quantonic heuristic of what The Grail Secret is. We have a start on our own quantum hermeneutics and memeotics surrounding The Grail Secret. Prior Doug's thinking of it 'twasn't there, after, 'twas everywhere...

If we are correct, Roman Catholicism and its Protestant scions are just and simply dialectical classical Babel!!! But if you have read Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's Holy Blood Holy Grail, you already surmised that.

This stuff is fascinating and unbelievably time consuming.

Next month we shall continue this, another of our n¤vel Chautauquas.

Yep, we are still working on our Bohm Reviews, our Banesh Hoffmann Review, our Shufflebrain Review, our Quantum and QED~QCD research, and our review of WJS' AIA. James' VoRE is somewhere in limbo... Evaluons have gone black...Agriculture Dept. Deep seedlings...

Thank you for reading,

Doug - 5Dec2005.

See you here again in early January, 2006!


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

Doug Renselle
Quantonics, Inc.
Suite 18 #368 1950 East Greyhound Pass
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730

©Quantonics, Inc., 2005-2029 — Rev. 4Dec2015  PDR — Created 1Nov2005  PDR
(5-9Dec2005 rev - Typo. Add some red text. Fix some missing subscripts and italicization of book titles. Ursa constellation. Yates' quote on hermaphrodicity. Update 11 bees.)
(12,14,20Dec2005 rev - Typos. Re insert arcas~callisto 1,2,3 image. Update 'technologies' to reflect Heron's contributions. Add 'Earth Shaker' anchor to Plantard Crest segment.)
(18,24,29Jan2006 rev - Typos.Add quantum chiralty list remark.)
(8,14Feb2006 rev - Add Plantard Crest anchor. Offer alternate spelling of Hamada: Hammadi.)
(1Apr2006 rev - Gospel[s] to Gospel. Reset legacy red text.)
(13,24May2006 rev - Correct many spelling errors. Qualify our Trismegistus 'Wow!")
(6Sep2006 rev - Slight page reformatting.)
(1Nov2006 rev - Repair typo.)
(17Feb2007 rev - Add 'Matthew' link under 'Still a Republican?')
(15May2007 rev - Add Doug aside on his version of respect and tolerance.)
(11Oct2007 rev - Interpret Et in Arcadia Ego as 2283 numerically per ogdoatic trinity.)
(5Mar2008 rev - Reformat slightly. Add editorial link to April, 2007 News on "insecurity requirements.")
(12Jul2008 rev - Add David Wood results under Plantard Crest hermeneutics.)
(20Dec2008 rev - Add 'Quantum~Awareness' anchor.)
(5Apr2010 rev - Make page current. Add Plantard Crest link to 'Symbolic Significance of Eleven' at Doug's Last Supper exegesis.)
(10Dec2012 rev - Add 'serpent' link just below Plantard Crest graphic.)
(4Dec2015 rev - Add two anchors: '11 bees' and '2 bears.')