Mike

Tom Strange, You wrote: “Mike... it's OK... they're your opinions and you believe them... there's nothing at all wrong with that...” What you really mean to say here, though, is: “Mike, they’re MERELY your opinions, and they’re wrong. This is not merely Tom’s opinion, it’s the absolute truth.” Why don’t you fully write out what you mean to claim? I know why. By hiding it in an implication it sounds more authoritative and gives the listener less of a handle to deal with it in disagreement. *** You wrote: “I think part of what confuses me when you're posting your opinions Mike, is that you "switch back and forth from different sources. I would think it might be easier to follow if when you're trying to convince us of your argument that "PFAL is God-breathed", that you use the one "God-breathed" source to help prove that. It doesn't make sense (to me) to use sources that aren't "God-breathed" because how could you prove they were true?” Here it is in outline form. Doctrine – Book and magazine form, with vpw’s name on it. History – Anything in the print and tape record. *** You wrote: “I never, ever heard or read where veepee said to elevate PFAL over the KJV or the Bible. I often heard and read where he said PFAL was to be used (a tool) to help understand the Bible or KJV. But if that's your opinion...” From the film class were taught that the KJV was a tool, and not The Word in itself. You may have forgotten. Toward the end of Dr’s life are many records where he pointed to the collaterals and said they needed to be mastered. He did not point to any version of the Bible like that in those years. *** You wrote: “Oh... and dooj's analogy with the hammer/chisel/coconut was a good one, there were tools and there was food. __ Your analogy was a nice try, but not the same comparison. You took food that could be used as a tool and compared it... a different thing all together.” Doojable deliberately took tools that could not be eaten to illustrate her argument, not prove it. Likewise I deliberately took tools that COULD be eaten to illustrate my argument, not prove it. The proof is NOT in the pudding.

Tom Strange, You wrote: “...to me it just sounds like you're taking veepee's written works going through them and deciding that "this one is" and "this one isn't" and then deciding "from this point to this point it all is" and then go back to choosing again... __ at least I think that's what you're saying up there... which is fine, it's your opinion... unless you've got some stone tablets that you brought down from a mountaintop or something...” I do have such stone tablets. It’s not at all a matter of whimsy for me. I do my picking and choosing according to principles, and it was done long ago, before I started posting, not on-the-fly. The principle is “It Is Written,” the motto of the Way Corps. It’s obvious that Dr’s teaching evolved over the decades from spoken to written. The written is the final end-product of the 1942 promise where Dr was to “teach others.” Towards the end of Dr’s life, starting slowly in 1975, he is on record pointing to the written record of his teaching as what needs to be mastered by us. *** As for your defense of CM’s grammar and punctuation, you omitted the context of my remarks. He was complaining that I was not responding to him, so I gave him some tips for getting better attention. ************************************************************ ************************************************************ ************************************************************ ************************************************************ Raf, HCW: Hey, Doc. Are your works God-breathed? VPW: No. Mike: Hey Doc. Are the collaterals your works? VPW: No. I didn't write the book.

Raf, My policy towards ignoring Dr’s private statements is an absolute necessity, and is well locked in place. It’s needed to protect from the wide divergence of what people claim (usually false claims) what he said in private. Even credible posters can read their own beliefs into a subtle conversation they had many years ago. And when they refuse cross examination they’re credibility on that issue drops a bit. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the exact same “reading into” went on for that poster you have in mind as goes on here all the time regarding PFAL page 83. Dr was very clear on that page that his sense knowledge ideas were just as unreliable as anyone else’s, BUT that what God taught him by revelation was solid rock. People here have shown me they can easily latch onto Dr’s warning on page 83 that his sense knowledge was unreliable, and can simultaneously ignore totally the “God-breathed” and “necessarily” connection in the same sentence. With a private conversation a similar mistake is even easier to make, since the context can be so easily lost in the shuffle. With page 83 I can point out the words that are continually ignored. *** I totally expect the people closest to Dr to be the MOST blinded by his flesh, according to the principle behind Matthew 13:57.

doojable, Why is it such a complex idea to you that I’d place a differing status to differing types of teachings of Dr’s? I cite tapes to show things regarding ministry history, and they serve some other purposes too. But the “last word” or the most authoritative level of Dr’s teachings is “it is written.” If there is a contradiction between what is on tape and in print, the print wins. I do not prohibit myself from citing tapes, even though I see they command the lesser authority than print carries. If someone cites a tape or something else from TWI that is not from Dr’s “book and magazine form” teaching I do not prohibit such a citing, I simply refuse to allow it to command the authority of “it is written.” *** You asked me to cite evidence of Dr’s earlier years overt insistence of his authority to present God’s Word. I did not cite that in this thread’s immediate context because I had already done so in the 22 “thus saith” statements I presented earlier in this thread. CM, has provided a link above to an unabridged version of one of the items I included in abbreviated form in those “22 statements.” *** You wrote: “In fact, I find it disturbing that you place no value whatsoever on what he spoke in private because even dr used to say that "in private' is where a man truly lives. In fact, "in private' is where he made his biggest offenses - and they should count for something - even if you don't like what they count for.” Ok, let’s feel free to utilize Dr’s private statements, and let’s elevate them to a status above what he put on tape and in print. Dr told me privately that I was to take over the ministry after Craig failed. He told me in private that if you don’t sell all your possessions and give me the money, that God wouldn’t spit in your direction. We can feel free to discount anything Dr did or printed in public if what he told me in private contradicts it. Hey! I just may have an element of sarcasm in my voice here, but I have seen attitudes not too different from the above alive and seriously entertained in more than a few clergy over the years. The entire Geer group rests on exactly such a foundation. Doojable, can you cite the record (tape or print) where Dr shared what you report here?

doojable, It IS the case with vpw. You just need to look in his early record for it. Many SNS tapes in the low 200's have this. It's in a major book, published in 1971.

Maybe I was thinking of someone else.

CM, You wrote: “no response mike? __ thinkin it over? don't even want any kind of clarification?” There’s no response for several reasons, but thinking it over is not one of them. Here are some reasons: 1) I have little time, but that may change today as the rains are coming. 2) There are many posts that I haven’t even read on the past two pages; yours included. I get hit with ideas from all angles, if you haven’t noticed. You are not the only one who is getting “no response.” 3) One way to help yourself gain a higher priority in my “response list” is to be less insulting. Keep up the current tone and you will get even less response form me. 4) Another way to guarantee a lowered status in my response priorities is to make it hard for me to read your posts. Hey! I’m all for artistic and individualistic expression, but a little cleaning up of your grammar and punctuation will go a long way to actually getting your ideas across.

doojable, I’m not changing the tune; it’s just that you haven’t heard all the notes yet. In past posts, before you entered the fray, we’ve been through this issue before. I stick to a fairly consistent set of rules, and I've stated them several times the past. Often posters don’t see these rules, paying too much attention to mounting their stratergery for counting my posts. Then again, sometimes posters like you enter the fray many months after I clarify my position, and need me to repeat these things. It would be interesting if I searched all my posts to see if I forget any details here (I’m winging it), but I’ll state my position again: There is a fairly well defined set of writings with VPW’s name attached in “book and magazine form” that I look to as the last word, the most authoritative say on God’s Word and will expressed to grads, generally Older Leader-type Grads (OLGs). One of the rough edges that I’m still working on is that this set starts around 1971 with the issuing of the first set of book-form collaterals to the class. I’m clear about excluding from study Dr’s old (1952?) book “Victory in Christ” and his mid 50’s monograph “The Dilemma of Foreign Missions in India.” My familiarity with all the magazine articles is weaker than what I have so far accomplished with the books. I have focused on the magazine articles more towards the end of Dr’s life more so far in my work, with less familiarity on the 70’s articles, and almost none of articles before the 70’s. The small collateral booklets that came with the class prior to 1971 are outside my primary set of writings for study and mastery, although I have looked a lot at the differences between the old large booklet “The Church, the Great Mystery Revealed” and it’s replacement chapter in the GMWD in 1977. Probably will also look at the other large booklet "Studies n Human Suffering" for the same reason: they came with the class up until '77. I’m happy to have learned from U of L and all the ministry's seminars and other old ministry “publications and teachings” but I only dabble in them and they take a decidedly second seat to the “book and magazine form” set I have “fairly” well defined. There can be error here like the caveat dmiller discovered admits. I do not attach any value whatsoever to what Dr spoke in private to any group or individual. There may BE value there, but not for me, and it won't be included in my study. There are a few other items of interest to me, but I'm not sure where they sit, like the "Green" Bluebook, a precursor to BTMS, and some later booklets. I don't have time to detail this list right now. When I study or cite sources outside this special set of writings I am braced to find error mixed in, but I do also see many benefits secondary sources can contribute, such as documentation of ministry history and augmentation of points found in my “book and magazine form” mastery project.

Ex10, Yesterday you wrote: “Oh geeze. I haven't read this thread in long time, so pardon me, if my comment is a little late in coming.” I’m glad to see you again, even though my time for responding to your points is scarce right now. Because this thread is hot with activity and growing fast, might I suggest to you and others that an apology for referring back to older material need not be made? I’m finding that there are several well established sub-topics here, like the one you addressed. What we all might try doing, if we want to address a well buried sub-topic, is simply place a title describing that sub-topic on top of our post to signify that it is not in response to the recent sub-topic, but to an older one. If we include with the sub-topic’s title some pertinent post # numbers, showing where it was last discussed, that will also help in managing many topics under this one PFAL thread. With this new site, the software settings allow everyone to select how large the pages are, so referencing PAGE # numbers is not the best system of referring to an older sub-topic. Different posters can have differing pagination. The POST # numbers are the same for everyone though... I think. Maybe we can come to some agreement on naming sub-topic titles, too. ************************************************* ************************************************* ************************************************* ************************************************* doojable, I know it got a little confusing with my responding here to dmiller’s “Pipe” thread, but I feel it’s the respectful thing to do in light of Modaustin’s set-up here. If I confine my PFAL “advertisements” here it is less offensive to other posters who find PFAL too much a reminder of some painful past events. This is not easy, but I am learning to adopt this new style of posting as best I can. Management has been very generous to me in allowing me to post as much as I do on my proPFAL leanings. The least I can do in return is respect their wishes and steer my proPFAL posting to this one thread. As I learn to better segregate these proPFAL posts of mine here, others who prefer to get away from such notions can learn to simply avoid this one thread.

CM, That's merely YOUR opinion, that it's merely my opinion. When I have time I think I can show that it's NOT merely my opinion, what I posted above, but that by close study of PFAL it emerges as the truth. I other words I think it can be seen that it's not only my opinion but God's too, which makes it true. We can start by showing that the later PFAL tools changed as I described. This requires a close look at the before and after. Both the early PFAL writings and the latter must be studied closely, mastered.

doojable, I’ve explained before that I quote things like Dr’s tapes mostly for ministry history, but I look only Dr’s the “book and magazine form” writings as the doctrine we were given to master that’s God-breathed. Sometimes I quote the soundtrack of the film class instead of the book because it stimulates memory better. It’s fine if dmiller wants to quote U of L, but I think the conclusion he drew from it is inaccurate. That’s all I posted. The U of L quote did not contradict Dr’s claim to have SOMETHING that he did not have to “go back on,” as Dr mentioned in Elena’s book. That something Dr did claim to have that qualified as the final truth on the God-breathed Word was not his U of L teachings. I just don’t think that U of L quote was saying Dr had NOTHING in print that was final. *** In an earlier post you wrote: “The Studies in Abundant Living and all of PFAL were meant to get the student started. They were all meant to give tools to study, to understand a huge book that many deemed impenetrable. Like using a hammer and chisel to crack open a coconut. You don't turn around and worship the tools - YOU EAT THE COCONUT.” I know there’s far more to your post, but two quick points. I could just as deliberately construct an analogy where the tools ARE eaten. With Mexican food, the chips are like spoons and some salads come in a shell that is like a bowl. The bowl and spoons serve as tools and they are food too! In this example, the eatable tools correspond to the idea you brought up twice. That idea is that there does seem to be some difference between the ancient scriptures, revelations from God given in writing addressed to Jew, Gentile, and Church of God, and modern revelations from God also written on paper addressed to grads. But we don’t have the pure ancient scriptures, just an approximation of them. The KJV is a tool too. PFAL is a God-breathed tool, the KJV is a man-breathed tool. Together they give us and senses understanding of God’s Word. We read both tools with our senses. More on this later. **************************************** The other point is that the PFAL tools changed over time, gradually at first, with some spurts, and then a HUGE change around 1982. *** The early tools helped us to a senses understanding of God’s Word. The later tools will help us to a spiritual understanding of God’s Word. *** The early tools have a large component of focus on the KJV, with PFAL in the background. The later tools have a large component of focus on written PFAL, with KJV in the background. This is why the early teachings of Dr focus on the KJV, and later he often urged us to focus on PFAL. *** The early tools are for senses understanding of God’s Word. The later tools are for spiritual understanding of God’s Word. *** Add to this mix the problem of many grads getting only a partial grip on the early tools. Add to this mix the problem of most grads having a non-existent grip on the later tools.

dmiller, In addition to my colorful refutation (not twisting) of your argument here on this thread, more details of my argument are on the official PFAL thread. I explain there why these printed words you've quoted here do NOT refer to the texts we OLGs were told to master. There are two separate and disctinct sets of texts, but you've merged them into one set. That's where YOU did the twisting, not me.

What the Hey, There is rain coming later this week, so I’m on the go a lot right now. I did skim read your post and saw a very well constructed set of ideas, ESPECIALLY at the end. You wrote: “I believe all the tools are there in PFAL to get to the "God-breathed" Word. But then again, they are only tools. If I tried to put a bike together with a hammer and didn't end up caring for the results, I probably did not following the authors instructions very closely or very precisely. I for one think that is the content of Mikes message all along - and nothing really more than that. He believes we tried to put that PFAL bike together with a hammer, and that was not the authors fault.” This is VERY close to my message! I would add only that I do believe that this set of tools and instructions are not man-breathed (or heavily man-breathed), like all other Bible aids in the world, but that they are God-breathed MUCH the SAME way the original scriptures were, with SOME possible exceptions. I’m not sure what I mean about possible exceptions. It’s the frontier of my knowledge. I will outline two. 1) doojable TWICE now has brought up the idea of the difference between the ancient scriptures being addressed to “Jew, Gentile, or the Church of God” in contrast to PFAL being addressed ONLY to grads. I expanded on her statements, because I’ve been working on this understanding for a few years with some difficulty, and she helped me out with it some. I also saw that no one else noticed these two posts of hers and then mine to the extent of commenting, but I wish they would. 2) There is a difference between being factually accurate and true in Dr’s vocabulary. Most of my critics focus on the factual accuracy of PFAL, and for the most part, this is the realm in which I've engaged them, while yearning to graduate tothe higher realm. I once had an entire thread on the differences between facts and truths, between the Natural and the Spiritual, the earthly and the heavenly, the human and the divine: It’s titled “The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW” and can be found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...150entry35150 However, it is damaged right now due to computer glitches. The quotes and apostrophes are quite screwed up. In addition to that there is a botched, partial attempt at the beginning by me to retro-construct a Table of Contents, with all the URLs obsolete. By skipping that mess at the beginning, and doing some word processing on the text to fix the punctuation it can be read and this idea can be discussed more. My break time is over and I have to return to work. When the rains come I’ll be able to respond much better to many items here. *** And for the Umpteenth Ubiquitous time: I do NOT think PFAL replaces the scriptures and never have.

You'll look foolish if I post the proof of what you missed, even though your posts are probably splattered before and after it. I'll spare you the embarrasment. But you'll have to do extra work to pull up your grade.

CM, Dr wrote: PFAL page 83 "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed..." TNDC page 34 "...every word I have written to you is true." You wrote: "so this is what you think makes everything he wrote 'god-breathed'" NO! You've not been paying attention! I've several times on this thread and on the "OK once and for all" thread written that these quotes are NOT what makes me think SOME of what he wrote to be God-breathed. You're wrong on the everything part. You're wrong on the "so this is what you think" part. Would you like to see proof of this? Or would it matter? Pay better attention or you're not going to get a passing grade in this class, young man! Gee, I wish someone would call ME a young man! :(

CM, You wrote: "name one thing that he wrote that is truth" I think I remember him writing that "CM is a super special guy."

dmiller, In your “Pipe” thread you looked pretty gleeful at having me over a barrel. That’s all right. Often our emotions cloud things. It happens to me too. I just want to elaborate a little here on this thread, just to keep things easier for the moderators. *** You wrote: “Shucks -- I can't argue with what docvic put in print, can I?? __ And if it is in print (like the way rag, pfal, etc., it has to be right, right?? __ This quote is from my U of L syllabus, printed by twi, for twi folks who couldn't go corps, and an admonition to those of us in twi (at the time), that they considered their *research* to be *up for approval* (at all times)” Let me help clarify where the super special stuff is. It’s the “...book and magazine form.” and it’s in the “...every word I have written to you...” *** It’s NOT in Dr’s taped teachings, including Corps and University of Life, although there IS lots of truth there. It’s NOT in the non-VPW books and magazine articles, although there IS lots of truth there. It’s NOT in all the classes and seminars, although there IS lots of truth there. There are LOTS of places in what TWI did “PUBLISH OR TEACH” that are NOT the final truth of the God-breathed Word. *** Now look at the discalaimer: WE DO NOT CLAIM THAT EVERYTHING WE PUBLISH OR TEACH IS THE FINAL TRUTH OF THE ORIGINAL "GOD-BREATHED" WORD. *** PFAL page 83 says: "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed..." There are things he wrote that are not addressed to us, his class. But to us, says TNDC page 34, "...every word I have written to you is true." Also remember this from "The Way - Living In Love" pp. 178 by Elena Whiteside quoting Dr on “FINAL TRUTH” : “I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.” *** You wrote: “Shucks -- I can't argue with what docvic put in print, can I?? I can. It’s just not in VPW’s books and magazine articles I can’t. Although I’d think twice about arguing with many other things he said and printed. There are some things in this second category, though, where I might win if I did argue. *** You wrote: “__ And if it is in print (like the way rag, pfal, etc., it has to be right, right??” No. Only in VPW’s “book and magazine form” printed works addressed to us. *** You wrote: “This quote is from my U of L syllabus, printed by twi, for twi folks who couldn't go corps, and an admonition to those of us in twi (at the time), that they considered their *research* to be *up for approval* (at all times)” Yes. U of L is not on the super special list. *** Now, do you see how that disclaimer does NOT say?: I, VPW, DO NOT CLAIM THAT ANYTHING I PUBLISH OR TEACH IS THE FINAL TRUTH OF THE ORIGINAL "GOD-BREATHED" WORD. *** P.S. - Was I at all correct some posts above when I guessed that your question on counterfeit seed was somewhat answered? I still haven't had time to read it very closely. Maybe I too read into that what I wanted it to say.

This may be the shortest thread I posted on. I eblaborated on the Yada, Yada thread.

dmiller Please read what is written. WE DO NOT CLAIM THAT EVERYTHING WE PUBLISH OR TEACH IS THE FINAL TRUTH OF THE ORIGINAL "GOD-BREATHED" WORD. And add to it this: PFAL page 83 "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed..." And this: TNDC page 34 "...every word I have written to you is true." *************************************** Maybe you thought it said? Maybe you WANTED it to say? I, VPW, DO NOT CLAIM THAT ANYTHING I PUBLISH OR TEACH IS THE FINAL TRUTH OF THE ORIGINAL "GOD-BREATHED" WORD.

I remember the Constitution re-write stuff well. It's gone relatively underground, but is still a happening thing in some circles. Far from drinking Kool-Aid, for both situations I prayed a lot. Because the ministry was strong in the 70's, with lots of united believers, I did absolutely nothing involving hoarding or stocking supplies. For the y2k I only kept a few extra bags of trailmix on my shelves and rotated my stock, plus some extra water. We're often reminded in SoCal to do that much just for earthquakes. *** Off topic, but often wondered: What is the Kool-Aid Company doing about the constant and prolific public airways use of it's name in extreme cultist and negative situations? What has happened to that company's stock in these decades since Jonestown?

I agree that there was some genuine concern for y2k involving panic. I’m also sure there were many variations on what I saw and reported, but the two quick fixes I knew and mentioned above were never heard over a two year span by this reporter. I’m sure there were honest electronics and media professionals trying t help, but in general they seemed to be ineffective. Yes, there was a lot of work to be done, but the panic was not handled nearly as well as it could have been. *** The period of 1968 to 1980 was far worse than the economic woes of gas lines and inflation. I mentioned they were only the tips of MANY icebergs. To name a few others, we had in that span the shaming and resignation of BOTH the vice-President and then the President. We had the escalation and the “relative” loss of the Viet Nam War. Civil unrest was massive on several fronts: racial, moral, political. The generation gap was wider than ever before. I remember the hippies degenerating into the violent Weathermen or sympathizers thereof. The Pentagon Papers being released added greatly to the growing national shame. Nixon, for all his successes, did cast a huge cloud of suspicion on government when his secret tapes came out as just one aspect of the long lasting Watergate drama. The Carter malaise was far more than economic, remembering the Iran hostage situation and then the military rescue fiasco that added to it. This is just from memory, and I know there was more. I think that time was a genuine crisis that had great potential of erupting into all kinds of worse case scenarios. I don’t want to get into any kid of political debate about it, but I will say my information did not come from the Liberty Lobby or anything like that. I simply read a lot of newspapers. Nowadays, the left leaning historians of academia think of that period as the good old days, and I see that period’s crisis being re-written for future generations as totally different than what I saw.

Sombody, I'm down! Trailing clouds of glory, I’m DOWN! Boy oh boy! THAT was a close one! I’m a little disoriented, but almost ready to post again. *** From a quick reading of what I missed, it looks like you guys are almost wrapping up dmiller’s dilemma of the counterfeit seed. Am I reading it right? Somebody, your idea of Adam’s progeny looks a lot like one of those preliminary proposals I made several days ago. I got sidetracked from working on doojable’s posts with some family issues, and now I have to get back to work since the weather improved. Instead of trying to catch up with this issue, I may just totally bow out and get back to doojable’s posts and some other loose ends. *** So dmiller, are you at all satisfied that at least MAYBE this is not such an intractable issue? You wrote regarding some proposal here: “No, it wouldn't (if you follow the docvic line of thought).” But what IS the written line of thought on these issues? Without the books it’s the TVT line of thought that we’re stuck with. I have to admit that I’m not at all up to speed on this subject. I honestly don’t know how much of my memory is accurate according to the books and how much is TVT. The wrong seed stuff is just not a subject I ever looked into very deep. NOR do I want to very much. It’s not that it’s unimportant, heck, there are TWO full chapters on it with identical titles, so it’s got to fit into the big picture somehow, but it’s not the picture I’ve been working on these past 8 years. Working the differences between those two chapters should be a rich, detail yielding project. *** In the fellowship I attend we went through those two chapters and there were some eye opening discoveries, but it was already many years ago and I was going through a divorce at the time and far from able to pay much attention, let alone remember it. Raf, I do vaguely remember some thing about something changing at Pentecost regarding this, but it’s gone now. I could ask our coordinator, but this topic is not even close to what we’re working on now so there’s precious little time to get into it there. Anyway, this was never a bothersome subject to me, so I may just bow out, and work on other stuff.

Thanks guys, for the settings help. I CAN SEE SIGNATURES NOW! Wow! I’ve been missing a LOT! Everything looks so DIFFERENT now! I can hardly believe I went this long.... Huh? Wha...? What THE...? What’s this overwhelming feeling I’m experiencing...? Why... I could swear that PFAL is NOT God-breathed after all!!!!! It’s so OBVIOUS that AC and AE stand for ACTUAL contradictions... ... and ACTUAL Errors..... What was I drinking this evening.......? It TASTES normal... LOOKS normal.... Did I drop acid tonight and then forget? OH! Oh NO! You guys TRICKED ME! Those settings changed MUCH MORE than mere signature viewing! I’ve been RE-PROGRAMMED to GreaseSpot Belief Settings! How diabolical, ya know. I must say, THAT was certainly clever. I’ve got to find those instructions FAST! Quick.... Where WERE they? My Options - Control Board (some corner) - Managed Settings? I CAN'T REMEMBER! Who was the scoundrel who DUPED me into this... I’m as doomed as doomed can be! Why DID I think PFAL was God-breathed, anyway? What would Pat Sajak do? Be calm.. Read the board... re-trace my steps YES! There it is... If I can only get there in time. Dave, I can feel my mind going! Daisy, Daisy, g i v e m e y o u r a n s w e r t o o . . . ... .

Yes, both quick fixes were were totally absent from the collective consciousness. It still gets me angry to see the sham of it. Some years I have to tweak my clock twice due to a leap year, sometimes it sails through for a few years with no tweaks. I had no tweak this January 1st, because 1994 was identical to 2005. Anyone can see this with Microsoft Windows. Just double click on the time located on the task bar to pull up the calendar program. Then roll the year register back on calendar clock program. HOWEVER, DON'T FORGET TO RE-SET BACK TO 2006. That's important! Nowadays I have to put a note on my screen to re-set the clock to the proper year after I'm done with my chores on the ancient program I wrote. Not re-setting the calendar back to 2006 can cause problems with some other programs. I only have to do all this once a month. For the longest time I ran my program on a very old machine in a DOS environment like the one I wrote it for, but the modern machine I have now with Windows can be crippled if run too long on the wrong year.

The y2k doomsday was a joke to anyone who had hands on experience with the kind of electronics that had the embedded computer chips that were supposed to bring down the infrastructure. Every single such piece of equipment SOMEWHERE had in it what is called a “Manual Override” button, switch, or circuitry, or something with a similar name. These manual overrides were put there so that if the computer chip were to blow out from a lighting strike, or old age, or a dropped wrench, then the equipment could be operated manually until a replacement chip was installed. However, none of the technical people with access to the media would ever effectually explain this to their media contacts. If the media were to explain all this to the people and especially to the non-technical CEO’s of thousands of companies, then those companies would not feel the need to pay the same technical people huge consulting fees to get them through the “crisis.” The media people hadn’t a clue of the manual overrides on every piece of important infrastructure equipment. I listened and waited for years for that idea of the ubiquitous manual override buttons to be mentioned on the media and NEVER ONCE heard it. Actually, the media ALSO had a financial motivation to keep the hype rolling. Any media outlet that put a damper on the crisis story stood to lose in ratings to the OTHER outlets that did made a big deal about it. I tried to tell some people this in the last months of the 90’s, but they all insisted that if the manual overrides actually existed then it would surely be on the news. *** I myself had written a computer program for my business scheduling and accounting in 1985, and I knew totally well that it was going to fail when 2000 hit, but all I had to do is set the clock back to a year somewhere in the 80’s that happened to be identical to the year 2000. Now six years later I STILL have not corrected my y2k doomed program. Every so often I have to tweak the clock again to keep it on a year that is identical to the current one. This year it’s 1995 that is identical to 2006. Setting my clock back was a vastly more simple AND quick fix than re-writing the code. Almost all of the infrastructure equipment managers could have done the same thing, at least temporarily to buy some time, if they didn’t have the personnel to manually operate the equipment. So even the notion that they had to hurry to fix everything was a technical hoax. There NEVER was a crisis. It was just a lot of re-tooling work, and it was very much more lucrative work for those dishonest electronics experts and media people who hyped up the situation way beyond what it really was. Too bad NO ONE in the ministry leadership got revelation that it was a simple case of the love of money. If I can explain it here to you folks now, then SOMEONE could have explained it to the leadership back then. But no one seemed to know even the 5-senses manual override angle and to get it through to leadership. *** Now, the 1970’s were much different. From 1968 on through 1980 this country was going down a set of steep spirals in MANY categories, almost ALL categories. THAT crisis was real and it was imo MUCH worse than most people perceived it to be. I happened to be young and with a lot of time on my hands, so I usually read 3 newspapers per day back then. I was a devoted political junkie then. By the time Nixon was forced out I was convinced that ANY day we could wake up to soldiers at every city corner, and not necessarily our own. I’m convinced we barely squeaked through that perilous twelve year span. I prayed about it lot then. I think it was miraculous that we survived. Does anyone here remember 17% inflation and gas lines? They were just the tips of many icebergs. We were teetering right on the edge yet somehow made it through. I credit God. I thank God.