Conference hydra::dejavu

 - By 1990, I predict that many cities across the United States will 
   have an abundance of psychic-related businesses, situated on nearly 
   every major corner.  I am relating this to the current frequency of 
   liquor stores in Southern California, where there are liquor stores 
   on nearly every major corner.  I think the quantity of liquor stores 
   will be challenged by psychic businesses, and eventually (perhaps by 
   1995), most will be replaced by psychic businesses.  I think the
   current psychic interest is more than just a fad.  I think it's the 
   wave of our future.

 - I'll join the long list of earthquake predictors:  I predict that 
   Southern California will have a major, devastating earthquake in 1988.
   (Maybe mid-late part of the year.)

 *Madam* Jerri  (doesn't seem :^) to fit)

    
    Dark black clouds above a plain
    Will bring the waters, more than rain.
    The leader of Blues will change a place,
    And architects will be in grace.
    
    The dance will grow, the birds will wheel,
    The sun will shine on much that's real;
    And rocks will move, and tunes so loud
    Will help disperse a growing crowd.
    
    Over the East the moon will rise
    To bring a change to startled eyes.
    Accounts will close for a new start;
    And strength will come to a faltering heart.
    
    The laurels grow: and it is so.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    I don't have much to say beyond a firm belief that we are in a
    transition between ages, and that it is very important to become
    and remain centered.  
    
    Donald Reinke
    
    
    

    I have had a premonition for nearly 20 years that something 
    will radically change my life for the better the year that 
    I turn 40.  I really can't be more specific than that, but 
    I have felt this way since I was in my early twenties.  I 
    even got a fortune cookie that said "The year that you are 
    40 will be the best of your life." and that was *after* I
    had the premonition.  It must be true.  Who in their right 
    mind would argue with a fortune cookie (now I ask you!).
    Anyhow, I am going to be fourty this week.  Think I'll start
    playing the lottery.

    Re 4:
    
    I predict that you had a very happy birthday.  Keep us posted
    on any radical changes in your life.  
    
    best wishes,
    
    Janice
    

re .4:  I got a fortune cookie once that read "pay the check and get 
        OUT!"


As for the future...

     In the year 1999, the Lunar 'Craters' will trounce the Boston 
Celtics for the NBA championship.  The score will be 997 to 552.

     In the year 2020, the transporter beam will replace all
conventional modes of transportation (I can't wait) and politians
will become extinct (I can't wait for that either).

     In the year 2100, the Red Sox will finally win the whole ball of wax 
and that will be the end of organized sports (crime?).

Pete ;^{)

    I predict a major economic upheaval of catastrophic proportion 
    within the next five years.

    When bit-mapped workstations with iconographic interfaces
    become so common that children learn to think and communicate
    in abstract symbols before they learn the alphabet, Cthulhu
    will awaken, rise from beneath the Pacific and take up residence
    in Silicon Valley.
    
    Pat
    

    Re .2:
    
    I think I could claim credit for predicting the California earthquakes.
    :-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    re: -.1
       Just about anyone could predict a California earthquake and
    be "right," don't you think?  Just like predicting darkness at night.
       If you want a little more "accuracy," maybe this will impress
    you and maybe it won't:  back in December Lazaris gave his year-end
    talk (wherein he predicts the energy for the coming year in terms
    of emotions and events...and for years and decades to come) and
    he also had an evening workshop I believe.  I'm not sure about that.
    In November he had his final two-day of the year where some similar
    topics come up.  Anyway, in the midst of all of that somewhere,
    he told us something I have never heard Lazaris mention before (whether
    in a workshop or on tape) and that was that California would be
    experiencing three major earthquakes within the following two years;
    each succeeding earthquake would be larger than the previous and
    would take place in a major population center of California with
    both loss of life and extensive property damage.  He added that
    the San Andreas was 12 inches "out-of-alignement" and needed to
    correct itself.  He also said that this alignment could take place
    through lots of small earthquakes (which we should be grateful for)
    or larger, more destructive ones.  He could not say precisely which
    of the events would occur because, after all, we create our reality
    and we had the power to make the future different than that.  Based
    on the current energies at that time, however, that was his prediction.
        I see last week's earthquake as earthquake number 1 in this
    scenario.  Please note that Lazaris' organization, Concept:Synergy,
    moved to Lake Arrowhead and Beverly Hills this past June.  They
    are all very much aware of the earthquake potential but they believed
    that they could create a reality whereby they would not be directly,
    harmfully affected.  
        So, SK,J...don't give yourself a broken arm. 
       
        (I don't like the symbols the notesfiles uses because one has
    to look them up every time somebody uses one, so...insert a little
    grin right here.)
      
    Frederick
    
        

    	Skepticism time - 
    
    	Why wasn't any "advance prediction" of the LA earthquake made,
    in reference to this Notesfile?
    
    	I'm always amused at these "predictions" which seem to be right
    on the money *after* the fact...
    
    	Larry
    

    Re: .11
    
    In major earthquakes, the maximum amount of movement along the fault 
    line is of the order of 10 feet or more. (The main movement may occur
    at depth, so you don't always see the resulting fault scarp line.
    I don't know the figures for the recent L. A. quake.
    
    A misalignment of 12 inches, as proposed by Lazarus (or is it
    Lazuris? How do you spell his name?) would not cause a major quake. 
    This may sound like nit-picking, but credibility is built on accuracy.
    
    -bs
    

    Re: Lazarus Earthquake prediction.
    
    Okay, he got one right, and he also said another two within two
    years. . . I'm willing to wait and see, but I'll try to avoid the
    West coast for a while.  ;-)
    
    Dave

    Okay, okay!  For those who don't understand the significance of
    what "delphic utterance" means, and who _insist_ on ignoring smiley-
    or tongue-in-cheek faces/icons, let me "legitimate" my prediction
    of the California Earthquake:
    
    >Dark black clouds above a plain
    >Will bring the waters, more than rain.
    >The leader of Blues will change a place,
    >And architects will be in grace.
     
    "Dark black clouds" obviously refers to am impending disaster; "more
    than rain" means that the "waters" in question are "humors," that
    is, emotions rather than purely naturtal phenomena.  "The leader
    of the Blues" obviously refers to the Chief of Police, who naturally
    located a command post during the emergency.  "Architects will be
    in grace," certainly for the later, earthquake-resistant designs.
    
    >The dance will grow, the birds will wheel,
    >The sun will shine on much that's real;
    >And rocks will move, and tunes so loud
    >Will help disperse a growing crowd.
     
    Naturally, in an earthquake, the buildings dance; birds, being
    disturbed, will take to the relative safety of the air.  Rocks --
    indeed whole local sections of tectonic plates -- do indeed move
    during an earthquake.  The "tunes" -- that is, the music of the
    spheres (i.e., natural forces) of the aftershocks made people scatter
    after they started to regroup after the initial shocks had died
    down.
    
    >Over the East the moon will rise
    >To bring a change to startled eyes.
    >Accounts will close for a new start;
    >And strength will come to a faltering heart.
     
    This takes place a short number of days before the penumbral eclipse;
    surely, both the moon (darkening slightly) and the landscape reflect
    change (in both cases, transitory).  The insurance companies will
    vacate those accounts with earthquake damage, and many small businesses
    are failing because of the earthquake, but low-cost Federal (disaster)
    loans will frop up many concerns that are on the verge of bankruptcy.
    
    And there you have it. :-D
    
    For those who want to come this far, a Delphic Utterance is one
    that, like lots of prophecies, is sufficiently vague that it can
    be used to "predict" a lot of things.
    
    So if you bought my "prediction" noncritically, have I got a deal
    for you on the Brooklyn Bridge!
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    re: .13
      God, I hate information like that! (10 ft vs. 12 inches is quite
    a difference!)  (Insert sulk face here.)  In "truth", I'm not 
    positive that Lazaris said 12 inches, but that's what I seem to
    remember.  Another point, here...I mentioned 3 different groups
    of people (one group at the two-day workshop, another at the
    question/answer session that night and the last at the Sunday
    workshop in December) and what surprised me was that he had 
    mentioned the earthquakes during the 2-day (I believe) but for some
    reason didn't mention it in the less intimate workshop later.  I
    wondered why at the time...was it because the energy had already
    shifted somehow (our energy, that is) so that it wouldn't occur
    or was it that perhaps he didn't want to alarm the people in the
    second group?  I may never know the answer to that one.
     
    re: .12
       One reason why in this case the information may not have been
    made well-known is that (as I recalled overnight) it was given during
    a 2-day workshop.  Recordings are not made then so no verbal "proof"
    is available.  Another reason, for you, at least, is that Lazaris
    was much less public then (and had, therefore, fewer people interested
    in what he had to say) and, would you have paid attention?  The
    "truth" seems to be that there was no concrete prediction made,
    and the reasons for that can only be conjectured.  So, here we be!
      
    My predictions?  I predict death to all of us.  I predict many
    infants born this year.  I predict gray hairs for me.  I predict
    more fun!
      
    Frederick
    

    RE: .15
    
    At least your meter is good, Steve (except for that last line...
    anacrusis maybe?).  
    
    
    JOhn M.

         As I watched the stock market drop this week, I was reminded
    of something else Lazaris predicted at the end of 1986.  He told
    us that the stock market (which is, he said, a consciousness of its own)
    would rise to around 2500 or so (Dow Jones) and then would drop
    about 400 points.  He said that it should happen around April or
    so.  A couple of months later, he told us that it had shown a great
    deal of [resistance] (my word, 'cuz I can't remember his) and that
    it would definitely fall but obviously not at the time he had foretold.
    ...incidentally, he said not to panic, because our economy would
    correct itself and would rebound.  Anyway, this is available on
    tape, should anyone wish to here it for him/herself.
      
    
    Frederick
    

    Don't want to throw cold water on Lazaris' prediction, but predicting
    that the stock market will fall about 400 points "sometime in the
    future" is a pretty sure bet - kind of like predicting that there
    will be a major snowstorm in Colorado in the future.
    
    Elizabeth
    

    
    Re.-last few
    
    Given that the market was up so high, it was probably destined (:^)
    to fall at some point, so that comment is true...however, this IS a 
    major fall, so the question is if Lazaris predicted that it would 
    happen all at once or gradually over a longer period of time.  Some
    of the market watchers said that this is the worst fall since the
    Depression.   Not sure if this takes inflation into account or if
    it is a direct comparison of the drop then vs. the drop now.
    
    BTW, DEC opened at 157 this morning according to Livewire.
                            
    Cindy
                                                      

    
    
    Well, I thought it might be timely to put in a repeat of Nostradamus'
    prediction of a _major_ earthquake in this country in either late
    April/early May of 1988.
    
    Let's hope this one doesn't happen either.
    
    Carole 
    

    
    
    
    ....and then there's the fellow (whose name escapes me) who has
    written the book "The Great Depression of 1990".  If that one
    happens, we won't be using this notesfile anymore, and verifying
    predictions in this note will be the _last_ things on our minds!
    
    Carole
    

    
    I always laugh when I hear the comment that economists have 
    accurately predicted 12 out of the last 5 recessions!
    
    Cindy

    According to reports, the stock market dropped 300 (*!*) points
    today, 200 in the first two hours, and then attempted to rebound
    by lunch.  God knows what it's going to be like by 5:00.

    Re .24:
    
    >God knows what it's going to be like by 5:00.
               
    Closed for the day. ;-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    
    
    RE: .24, .25
    
    It dropped by over 500!
    
    C.
    

    The decline of 507 points makes the crash of '29 look like a
    day at the beach.
    
    I understand that much of the decline was due to program trading.
    Over 600 million shares were traded today!
    
    People tell me that on this Black Monday;  Computers were jumping
    out of the windows! (Nobody predicted that would happen!)
    
    .....Bob on Wall St.                        

              
    RE: Elizabeth
        Personally, I don't think you are giving credit where it is
    due...twenty-one months ago Lazaris predicted a 2000 point Dow Jones
    by the end of 1986.  In December of 1986 it was around 1900.  At
    the time of his talk, to predict a Dow Jones of around 2500-2600
    points seemed extravagant.  
         I think, based on the history of the Dow Jones, that very few
    people would have predicted a 400-point drop.  
  
    (The Dow did get to 2000 shortly after that talk.)  Later,
    in March or April or thereabouts, he talked about the tenaciousnous
    of the Dow Jones consciousness and talked about us creating a different
    reality than we could have (or *should* have according to the energies
    we had in the December past.)  He still verified that the Dow Jones
    would, in fact, "correct" itself by the amounts he had predicted.
    It should be clear to any person who listens to Lazaris that he
    never says "this will happen," and that he instead *suggests* that
    "this *probability* will happen unless there is a change in energy."  
        Can it really be that disturbing to us to think that our probable
    futures can be predicted?  As an exercise, Elizabeth, you could probably
    get ahold of the year-end tapes from the past several years and enumerate
    both the predictions and then those that missed/succeeded.  I think you
    will find, (as I mentioned several months ago,) that virtually all of them
    either "came to pass" or were explainable within the framework of 
    the understanding implicitly necessary in the message he has taken
    a great deal of time trying to convey.

    
    Frederick
    

< Note 339.27 by KYOMTS::COHEN "Dynamo Hum........" >
                          -< Look out Belowwwww..... >-

>>                     Computers were jumping
>>    out of the windows! (Nobody predicted that would happen!)
    

Bob,


Are you sure they weren't pushed! :-)

- Howard

RE: .28
    
    There are really three different questions:
    
    	1) Can the future be predicted? (Only the totaly insane would
    	   say no -- if I push my mug off my desk, I can predict with
    	   very high reliability that it will fall).
    
    	2) Can the future be predicted without the aid of projections
    	   based on current models of cause and effect?  (i.e., does
    	   precognition exist?)
    
    	3) Has an accurate example of 2, or even a difficult example
    	   of 1 occurred in a specific case?
    
    One can accept the answer to 2 is yes and still meaningfully ask
    3.  Your sentence starting with "Can it really..." grossly confuses
    those two questions.  It implies that the only possible reason for
    doubting Lazaris' prescience is to doubt the possibility of anyone
    displaying prescience.
    
    					Topher

    
    re: previous replies
    
    
         It looks to me like Lazaris' prediction was essentially correct.
    When I went out at lunchtime I had heard that the stock market opened
    200 points higher than the close yesterday, in other words that
    the recovery also foreseen has already begun. I have to say that
    I also agree with what Frederick says, that only probabilities are
    predicted rather than absolute future events, for the reason that
    everything existing or taking place is always being affected by
    the "consciousnesses" around it (who basically control and create
    everything that is, if you subscribe to the YCYOR perspective).
         
         So when you are "reading" the future what you are really doing
    is tuning in to something within some other focus of consciousness.
    Instead of an "objective" external cause-and-effect that is responsible
    for events, imagine that our world is just an interplay of all of
    the different consciousnesses existing in it and their creations.
    This is a pretty esoteric way of looking at it but it makes the
    most sense when trying to understand so many of the unexplainable
    or complex processes we see everyday.
    
         Also, something else aroused my imagination: Frederick says
    that Lazaris (sp?) says the stock market is a consciousness in and
    of itself. But if so, what are its different characteristics? What
    are its ambitions, drives and motivations--what is it like as a
    personality? Strange questions but fascinating nonetheless. 
     
    

    It's now Wednesday.  We've gone through two days of Market upheavals
    never experienced before in history.  The first day we had the largest
    drop in history of the DJIA, the second day the DJIA was a roller
    coaster ride, changing over 600 points during the day, about TEN TIMES
    the normal change.  Both days had record-breaking trade by a factor of
    two over a previous record set last week.  The average stock lost
    20% Monday, and another 10% Tuesday.
    
    Alright, people can always predict a drop, but what about "wild
    Tuesday?"  Did anyone predict the reaction AFTER the drop?
    
    Dave

Ok, I predict that the market will continue to be erratic until it stops
being erratic.  I think that there will be a big drop at that time.

		Dave

    Have any famous psychics/channelers/whatever predict the last few
    days, or did this surprise everyone?

Re: < Note 339.34 by HPSCAD::DDOUCETTE "Common Sense Rules!" >
>                      -< No No No, that not what I mean >-

Well, anyway, my prediction still holds.  Let's see what happens in the
next bunch of months.

		Dave

    re: .35 (Mary)
        Gad!  You are "right", of course, but from my perspective you've
    missed the rocket.  The original, December talk had Lazaris talking
    about the forthcoming year (primarily) and the energies which were
    present at that time which would lead to the probability.  In March
    or April or thereabouts, he "shifted" his prediction to say that
    there had been a tenacity by the stock market "consciousness" to
    avoid the collapse when it would have happened before, but that
    nonetheless it would happen.
        Mary, you can't have it both ways...either you create your own
    reality or you are fixed into some pre-destiny!  If it is true that
    we create our own reality (as I believe we do) then OF COURSE we
    can turn events around...we can miraculously stop cancers, avoid
    nuclear disasters (such as Chernobyl,) or get jobs that we had
    "no chance" of getting.  (This is only an infinitessimally small
    sample of examples, please.)  Why should it surprise you that the
    prediction didn't happen exactly as "programmed?"  This isn't just
    random probability, either.  This was a significant statement, the
    *spirit* of which was essentially predicted.  There was enough "energy"
    available (an this is a separate discussion in and of itself) to
    "change" the probable future.  I've noticed many, many of your notes
    with much room for optimism and positive reality creation.  Why
    are you contradicting the beauty of that by somehow adopting a
    viewpoint which suddenly denies us the opportunity to change what
    we have or probably will have?  I forget the name of the book, but
    it was written about 15 years ago and it concerned itself with the
    future forecasts by the "Club of Rome".  Many of the things that
    those scientists predicted, should have happened by now (such as
    oil shortages, pollution problems, etc.) but they haven't.  Why
    not?  Is it because they were stupid or lacked awareness?  I think
    not.  I think it's because there were enough of us on this planet
    who decided that that isn't the future we want or wasn't the future
    we were planning.  This "consciousness" literally changed the outcome
    of that particular predicted future.  So, in this case, there was
    a change in our consciousness...enough to postpone the fall of the
    DJIA and enough to make it more dramatic than "predicted."  Similarly,
    in December of 1983 Lazaris predicted violence at the 1984 L.A.
    Olympics and it didn't happen.  Whoa!  That looks bad for Lazaris,
    doesn't it?  Think about it...a couple of months later the Soviet
    Union and their allies dropped out of the Olympics.  Doesn't that
    change the probability a great deal?  You bet it does.  Thankfully
    for most Americans there were enough people who heard this message
    and were concerned enough about its possibility to WANT to make
    it different.  And you know what, Mary?  They succeeded.  This is
    called "creating your reality" and I am very disappointed that you
    (since you usually show more *enlightenment* than this) failed to
    see or understand this.  I will just consider it a lapse in your
    consciousness and let it go at that, okay?  
         Predicting an event for the distant future is exceptionally
    difficult, if not impossible, especially (as I believe) as we
    (or ME---I) take more conscious responsibility for the world in
    which we live.
      
    This editorial has been brought to you by
    Frederick
    

RE: .37 (Frederick)

We have some problems here:

    >  you can't have it both ways...either you create your own reality or
    you are fixed into some pre-destiny! < 

    >  Many of the things that [the Club of Rome] predicted, should have
    happened by now (such as oil shortages, pollution problems, etc.) but
    they haven't.... I think it's because there were enough of us on this
    planet who decided that that isn't the future we want or wasn't the
    future we were planning.  This "consciousness" literally changed the
    outcome of that particular predicted future. < 

In other words, a majority of like-minded people *predestine* the future
for the remainder!

RE: the "predictions" of Lazaris

OK, so Lazaris "predicts" that there will be violence at the 1983 Olympic
games.  When it doesn't happen, the excuse is that the event was "prevented"
by people who heard his prediction and "willed" it not to happen.  If such
is the case, then Lazaris is no better at predicting the future than I.
If I said that the world were going to blow up tomorrow, and it didn't,
then I would simply counter by saying "that's because someone willed it
not to happen."  Such pronouncements are worthless, as the prophet is always
given an excuse for being wrong!  

But then, this is typical of Lazaris's sayings.


John M.
                                              

    re: -.1
        Oh, Johnny!  In the first place, I have not heard Lazaris put
    much emphasis on predicting a "solid" future.  I think somewhere
    within these notes I talked about going to a psychic as being
    essentially a waste of time unless you are going there to see what
    you've given your *power* (defined here as the ability to act) away
    to.  If you create your own reality (and, again, I submit that we
    do) then what kind of future do you want?  (And for this, I will
    review what I have stated before, this means what kind of future
    do you REALLY want, not the kind of future you SAY you want...for
    more, find the appropriate note in 358.)  So, basically, understand
    that *most of us* (in my reality, at least) do NOT have dominion
    over the physical plane, *most of us* have NOT eliminated our 
    negative egos from our lives, and *most of us* adhere with great
    tenacity to a consensus reality of limitation and predictability.
    So it comes as no surprise to me at all (and shouldn't to you, either)
    that in so doing we give ourselves over to predictable events with
    predictable outcomes.  That being the case, it is therefore much
    easier to predict the so-called future.  Lazaris is doing only what
    our reality allows within it.  Could someone else do it?  Sure,
    why not?  But in terms of accuracy it becomes more and more difficult
    as those of us (I hate to use the term New AGers, here, but I guess
    it is as appropriate here as not) who are *beginning* to recognize
    our power are wresting back away from that goofy consensus and are
    instead deciding (remember our talks about choices and decisions?)
    to create the reality we want to.  The word belief has come up again
    and again.  It has import as well as impact, for me.  IT really
    does come down to *core* or bottomline beliefs.  If you believe
    the consensus reality, then it will probably bear out for you...
    at least to some level.  
         When Lazaris predicts something, I pay much more attention
    than virtually anyone else saying something (you included, John-
    sorry) because I believe he understands to a greater depth and
    *sees* much more than we do.  That still doesn't mean it will
    bear out.  We can still change.  Lazaris is not about predictions.
    That's not his schtick!  He is about showing us that we create
    our own reality.  If this is what you get, this is what you have
    created.  If you want something else (free from ego, at the core
    belief level) then you will have it.  Think about something else
    for a second, here.  What if Lazaris said that a nuclear blast
    would rip Atlanta apart tomorrow?  Can you imagine the panic
    that would ensue?  He has said over and over again that he is not
    here to save us, for we determine when our lives are to start or
    stop.  Would you really expect him to save us?  From what? To what?
    Would we change because of the saving?  Would we recognize it?
    You see, change is internal, not external.  We change, and our reality
    changes.  If our reality changes without our conscious effort,
    then have we changed?  
        I really suggest very strongly that you not make assertions
    about Lazaris' statements when *in fact* you do not know his
    statements.  I have stated many times that I give you MY
    interpretation.  Someone else could have a different interpretation.
    Someone who listens only to a secondary source is only able to
    reflect on that source, not the original.  Be careful of what
    you attempt to show awareness of, for you are only arguing for
    your own limitations.
      
      
    Frederick
    

    The latest issue of Omni magazine has a huge article on all of this.
    I'd type it in but it is huge.
    
    					Geoff

    (...an addendum to some prior notes...)
      
        At yesterday's workshop in San Francisco, Lazaris started off
    talking about the stock market collapse of last week (especially
    since it was so directly related to the topic "Ending Self-Sabotage.")
    Though he didn't mention his earlier predictions, he did add that
    the small investor will bring it back (a recovery) but that it will
    take "a while."  He said further that the collapse occurred for
    these four reasons:
    1.  Secretary of the Treasury's Baker making/doing something that
        had to do with floating the U.S. dollar against the German mark.
        This was (metaphysically) due to a figurative as well as a literal
        breech of confidence.
    2.  Panic
    3.  Institutional computer trading.  Though technology is or should
        be only a tool, it became the source of the problem because
        our power was turned over to the tool.  He called this a breech
        of power and responsibility.
    4.  Uncertainty of individuals.  Due to our deficit trading situation
        (we are the planet's greatest deficit nation.)  This is a breech
        of confidence situation, again.
      
        How this deals with sabotage is that it deals with our feeling
    so little control over it. (This is one of the components of self-
    sabotage, which I do not wish to go into here.)
      
        As a point of interest, perhaps, he told of Peny and Michael
    hearing about the collapse while they were out shopping and quietly
    and quickly figuring out their possible losses (based on 25% loss
    since that is how much of the market had failed that day.)  Well,
    later, after consulting with Lazaris (who told them not to worry
    about it) they discovered that they had not lost a single dollar
    with their investments [I know neither how much they have invested,
    though I assume a sizable amount, nor where they have invested.]
    The point is that though a reality can look quite hopeless for many
    or even most individuals (the "consensus reality") we can,
    individually, create a different reality than that, and, eventually,
    cause a shift in the consensus, which will therefore create a different
    consensus reality.  Obviously, Michael and Peny and Jach have consulted
    with Lazaris before about their investments, and have been well
    aware of the potential and probable futures, but they took "heed"
    of his *predictions* to the extent of creating a different future
    than that.  This, of course, will seem to be only conjecture for
    many of the readers of this conference...let it suffice that the
    information has been presented and reasons have been given for events
    and methods that could elude a probable future and make it become
    whatever one would desire it to be.  As easy as that?  No, not without
    work, but via responsibility and conviction.
        I really don't care to dispute this information or argue about
    it...hopefully, you will read it and think whatever you will and
    let it go.
      
    Frederick
    

    
    OMIGOSH!  The 'computers' made them do it!
    
    Hal, Hal, are you there Hal?
    
    dodododododododo
    
    Cindy

    RE:  .41
    
    I find all those "Depression of 19XX" books very depressing.
    
    
    RE:  Lazarus & the stock market
    
    Unfortunately it seems that the only way that people will believe
    Lazarus or any other "knowing entity" ( Merill Lynch etc :^)) has
    superior knowledge is 1) For all their predictions to come true,
    and 2) They were the only ones on the face of the earth to be correct.
    That is not to say that I personally believe Lazarus, or for that
    matter believe IN Lazarus.  What I am saying is that if Jane Pauley
    on the Today show said that the market would go up today, and Lazarus
    said the same thing - somebody would insist that Lazarus does nothing
    more special that watch NBC in the morning.  It may just be, on
    the other hand, that Lazarus did not watch the Today show to get
    the information.  Perhaps he cnannels Jane Pauley!    8^D
    
    
    Marion
    
    
          

    Take Care, Oh Children Of The Light
    The Mushroom rises in the night
    Across the land where Jesus stood

    RE: .45
      
         YUCK!!!  ...talk about negativity!
      
    Frederick
    

    Re .46 (Fredrick):
    
    Okay --
    
    The mushroon grows and then is plucked;
    Into a souffle then is tucked;
    Nourishment of body feeds the mind;
    War-clouds die, the land is kind.

    re: -.1
      
       Bravo!!  That was MUCH better!
      
    Thank you.
    
    
    Frederick
    

    re: .48 (Frederick)
    
    	You know, I've been wanting to ask this for eons -- what
    	in the world is a "kudo"???  The candy bar??
    
    					Carla
    

    Carla ("wind-through-valleys")
      
         My first exposure to the word came in TIME magazine a couple
    of decades ago.  I use it as they use it.  (What I take it as is
    as an acknowledgement...a "thank you", even...usually for some
    noteworthy accomplishment(s).)
         What candy bar?  Is that anything like a MARS candy bar?
    
    Frederick
    

   I thought it was a Japanese word.  I heard it a lot in Okinawa.

   Mike

    re: Paul
       
        Next time I see her I'll speak to her straight-away about it!
    
    
    :-)
    Frederick
    

RE: .50
    
    It means public acknowledgment and thanks.  According to my dictionary
    (the paperback American Heritage) its from a Greek word meaning
    glory or fame.
    
    					Topher

               
    Aw, Topher, we were just getting going!  (;^)       
    
    Back on the topic:
    
    I predict that the words 'fantasy' and 'reality' will be more closely
    linked together in the future.  From the DEC issued blue dictionary:
    
    fantasy, n., pl. - sies.  1. The creative imagination.  2. A product
    of the imagination; illusion.  3. A delusion.  4. A capricious or
    whimsical notion or idea; conceit.  5. A daydream.  6. A fantasia.
    
    reality, n., pl. - ities.  1. The condition or quality of being
    real or true.  2. Something that is real.                           
    
    Cindy

    re: .56 (Cindy)
    
    	I hereby second, support, and subscribe to your prediction.
    
    	I, for one, would love to turn my fantasies into realities.
    	No exceptions.
    
    						Carla
    

    re: -.1
      
        No exceptions?  That sounds a bit scary to me.  I have many
    fantasies, many of which I would not like to live out.  I'm not
    talking solely about ego fantasies, either.  Sometimes I have 
    deliberately gone into meditation and "fantasized" "Beating the
    hell out of someone" or turning into a toad or some such thing.
    It's great for meditations but not for my conscious reality.
        If, on the other hand, you are talking about positive fantasies,
    then *I'm with you.*
      
    Frederick
    

    
    	My predictions:
    
    	   * Ollie North will publish a book detailing his account 
    	     of his life.  The book will gather dust on the booksellers
    	     shelves for 12 weeks, and will then be marked down and
    	     tossed in the bargain book bin, where it will gather
    	     some more dust.
    
    	   * The price of Digital stock will soar to 148/share by 
    	     May, and will drop to 122/share in June, then continue
    	     on an upward trend until the next buy-in time.
    
    	   * Everyone who reads this note will die before reaching
    	     the age of 172.  None of you will return from the grave.
    
    	   * I will make more predictions, whether or not these come
    	     to pass.
    
    	- Greg
    

    
    Re.-1
    
    I have to throw in a good word for Anita - she was forced into that
    campaign by her ultra-fundamentalist husband and local minister (her    
    story told in "Right Wing Women" by Dworkin and "The Second Stage" 
    by Betty Friedan).  She also ended up divorcing the guy.  As for
    the OJ industry, well, they dumped her after she dumped her husband
    and said "The contract had to expire because of the divorce and
    so forth."  She filed suit, however I don't know the outcome.  Anyway... 
    
    I enjoyed the rest.  (;^)                                 
    
    Cindy