Search the Community

whats the alien recording that yall are talking bout

@Leo Gura Honestly I think it’d be best if you just cleared up the air about the alien consciousness recording. „I was wrong, I don’t think now it’s possible” or „I still believe it’s possible”. Whatever. For the sake of transparency. Clarifying this would clear up confusion.

Lol exactly. The teachings are exactly meant to train one’s sovereignty of mind and against group think and cult dynamics, and give the tools to discover truth for oneself. But no, invalidate all that because Leo can display narcissistic tendencies or be deluded sometimes (like with catching alien consciousness on camera). Sure, he’s a cult leader 100%.

I'm sorry to see Zurew go, but was he ever going to be able to let this go ? Or was he just going to throw mud on the classroom walls for all eternity. Making claims about having an alien intelligence awakening doesn't mean it's a cult. (Where are these victims who blindly followed Leo on that) As I said earlier, Leo never claimed to be the perfect embodyment of all his teachings. Yet this justice panel seemed to want to hold him to some standard of perfection.

Yeah ? What is he doing anyways instead of showing his acrobatic genuineness of how to do a professional devil’s advocate ? all he’s doing is bitching about Leo not keeping up his words about the alien thing . How many times is he going to say this in the most devious manner possible?

Oops, @zurew got permabanned. This is rough. If someone like that gets banned, you have to ask what kind of place would do that, and why. (Setting aside the usual spiritually performative justifications that have already been raised before.) It seems to me, among other things, that Leo wants people to believe him - not as an evil conspiracy, just as a simple tacit request or desire - on certain subjects, at least. @Leo Gura All this just so you don't have to admit you were wrong on the alien recording - and don't have to face the implications of that failure, including the people who blindly followed you on it? The Dictator has nothing to envy you for:

True, and seeing as this seems to be the year of disclosure, can we expect you to release something, related to your alien intelligence awakening, before the end of the year ?

This is my last reply in this clusterfuck thread and I wont waste any more time on this. So allegedly some people here have big issues with closed-mindedness and with someone not using proper learning frames (because "lessons will be lost on them," because "they are not open enough"). I want these people to present a definition of closed-mindedness to the readers under which they can establish that Leo isn't closed-minded (but me and Carl are). If they can't do that, then I will take it that none of them really care about any of their listed norms in a principled way, and that it is just empty mini-Leo rhetoric on their part. Present a definition of closed-mindedness, under which a guy who has repeatedly claimed to be the most awake being in the universe, has repeatedly claimed that no one else knows what they are talking about, claimed that he is the standard of epistemology, claimed that he has little to nothing to learn from humans anymore (with regard to spirituality), and who stops 99% of his debates with "you don't know what you are talking about" and then frequently refuses to elaborate; and a guy who wants to dictate what definition of cult ought to be used by everyone; and a guy who has made multiple inferentially justified, highly confident statements about alternative spiritual pathways (like what certain forms of meditation or yoga can do for you or get you to, even though he hasn't seriously practiced them for multiple decades); and a guy who explicitly stated that he can't be wrong about being the most awake being on the planet <--- that this guy isn't closed-minded, and that this guy is inside a proper learning frame (in which he can learn new things and correct false beliefs); but a guy who gives detailed arguments about why he thinks the way he does, who qualifies most of his statements, and who immediately acknowledges epistemic limitations and clarifies how he can be wrong <--- that this guy is the closed-minded guy, and that this guy isn't inside a proper learning frame. [ It's very transparent that none of you seriously care about any of these norms. These norms and mini-Leo ticks (where you use one-word catchphrases like "closed-minded" to derail conversations) are exclusively used to enforce Leo's dogmas and none of them are used in a serious, principled way. The moment you would need to apply these norms to Leo, that's the moment when all of you suddenly stop caring about them. ] ------------------------------------------------------- Some people here have been dead silent about a lot of things, and it's clear to me that Aurum is only interested in highly selectively engaging with arguments. So here is Leo's alien transformation failure spelled out again, since most of you guys extremely conveniently ignored it last time. By the way, do you guys know how your trusted guy responded to @UnbornTao's "Where is the video, Leo?" question? He said, "I'm not going to bend over backwards over your closed-mindedness." <---- Even though he created the enforcing "bullshit" standard for himself. That's your Tier 2, epistemically responsible guy, who is true to his own standards and words, who can own up to things, and who won't discourage you from holding him accountable using the standard that he created for himself (perfectly describes a guy, who cares a lot about not creating or contributing to cult-like dynamics, right?). Aurum - I dont see you holding Leo accountable , but I see you a lot throwing around the label of "closed-mindedness" towards people who do want to hold Leo accountable. Your only way out this is to claim that you didnt know that Leo claimed these things about the alien transformation thing - but in that case , that just shows your very low level engagement with the arguments here (where you come in here with big wide shoulders and throw the "closed-mindedness" label and implication around without having any fucking clue about the relevant context some of the Leo critiques target). And this is just one of the points you failed to engage with, I gave you a lot more than just this, and I left other effort posts here with a lot of links and - but it is very clear at this point that you only highly selectively want to engage with things and you are disinterested in actually reading through the posts and the links in detail before you chime in with your quick uninformed emotionally baiting comments on things. Let's correct that. He doesn't just think highly of his awakening; he thinks the highest of himself while degrading everyone else. To this day, he still makes childlike comparative judgments like "I'm stronger than you, and you guys are weak as shit compared to me," about every other being in the universe. And yes, that claim is extremely unwarranted on his part. He is pretentiously using extremely weak inferential judgments, and that's supposed to be his "justification" for claiming that he is the most awake. He has no fucking data or direct access to who has what level of awakening. And even if he had direct access to the content of the awakenings of every other being in the universe (and to the awakenings of every being who has ever lived), he would still need to presuppose his own circularly justified notion and norm of what "being the most awake" even means. So: 1) Let's not pretend that he has any substantive reply to any of these problems, and lets not pretend that his claim has any serious leg to stand on, or that he carefully and rigorously worked through all of this before vomited out his pretentious statements. 2) Let's also not pretend that you would ever entertain this kind of reasoning from any teacher other than Leo. You conceded that it is an inferential comparative judgment, so it is subject to being wrong. Yet I haven't seen you once press Leo on his credence with respect to that claim. I haven't seen you once press him on why he makes comparative judgments in the first place, and I haven't seen you once question what purpose those explicit comparative and degrading judgments serve. I guess all of this is also included in your "trust" in Leo, along with his infinitely delayed alien transformation-on-camera claim and his healing claims. (Before you make your usual thought-terminating "you're closed-minded" move again, I'll qualify my position once more: the argument does not rest on the premise that these things must be impossible. The argument is about adjusting credence based on evidence and owning up to failure—and failing should obviously lower your credence in such claims.) My original example had a lot to do with ethics, but you couldn't engage with that, so you went with your own modified version instead. You also had a very hard time entertaining the idea that there is no contradiction in someone agreeing with Leo on all of his spiritual takes while also having issues with some of Leo's teaching methods and behavior. But in any case, the argument that "I have seen him make awakening claims, and I managed to verify some of those claims. Therefore, the more I manage to verify, the more I'm going to trust that his other awakening claims (that I haven't yet verified) are true as well" could work. But your special privileging of Leo and your dead silence about his failures and about some of his behavior go beyond any reasonable notion of trust you can appeal to. Leo hasn't demonstrated a single empirically verifiable miracle yet, so you have zero reason to trust him on miracle claims. And yet, you have been dead silent about his failure to produce the alien transformation on camera and about his healing claims. It doesn't matter how many of his awakening claims you managed to verify, because there is no straightforward bridge from that to his empirical claims. It would be like taking some verifiable facts from the Bible (for example, that Jesus existed) and then pretending that it is therefore reasonable to infer and trust that every other fantastical claim presented in the Bible is likely true as well (such as the miracle claims surrounding Jesus or the claim that Jesus is the Son of God). Given your trust standard, the exact same "I'm just trusting my teacher" argument can be made by many other people whom you would negatively label as "blindly putting their teacher on a pedestal and taking certain claims to be true from their teacher without verifying them first." Buddhist and nondual students can use the exact same argument: "Im going to trust my teacher's w,z claims, because I managed to verify that his x,y claims were true." So I guess, all of the students who managed to verify some of the things their teacher told them are justified (by your standards) in giving special privilege to their teachers as well. And I'm sure you won't put any negative label on them for it, and I'm sure you won't reassure Leo about how these supposedly low-consciousness, cognitively undeveloped, conformist individuals are lost and not doing proper spiritual work. I thought this was supposed to be about "doing the work" (like using the suggested methods) and not about special-privileging your teacher's explicit propositions and dogmas, or about maintaining some kind of polished, special image of your teacher. But again, this is nothing more than empty virtue-signaling on your part. You don't seriously care about these standards and norms, because you make your own judgments about other teachers, and you are perfectly fine with being closed off, labeling them with a bunch of negative labels, and special-privileging Leo - even though you haven't gone through their exact methods for their exact suggested timelines. (you havent done half a century worth of meditations or yoga work and yet you are perfectly okay with placing your bets and with judging those methods and the efficacy of those methods and the efficacy of other teachers). And the exact same shit applies to Leo as well, but you will never, ever publicly assert to have an issue with Leo being 100% confident in his stance and with him being 100% closed off to all other teachers, despite the fact that he has only directly practiced a fraction of a fraction of other teachers' methods (for a fraction of a fraction of their suggested timelines) Yes, that's why debate won't resolve this. One of us is just going to be mistaken. "One of you is going to be mistaken," but the moment I present you with similar epistemic challenges, you suddenly categorize them as "me trying to gaslight you with nonsense," even though it's clear that you have no substantive reply to those epistemic challenges. Yet you are still perfectly confident that you are right and that Leo is right, and you talk down to everyone who disagrees with you from your pretentious high horse, even though the exact same "I've personally verified claims x, y, and z relative to a different body of work" argument is equally applicable to many other people. Neither you nor Leo has any substantive response to underdetermination issues, and neither of you arrived at your position by carefully and exhaustively ruling out all alternative options. Yet both of you pretentiously act as though you have some kind of high horse to ride and some kind of special epistemic leg to stand on. You and Leo both refuse to acknowledge your epistemic limitations, and instead you play the "I'm absolutely certain in my position" game. Then, whenever someone challenges that certainty, both of you dismiss it as "gaslighting."

He wont answer in any straightforward way. My predicition is that maybe after enough pusback from you guys - he will try to wiggle himself out by doing desperate , dishonest and hardcore reinterpretive work on his own past statements. Leo is not an honest actor when he is cornered. He will pretend that when he made those statements that he wasn't referring to having the ability to transform in this world (even though it's super clear from his statements that he was going to record himself with a camera, upload it to youtube, and shock the world with it). Whatever state of consciousness he was referring to in those statements, it was a state of consciousness where there is still a camera, there is still youtube, and there is still a world that could be shocked by the uploaded video. (Dont let him bullshit his way out of this.) Typically, the cycle with Leo on this is something like this: Leo: "X is imagined." (He uses an incredibly broad notion of "imagination" that includes things that you can't change, but he uses this term so that he can look cool by giving the implication that shit can be changed.) Then you ask: "Okay, but then why don't you do grandiose shit if X is just imagined?" Leo: "Well, imagination is subtle and very intelligent, and just because it is imagined doesn't mean that you can easily change it." So now we suddenly walk back the initial implication about shit being able to be changed easily to a position where everyone started with (where it is recognized that certain limitations are real in the sense that you don't have the ability to just change them on a whim). Leo will also rhetorically use "you are just imagining X" (like "you are just imagining enlightenment") in order to undermine your arguments and claims when you disagree with him, but he will carve out endless nuance about how imagination works when he is pushed on his own claims about what is real and what is possible. All the nuance about imagination flies out the window the moment he needs to engage with your arguments and claims (everything will be just broadly "imagined," without adding any specificity or nuance to it), and then infinite nuance about imagination will suddenly appear the moment he needs to defend his claims. ------ Given this reasoning, it's clear why he failed to deliver on his claim. He wasn't rigorous enough, and he jumped light-years in his logic. He probably made an inference from, "I accessed infinite intelligence and recognized what is possible from that state," to, "Of course, given this previously acquired knowledge from higher states, and given that I now recognize that limitations are imagined, of course I will be able to record myself turning into an alien on camera." (equivocating between God and his ego and equivocating between different states of consciousness and what is possible given different states of consciousness). He makes this move a lot: where he propositionalize insights that he learned from higher states and then assumes that he can operationalize all of those insights in his current state simply because he once recognized that the limitations are "imaginary." (For instance, retrospectively using the propositionalized insight that "he is God" to justify the claim that whatever his ego is aware of right now is all that exists, and that when he closes his eyes, the world ceases to exist.) And one reason why all of this is exceptionally weird coming from him - is because he is the one who is hardcore pushing and aggressively defending the view that different states of consciousness are robustly metaphysical and not merely epistemic models for making sense of things (and he is the one who argues that non-dual people are radically wrong from assuming that different states of consciousness arent robustly metaphysical).

So I have noticed a recurring thought over the past maybe 2 years or so. I’ve been listening to Leo's work for 6-7 years now, and while I have certainly had a good amount of experiences with psychedelics, I have also learned quite a lot from just actualized.org alone. I’ve always been contemplative but LSD is what started this journey for me because it's what made me realize God is real, being a former super atheist who used to make fun of thiests. Anyways, I believe that my first LSD trip could have been a first hand experience with God consciousness. I remember feeling something indescribable while peaking. I remember thinking that I wanted to feel like that forever. My friend was there too and we were both outside in his backyard. All I could say was “Greg?” I’ve still never quite had a feeling like that, but I can’t say for sure it was a peak of God consciousness. I’m getting to the point now, basically, and this is in no way a diss to Leo’s work or actualized.org. But the knowledge that I am actually God has in a way discouraged me from seeking out guidance. It’s like, when I'm having dark moments, I want to be able to conjure or seek out some sort of source that can help me, but I don’t because… I am God, and everything else is just me. So, why would I do that? I had this sort of insight where it feels like I got the ending of a movie spoiled for me, and now I’ve lost all desire to watch it. If that makes sense. The sucky part is that I am God but at the same time I have no idea what I am doing, and it feels like the power of God isn’t being used right. In the “Explaining paranormal phenomena” video, Leos talks about channeling aliens and other things and how these things are actually possible and people do them. I think that’s cool and would like to try, but then the wind is sort of taken out of my sails because I remember I am God and what could an alien possibly tell me that is more of a mindfuck than that? It’s funny though, because I realize that I am literally asking you all for help/thoughts/input right now. So maybe I am missing something here. Any thoughts are appreciated. If this post is too long please let me know.

You guys keep talking about Leo not delivering on alien consciousness while I'm still waiting for the hot witch girlfriend video

@Someone here i dont expect leo to honestly engage or answer any of those questions. He is a master at being a weasel. This was to demonstrate to others how Leo refuse to walk back claims and refuse to change his credence on claims and refuse utilize more epistemic humility given that he failed to deliver on the alien claim. Its cool that you suddenly recognize now that harsh rhetoric isnt effective and isnt good (when its used against Leo), but you very rarely had to bring this up when Leo used this kind of rhetoric against other people. Maybe I should have used the "you dont know what you are talking about" , and "im more awake than you" and "im the standard on epistemology" as a response and then my rhetoric would have been more acceptable. This point about the alien transformation has been brought up multiple times now. Do you know what Leo's last response to this question was? He told unborntao, "I won't bend over backwards over your closed-mindedness." So that's how he clarifies things and owns up to things. Again, to be super clear on this: he created the standard for himself. He said that a camera should be able to record his transformation, and when someone asks him about it, they are the bad guy(the closed-minded one) for asking for it. How is that not enforcing cult-like dynamics, where he can freely make any bullshit claim and, when held accountable for it, infinitely gaslight you into believing that you are the bad guy for holding him accountable for the very thing that he explicitly told you to hold him accountable for?

I honestly have no idea what happened with his claim that he would demonstrate an alien transformation on camera. Only Leo knows what actually happened.. unfortunately he still hasn’t clarified it..but instead he’s offered excuses that avoid addressing the obvious possibility that it was another psychedelic experience he misinterpreted As @UnbornTao suggests. That said..this is exactly why I don’t see the value in aggressively attacking him. People make mistakes. Humans get things wrong.If he’s mistaken then criticize the claim..point out the inconsistencies..and move on. What I don’t understand is the endless hostile rants. They accomplish nothing. They don’t help us..they don’t help Leo and they don’t bring anyone closer to the truth. All they do is fuel ego battles between keyboard warriors and deepen the divide instead of creating any chance for understanding or meaningful discussion. If the goal is understanding each others then criticism should be rational and polite .If the goal is just to vent outrage and score points..that’s a different conversation. And stop calling me a Leo fanboy . It’s not like I hang out with him everyday ..I just watch him on a screen .

Well. First off..there is something inherently very wrong with the statement "a non-dual person would do this". If you have to classify me as a non-dual person than just shoot me now. Because id rather be dead than be a Jim Newman or a Tony Parsons. So if Leo had his own fucking God day as an alien rat why should I give a fuck

Bruh 😂 When he says being a backflipping alien mouse is one of the highest states of consciousness he has been in, a non-dual person would say that's Maya/illusion/form/"experience". When a non-dual person talks about "higher consciousness", they don't talk about alien mice or turning into an alien on camera. They talk about something more "vacuous", like Being, presence, is-ness. And that's not Maya, it's truth.

"How about you guys chill and just trust me on this? I will show you Alien Awakening that will absolutely blow your mind. When I finally post it on Youtube, people's jaws will drop. My Awakening will contradict 5000 years of spiritual teaching. And it won't just be words, you will visually see me morph into an Alien Intelligence. And if I don't, then you can call out my bullshit. Until then, sit tight." @Leo Gura What happened here, were you on drugs while posting this? It would be great to clarify what happened here or if you think this would still be possible. @Others here who attack Leo. Please understand how difficult it is for Leo to let that out. Leo could just keep his thoughts in secret. If you discover new things in spirituality which is half baked, you are very vulnerable. Everyone here should not attack each other when someone tries to express what he discovered. Better attack Sadghuru who discovered an alien in form of energy on a lake.

If Leo wanted to end his beef with non-dual spiritual people, he would go in the philosopher direction of finding an own term for what he is about rather than siphon it under existing words like "consciousness" or "awakening". That's the true alpha/sigma move. Then you can actually say "you don't know what I'm talking about" and it would make more sense. But if you instead want to use existing terms and create a hierarchy where you're on the top and you get to judge and compare, then of course it makes sense to keep using the same terms. The point of divergence is that what non-dual people call fantasy and Maya (forms, experiences), Leo calls higher levels of consciousness. Some suggestions: Infinitability — the degree to which you have uncovered the realm of form through your experience, approaching the infinite. Formiousness. Multitudiousness. Experienciousness. Leo can still use words like consciousness and awakening, but if he also gives such definitions for the ways in which he is different from other approaches (I believe existing terms like "Alien Consciousness" are ill-defined and don't capture his larger approach), it's more understandable to act as a leading (if not a #1) arbiter of that perspective. This is not a new suggestion of mine, I suggested this 5 years ago with the "psychonautics vs spirituality" distinction. But this is perhaps more descriptive of the ontological differences rather than the methodological ones (psychonautics, with its association to psychedelics, can tend to be viewed more as a method than what is being aimed at).

OK to be fair. @zurew he has made good on all claims from my perspective other than the alien thing. Which I dont even know if it is a thing. But I validated everything he has ever said in his videos and all of it is true. He by far surpasses all teachers that I have encountered. Unfortunately there is a cost for his pioneering. He seems to have gone a bit insane. This is where I and he cross roads.

Well I hate to disappoint but this not mutiny on the bounty. It is just people talking for themselves. Leo has not put forth, yet, any claims i cannot yet validate and that is what sparked my response to @UnbornTao So. When i hear the alien shit i will speak on that. But until now it is been suspense. A suspense i do not need or like. Perhaps he lost his mind on psychedelics. I'm not the one to say that

You do not understand your own claims, since you couldn't deliver on any of them. To be extremely clear on this, you haven't delivered once on your miracle claims or your alien transformation claim, and you still refuse to adjust your claims or your credence regarding those claims. You pretend to know much more than you actually do. If you knew how this shit worked, you would have already delivered on your claims and wouldn't just talk big with 0 results after years of failure. The only thing we have seen so far from you is you talking grandiose about yourself, you making excuses and delivering 0 empirical results with respect to your empirical claims. But sure, sure—we are the ones who don't know what we are talking about, while you do. That's why, once again, you haven't demonstrated shit yet. I guess we are in the infinitely "sit tight" period and you are in the "I will make infinite excuses why I cant deliver on my own claims and I will infinitely weasel my way out of my own standards" period, right? Anything but having the spine and the epistemic responsibility to own up to your own claims and to your own standards. The camera was the issue and not your lack of understanding of how reality works, right?

If anything, this alien business has proven how gullible most people are. They'll eat up anything that sounds remotely spiritual and transcendental, with no real interest in asking what's actually going on for the person claiming such things. If certain terminology aligns with your views, and it comes from a worldview you favor, then it must be true. Before taking people's word for it, pay attention to his failure to record such a video. The implications of that failure are bigger than you think.

Its not that. But he has gone mad. At least I feel he has ever since his alien realizations.

US Treasury paying $24 billion a week in interest on its debts This topic can be approached from many angles. Taken from an article in Fortune magazine. Does this highlight the Trump Administrations' incompetence infected with MAGA belligerence? What about the credibility of the Liberal Democrats or Moderates whose undisciplined spending led the way. This statement also puts a spin on the overall subject of irresponsible government spending over the last 50 years. For me it brings to mind a plethora of subjects addressed by Seers, channelers, mystics, Farris wheel operator's, theologians, prophet's, etc.,,, concerning the trajectory of experience and increasing speed of change at a certain point in human history referred to as the eschaton, the resurrection, end times., etc.,,, Sitting at the screen, I begin to ponder the changes that are now occurring. Different unrelated subjects arise in my mind. That my expression of them become frivolous because of my compulsion to inject humor to offset the worry of the more somber issues. There are so many "something new happenings",,,, Disclosure of UFO's and Alien life. Worrisome conditions like the stability of the U.S. dollar and the debt of the Treasury, Unstable and extreme weather patterns affecting many areas of agriculture and its cost when subsidized by the U.S. government. Who in the hell would want to be President of the United States? Would they realize what they're getting into? No ordinary person in their right mind would seek this position? This began as a subject in the main forum but I began to wander off into other areas with my commentary. So I moved it here. US Treasury has borrowed $155 billion every month of this fiscal year—and is now paying $24 billion a week in interest on its debts Eleanor Pringle Posted: July 10, 2026 | Last updated: July 10, 2026 Despite concerns from debt hawks, the U.S. government is continuing to borrow at pace: For the fiscal year of 2026 so far, the federal deficit has totaled just under $1.4 trillion. The first nine months of this fiscal year (beginning in October) have now surpassed the borrowing levels of 2025, when deficits totaled just over $1.3 trillion for the same period. At the time of writing, the total U.S. national debt sits at $39.4 trillion, accumulated under administrations led by both Republicans and Democrats. As such, the monthly borrowing for 2026 now sits at roughly $155 billion, or $39 billion per week. And, like any borrower, that debt carries an interest cost. The latest monthly budget review from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirms that net interest on public debt for the fiscal year has hit $857 billion: roughly $23.8 billion a week. This is approximately $100 billion more (13%) than the interest paid out in the first nine months of 2025, the CBO adds, owing to a higher total debt burden than last year and higher long-term interest rates. In fact, interest payments on the debt are now $20 billion larger than the outlays for the Departments of Defense, Commerce, Homeland Security, Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Coronavirus Refundable Credits scheme—combined. Also contributing to the demand on government purse springs is the increasing demand for social security, Medicare and Medicaid. Spending for Social Security benefits rose by $62 billion (or 5%) because of increases in average benefits and in the number of beneficiaries, CBO noted. In comparison, Medicare outlays increased by $58 billion (8%) due to higher enrollment and higher payment rates for services. Rising costs per enrollee meant Medicaid spending increased by $49 billion (10%). This is a trend that isn’t going anywhere: The U.S. population is aging. According to the Census Bureau, Americans’ median age—the age at which half of the population is younger, and half is older — continues to rise, climbing from 39.2 in 2024 to 39.4 in 2025. Men’s share of the older population is particularly of note, the bureau adds. In 2001, there were 70.6 males for every 100 females age 65 and older, but by 2025, the ratio had increased substantially to 81.6. Debt trajectory With the factors influencing Treasury spending only embedding further over the coming decades, those concerned about the U.S. fiscal trajectory are calling for action. So far, they haven’t got much response—though there is a growing sense of urgency among policymakers, according to experts. The latest CBO estimates have alarmed the likes of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget which, for a long time, has been lobbying the government to address its borrowing. In a statement shared with Fortune, Maya MacGuineas, president of the committee, said: “The FY 2026 deficit has now passed the FY 2025 deficit–and it is likely to stay that way for the rest of the fiscal year … We will likely borrow $2 trillion or more this fiscal year—an astounding figure given that the economy keeps growing and unemployment is low.” The current situation is “likely the tip of the iceberg,” MacGuineas adds, if policymakers don’t make changes to entitlements and “ignore the need to cut spending and increase revenues,” she adds: “Social Security and Medicare are within seven years of trust fund exhaustion, and action needs to be taken to prevent across-the-board cuts to both programs.” MacGuineas advocated targeting a deficit of 3% of GDP, roughly half its current level, a proposal that has gained support across the political spectrum. But she also added that “more importantly,” politicians should be “honest with the public about the grave dangers we face by remaining on this unsustainable path.” This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

I think one of the main issues with Actualized.org's teaching is that it aims for such an "ultimate answer" that tempts people to assume that if you crack the philosophy, it means you will also have the practical knowledge or power to bend reality, along with complete understanding. But really, it mainly grants just the broad understanding, which is still very practical, truthful, and "holy." Science tries to properly map reality and discover ways to bend, twist, or "alchemize" reality into what a self would want. With Actualized.org, you arrive at: "God/Reality/Truth is the absence of bias, pure unfiltered infinity." Even after you crack that nut, you still don't have answers to many other important questions. Do we care about saving humans? Do we care about saving humanity, Earth, animals, or insects? What are we okay with killing, utilizing, or molding to our will? What is "Good" Selfishness? Is there even any? Do we just fully give into Reality? Even if all reality is made of "infinities," what are the actual practical, relative structures and stable patterns of reality that we can use? If reality can become anything it can possibly be, moving ever closer to God, then what should we actually strive for? Should we try to make humanity as close to God as possible? Should we make room for alien species or entirely new forms of intelligence if they more closely resemble God? By what standard do we determine the most optimal direction for reality to evolve? Even if free will doesn't ultimately exist, we still have to make choices every day. So what should guide those choices? I agree that if people fully knew and understood God, we would probably have a much more advanced science, and it would answer many of these questions. But there are still so many problems that scientists, humanity, and governments would have to solve afterward. Leo seems to have carved out the niche of God and Truth, without caring much about utility or how to practically implement that understanding into science. Which, again, is completely fine, and it's a very necessary niche. But I can't say with confidence that Curt's, or scientists' in general, only purpose is to understand God. Many of them also want to understand the relative structures of reality and how that understanding can help us practically in this world. That is equally valuable. These are all distinct and much-needed niches. It's just important to understand the purpose of each.

The Hitchcock drama of the last minutes is one of the most beautiful aspects of football . Many teams have made such great comebacks in the last minutes. There is no such thing as impossible in football. Never leave a match you are passionate about till the final whistle. Especially when this alien cells Messi is playing.