[XiWm9O9S]

i can appreciate that many people use "popular opinion" as a basis of determining what seems weird, i.e. in the evaluation of where they position themselves in society. some people seem to have a high weirdness threshold tolerance, and others less so. the utility of weirdness shouldn't be underestimated, that there are many who cling to the weird in efforts to disengage from (what their psyche may be subconsiously suggesting) that which isn't working well. there may be a relationship between free will infringement and the degree of open mindedness - that an impasse may be opportunity for someone to play their "weird cards" in chance they can free themselves from their less than fruitful situation.

thanks for the response, a very good point.

i am reminded of the punk rocker phenomenon, (as well as the flower power generation, and before them the beatniks, the zoot suiters, the flapper generation, and other 'outrageous' fringe elements ) wherein kids disillusioned with the perceived strictures of their cultural and social surroundings embrace 'weirdness' in order to express their desire to break free.

thus are seeds of new social paradigms sown, as new music, fashion and social mores gradually filter into popular culture and co-exist with the older social paradigm, although with some friction, until a new generation of kids start the cycle anew, and the older 'mainstream' paradigm is gradually changed, and what was liberatingly 'weird' for our parents may be more of the strictured old-fogeyism for us.

this process occurs without necessarily infringing upon anyone's free will, as you are free to gravitate towards whatever cultural segment of society you wish.

regardless of culture, though, some are more able to accept higher degrees of weirdness than others, as you say. the mainstream press, for example, may reflect the parameters of limitation of weirdness deemed real or acceptable by a society at large; whereas an individual may be able to accept as real the more progressive concepts of the greater reality. the law of free will prevents others in the society from being 'blindsided' by these issues, so that their normal process of personal evolution is not usurped by that which they are not yet ready to face.

thus, in this time of revealing, everything is 'hidden in plain sight' for those who want to discover new truths, and those who don't will not see these things. this is why no absolute proof of ghosts, or ufo's, or psychic ability, or life after death, etc. is front page news and unequivocably demonstrable to the masses. the individual, though, if so inclined, can 'prove' these things to him/herself after careful study and inner reflection.

i have often seen very stange things in the sky, but in every case there has been room to rationalize (sometimes a stretch!) it as being some mundane, 'natural' occurance, or a trick of the eyes or mind. for myself, i can say i feel that this is because i need to find my personal assurances and connection to the greater intelligence, within myself.

so, what about those who still 'sleep' who are suddenly, traumatically faced with a 'close encounter' of the undeniable kind? why them and not me? i suppose that it's possible this could be arranged by their own higher self in order to kickstart an awakening process which is not going to happen any other way, and for them time could be of the essence here. in this way they may not be having their free will infringed upon. this is merely conjecture, of course, but the free will of the awakening soul here is of paramount importance.