Quite interesting - Mayan day/nights and earth periods

[Bring4th_Austin]

'intelligent infinity offers a type of clock' is not an approximate statement.

"The striking of an hour," in regards to the scope of the universe, could easily be 100 year period. The fact that it is a moments time for us is only an interpretation. Of course it could be a moments time, but it could not be.

No, but it does not define exactly what that means. "Offers a type of clock" doesn't have to mean it hits in a moments time, it only means it is on a schedule. We know that 4D vibrations hit at an exact moment, we know they'll be here completely in a moments time, but this means nothing about harvest.

im at a loss to see why you are unable to merge scattered relevant information you see around, despite it should be easy for you :

- at one point it is told that intelligent infinity offers a type of clock. and it is told that its movements are precise and regardless of the circumstance upon the striking of the hour, gates to intelligent infinity opens.

- at another point it is asked whether harvest will be spread out or happen at a particular time. the answer was 2011. harvest is not a spread out event.

- harvest happens with the gates to intelligent infinity opening.

I've touched on each of these points, showing that you're interpretation is only one interpretation. You didn't touch on any of my interpretations, you just said "I don't know why you don't see things in my interpretation."

Not only that, but no one knows what "the gateway from intelligent energy to intelligent infinity opens" means. It's open to wild interpretation, including the idea that it only happens in time/space. Ra never said it was something that happened in space/time. Assuming anything outside of Ra's words is...well...an assumption.

not knowing what 'gates of intelligent infinity opening' means, and this being open to interpretation, does not change the other information given. there is not that much room to interpret everything. you cant load an uncertainty to the above points by interpreting 'gate to intelligent infinity'. you may not know what does gates to intelligent infinity opening mean, but it will happen regardless of the circumstances upon striking of the hour, apparently, and this includes interpretations.

The fact that it is open to interpretation is the only point I need to prove. Again, "the striking of the hour" meaning "in a moments time" is YOUR interpretation of that statement.

Also, saying "this is an appropriate probable/possible time/space nexus for harvest" is WIDELY open for interpretation. "Probably/possible" means it is NOT definite. It means it MAY happen then. Again, in 40 years, someone could point to that statement and say "it could still be valid, because Ra said it was only possible."

it is quite clear that it is not spread out. moreover, judging by the fact that Ra says 'harvest is now', and the effort spent by Ra and all other society complexes and disincarnate entities in order to increase harvest. a potential 40 years shift, is a major time period for 3d, considering 3d is just 75,000 years. just looking back the state of the world 40 years ago and now would portray the difference in proper detail.

"The harvest is now"...30 years ago...40 years is just 10 more years added on to that. 40 years isn't really that much compared to 75,000 years, that's your own opinion and your own interpretation you seem to insist is the only correct one.

including the idea that it only happens in time/space.
Not only that, but no one knows what "the gateway from intelligent energy to intelligent infinity opens" means. It's open to wild interpretation, including the idea that it only happens in time/space. Ra never said it was something that happened in space/time. Assuming anything outside of Ra's words is...well...an assumption.

it seems that there is a misconception like feeling what happens in time/space may not affect people's lives drastically in space/time, or its effect may not be felt, or even remembered. that is not correct. moreover, in the case of something like harvest, the effect is planetwide, not personal.

It could easily only happen once a person has left space/time and entered time/space. That's what I meant, but even further, it's your own interpretation that something happening in time/space would have to effect us directly, immediately, and noticeably in space/time. Something can exist/happen in time/space without happening in space/time, according to Ra:

At this nexus the green-ray environment exists to a far greater extent in time/space than in space/time.

It is existing to a far greater extent int time/space than in space/time...something is happening in time/space and not in space time. Very clearly spelled out. Although I have no doubt that you have yet another interpretation which you think is the only correct possibility regarding this statement.

Then, of course, even if it was a moments time, Ra constantly spoke about approximations and mistakes regarding time periods. The striking of the hour could not happen for years due to Ra's difficulty.

They gave an approximate year...which is vague. They even hammered in the fact they have difficulty with our time. This gives the material a clause...if it doesn't happen in 2011, maybe 2012...if not 2012, maybe 2013...if not 2013, maybe 2040. Who knows what Ra considers an approximation? On top of that, just because the questioner offered a single year and Ra did not state a time period does not translate to harvest happening at a single moment. It COULD, of course, but it is not 100% sure statement.

There is still no way to know what this means, how it happens, where it happens, or whether "striking of the hour" means a moments time, or simply on a strict schedule. You have a very defined idea of what you think it is. But again, in 40 years, if nothing happens, someone can still interpret it to be correct....you may not, but many others may.

having difficulty with time/space of this planet does not mean confusing the concepts 'time period' and 'at a certain date'. the question was asked in that direction, and the answer was not a time period.

in addition, something that is expressed as 'being now' (harvest) and a date like 2011 being given for it, and tied to a type of clock has to have a function that matures in narrow vicinity of the date given. if, there had been a room for deviance like a whopping 40 years, that would be a totally different function, and the possibility would be mentioned.

It was expressed as "being now" 30 years ago, and you're saying that 40 years is "whopping." Why would Ra say "harvest is now" when it was in 30 years, and how is 40 years so much larger than 30 years? You don't know what Ra would have mentioned or wouldn't have in different situations anyways, you just have your own interpretation of what they did mention.

at this point, i would like to remind you that Ra was able to see all possibility vortices from their observation point. edgar cayce too apparently, for that matter.

so, if there was the possibility of a whopping 40 years deviation, it would be mentioned.

Edgar Cayce had some predictions not come true...and again, you don't know what Ra considers approximate. You don't know what Ra would mention or wouldn't mention in specific situations. It could be 40 years. It's your opinion that it's not. Your own interpretation of Ra's words which you feel is the only correct one.

Saying "those who are not in incarnation at this time will be included in the harvest" is fodder for questioning. For one, why would he say "those who are not in incarnation at this time will be included in the harvest" and not "all will be harvested"? Why make a special statement for those not in incarnation if everyone at that very moment will be harvested? Why separate the two groups, incarnate and not incarnate? It hints that this is the moment that disincarnate entities will be harvested, but not necessarily incarnate entities. Of course that is a single interpretation...which is my point, it can be interpreted many ways.

these are not concepts relevant to time. all gets included in the harvest, but those who are harvested would only be those who qualify for harvest. that is the differentiation of 'not all being harvested'.

you are getting misplaced hints. 'INCLUDED' means, the party would be INCLUDED with the other group. therefore, disincarnates being INCLUDED in harvest would mean that they would be included in harvest with the other group - incarnates.

There would be no reason for Ra to specifically talk about those not incarnated at that time. It would be a given that they are included in "all." It's your interpretation that Ra was simply clarifying that they would ALSO get included, but it's my interpretation that if that were the case, Ra would just say "at that nexus all will be harvested."

some are afraid of their comfortable lives getting disrupted, some are afraid of nothing happening at all.

That is for sure, for a long time I was afraid nothing would happen. I would not consider myself "comfortable" in 3D existence, especially on this sphere, and I would love for there to be an instant event that would propel us to something different, even if it meant a rough moment. But I see a lot of ambiguity in Ra's words you do not, and I don't feel like my opinion is the only right one. It could be wrong, and I'm okay with that.