3D to 4D: Sudden or Gradual? A great read...(David Wilcock interview)

[Bring4th_Austin]

you can pick anything you can verify in your personal life. this may be the chakra system, this may be philosophy, this may be historical concepts about the lives of people examined.

a totally coherent, complete furball of information system touching the current reality we inhabit from any tangent will validate itself.

Isn't this also true of Q'uo? And a lot of other consciously channeled material? This in regards to the chakra system, philosophy, and so-forth. You say that these rather subjective things "validate the whole of information." Why do they validate the transient information, and only the transient information of the Ra material and not other material?

What I am contending is the information which is apparently transient of spirituality; the ETs, the pyramids, the history, science, harvest, pole shift, etc. Why do we trust that Ra is correct about the Atlanteans only because their philosophical teachings seem to ring true to us? (just an example)

I'll try to bring it back around...you contended that Q'uo was distorted and thus you couldn't believe for sure their statement that the pole shift was averted. With regards to everything I just said, why would Ra's prediction of a pole shift hold any more sway than Q'uo's assertion that pole shift was averted?

There are many threads in Science & Technology that attempt to establish verification of the info given us by Ra.

I searched there before asking the question, and found a couple of threads. There was one about String Theory, which was theorized before the Ra contact. There was one about possible life on Venus billions of years ago, which is circumstantial. And there was one linking to the work of David Wilcock talking about various things related to the Ra contact, but nothing that directly validates Ra's words.

Am I missing something? Are there any threads there which offer evidence which directly validates Ra's words?

Science and telchnology deals with inventions of little value to evolution, other that providing tools and gadgets, while philosophy attempts to address ideology, values and underlying principles of thought.
It's not just Kant, there's Plato, Teilhard de Chardin, et al.

As they state, Ra is just offering their own spin, or 'somewhat different slant upon the information which is always and ever the same.'

To learn, one must bridge what one currently has to work with to that which is offered. There is so much more to work with, in the form of philosophical, psychological, and religious work, than many people realize.

Right, when I first started this side-discussion I tried to somewhat establish this. I find this particular discussion about the mechanics of harvest rather transient to philosophy/spirituality:

Honestly, I am equally as skeptical of ANY information transmitted in the Ra contact that is not of spiritual nature, including things about people (Jesus, MLK, etc.), history (Atlantis, etc.), the pyramids, and all. Their descriptions of oneness, unity, Service to Others vs. Service to self, polarity, and the nature of consciousness is pretty indisputable, but I don't buy every bit of the information. I discuss it with loyalty to the material on this forum because that is one of the main purposes of this forum, but candidly, I trust Q'uo as much as Ra, and neither do I trust completely. When we start dismissing consciously channeled material simply due to the method of delivery, then I will just as ready dismiss all material in the Ra contact aside from philosophical and spiritual concepts (for example, information on harvest, ETs, science-minded metaphysics, densities, etc. I would dismiss)

I am drawn to the Ra material mainly because of the spiritual teachings. I hold true to the transient information because this is an L/L Research established forum. But Q'uo is also L/L Research material, with just as much if not MORE philosophical and spiritual information which rings true throughout our daily lives.