12-27-2009, 02:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-27-2009, 02:51 PM by Questioner.)
(12-27-2009, 12:36 PM)Lavazza Wrote: Please follow this link if you think it will be of value (I certainly do!), but bear in mind that it has nothing to do with The Law of One
I find Bashar's style delightful and I certainly see the relevance of the excerpt you posted. In that talk he points out that gullibility and cynicism have the same root: a refusal to consider evidence that might contradict one's preconceived conclusions. I think it is worthwhile to explore here what meaning we assign to evidence, logic, faith or conclusions. Our response to the spiral light provides us with yet another opportunity to consider these themes.
One point of similarity I see from Bashar and the L/L Research materials. If I understand correctly, they both say that we will not, in this lifetime, get evidence that takes away from us our right and responsibility to choose our own faith and beliefs.
(12-27-2009, 02:11 PM)pksmith Wrote: I can certainly understand the general reluctance around here to really dive into David's site.
I'm not reluctant. In fact, in the past I've sometimes spent a lot of time following through all the details of David's presentations. Currently I feel I need to limit my time online to the forums that are most productive for my current growth and interests. That's in-depth use of this forum and two business forums, and a quick stop at a silly timewaster forum.
This is why I keep asking if someone here could summarize David's presentation. I expect it's very, very detailed and comprehensive. I'm interested enough in his opinion of this phenomenon to want to read a summary. But I'm not interested enough to follow all the ins and outs of his entire explanation process. My current time allotment for discussion in depth of spiritual matters goes to this forum.
I agree that David's strength is in his knack to synthesize a wide range of research and spiritual materials. And I agree that his weakness is sometimes not finding a clear way to summarize, then getting frustrated when people can't follow all of what he said. I have some of the same strength and weakness myself so I can certainly sympathize.
(12-27-2009, 01:55 PM)Peregrinus Wrote: I have to laugh. Ali, being an INTJ like myself, has personally concluded that this was most definitely a missile, while I have personally concluded it was definitely not. How is it that two masterminds can come up with two completely opposite conclusions?
Because the essence of INTJ energy is to reach a definite conclusion (J) through a process of rational thought (T) based on intuitive perception of one's own inner states (IN). Starting with differing inner states and intuitive processes, of course the rational conclusions would wind up different. If you each had the same inner-life experiences, such as reaching the same states through meditation, I believe you'd then use comparable analytical models to reach matching conclusions about the matter.
(12-27-2009, 02:32 PM)ayadew Wrote: Ah, David is a wonderful person....He really believes in what he do, and think it's right.
I agree.
Perigrenus, I meant to write a post asking if you could give some kind of explanation or maybe a simple diagram of your point of view of the rocket theory, given your chemistry expertise.
For those with the astrology background: what astrological significance is there in the timing and location of the event, other than the Nobel Prize connection?