Politics and harvest

[Zach]

My view may seem somewhat extreme

Well, I would lie if I said that quote didn't go through my mind as well when I saw that clip... it's really freaky. Just when I thought the US election can't get any crazier.

I sense the true reason for her convulsions being stranger than most would expect. Her doing that, to me, is a red flag (not that there aren't plenty of others surrounding her lol); and a big deal and something worth talking about (and her addressing) given her position. I know there are seemingly weird illnesses that cause some seemingly weird actions... But if she has seizures, lets say, being in her position its worth addressing if you ask me. Thats my first time seeing that video and I don't know any details surrounding it but if that just slipped by no questions asked/answered...that makes it even stranger to me.

[ColinT]

Hello

[ColinT]

Goodbye

[AnthroHeart]

Some years ago the Russians reported detecting anomalous energies at the leading edge of the heliosphere, suggesting that the Solar System is moving into a new type of physical space:

Interesting and fascinating.

[APeacefulWarrior]

Actually I see it a bit differently, I think it creates a confrontational environment, which I at least am beginning to find tiring, because it has become a pattern with you. It doesn't matter what a person presents you with, you simply continue to disagree.

Please tell me you at least understand that you're being just as disagreeable towards my views.  This is a two-way street.  Yet you're acting as though I should refrain from providing my view on the situation just so that you don't have to see someone having a differing opinion.

For that matter, I've agreed with you on things in this very thread!   And it's a little disingenuous to say "it doesn't matter what a person says" as though I'm chronically disagreeable with everyone. This is really only about you and me.

So despite the fact that this is a forum dedicated to the Ra material, and I have used Ra's words to speculate about world events, you once again become condescending like in the other thread, this time by saying I'm "looking for confirmation that the world is doomed". So perhaps you can see why I don't consider these exchanges with you constructive, which eventually leads to my sarcasm, because I think you are more vested in disagreeing than any sincere exchange of ideas.

So you think that simply posting a Ra quote means the discussion is over?   And that if I disagree with your interpretation of it, I must be doing so solely for the sake of being disagreeable?  At this point, you're basically calling me a liar by implying I'm arguing in bad faith.  Which I'm not.  I've even been explaining my motivations, but you're just ignoring that.

And I didn't write that line about 'looking for confirmation' in response to your Ra quotes, which I addressed in a different reply.  I wrote it in response to a biased and inflammatory RT article, which I spent quite a bit of time deconstructing in hopes you would see how heavily-spun it was.  Instead, you wrote an incredibly heavy handed reply telling me to "click the X in the corner" if I see something I disagree with, while simultaneously accusing me of trying to stifle discussion.   Then you deleted that response's entire text and replaced it with a Hillary video after I replied to it.

What really makes me sad here is that I thought we'd reached an amicable conclusion.  You asked about RT and Al-Jazeera in America, I answered, and that was that.  Then I go to bed, and when I wake up, I discovered you had continued the argument hours later with a post that was almost nothing but personal attacks against me.

Yes, we clearly disagree on many things.  The difference is, I still respect your right to hold differing opinions and I'm not going to take it personally that you're disagreeing with  me.  And I certainly wouldn't accuse you of insincerity just for disagreeing!   I'm simply posting my own honest views on these things.  But your last reply to me makes it sound like you're taking it as a personal affront that I have other points of view on these matters and I'm capable of expressing them.  We both have just as much right as the other to hold different opinions and post our views in a public discussion.  And again I ask, what is a discussion if it isn't an exchange of different points of view?  

It's entirely possible for us to agree to disagree without anyone calling anyone else insincere.  And i really hope that if you pay attention to nothing else I say, you'll at least take THAT message to heart because, seriously, attacking my motives for having a different opinion than you is not cool.

[APeacefulWarrior]

> a new planet and new physical vehicle system gradually expressing itself

Something that's long fascinated me is Ra's assertion:

"That which fourth density is not: ... It is not of heavy chemical vehicles for body complex activities.

You know this isn't Reddit, right? The > for quoting doesn't work here. I just mention this since it's a lot easier to follow the flow of discussion if you use the "quote" tags to show who you're replying to.

How to test this? I've been doing so with a combination of yoga, diet and somatic meditation. The results are not definitive, certainly not conclusive in any way, but the sensations and results on my physical mechanism suggest that we may now be able to "build in" a type of material that enhances health and well-being. The next step is to try it out on plants using specific electronic techniques and equipment I'm designing. I've been looking about for some time for others with whom to collaborate, but it's beyond "leading-edge" and the interests/comprehension of anyone I've encountered. I mention it because it's a very practical alternative both to modern drug-based medicine and to the cyborgs of Transhumanism.

Yeah, I certainly agree about over-reliance on chemical medicine and the general silliness of Transhumanism. Although I also can't help thinking that the transhumanists may still be doing interesting/useful work (even if not in the way they intend) specifically by exploring different types of consciousness on the physical plane. What type of entity would result if one ever did manage to duplicate his mind on circuitry? I find it a rather fascinating question to ponder in the same way I wonder how a "true" self-aware general AI would fit into the density hierarchy, were one ever created.

Obviously, an entity which exists on circuitry must be part of the Creator, by definition. But what would the connection be? And how do concepts like death/rebirth apply when it's an entity which can be literally switched on and off at will?

My own work is largely spiritual. I have guides on the other side -and one in particular- with whom I work very closely, exploring the ways our consciousnesses can be merged or separated. Much of this work is happening on the 4D plane. (I'm not terribly familiar with the Hindu planes, so I'm not sure how that translates to your system.) I'm basically exploring ways that 3D and 4D can be unified to work cohesively, and what changes such explorations have on my/our consciousness.

I am curious, how are you trying to integrate electronics into your own work?

[YinYang]

Please tell me you at least understand that you're being just as disagreeable towards my views.  This is a two-way street.  Yet you're acting as though I should refrain from providing my view on the situation just so that you don't have to see someone having a differing opinion.

For that matter, I've agreed with you on things in this very thread!   And it's a little disingenuous to say "it doesn't matter what a person says" as though I'm chronically disagreeable with everyone. This is really only about you and me.

I have no issue with differing opinions, what I do take issue with is what you do when I have a different view to yours. You either disparage my view, or you become condescending or patronising. Sometimes you even put words in my mouth. This has been happening for quite a while now.

Let me give you examples:

Bizarre opening ceremony for Switzerland’s record-breaking railway tunnel

I mean, what, do we think the Swiss are Satanists now?

Can you see how that comment is disparaging? Can you also see how it immediately removes the harmony in the thread, and creates an oppositional environment, let alone that it also stifles conversation, which is why I said you display "thought police" tendencies in my earlier post which I accidentally replaced with another.

It mainly has to do with harmony, your delivery method is of such a nature that it immediately removes the harmony in a discussion.

Is the Pope influenced by Orion?

You are, of course, free to disregard any teachings of Ra which do not resonate with you, but on this matter, I do believe you are simply incorrect.

Can you see how this is condescending and confrontational? Let alone that in that particular thread your interpretation of the material is highly questionable.

You do not roll your eyes at me, you roll your eyes at Ra.

Can you see how this is confrontational? That thread is also an example where I provided you with the relevant Ra quote to show your error, to no avail. And that's why I'm saying it looks like you're more vested in disagreeing than a sincere exchange of ideas.

YinYang, if you read the news looking for confirmation that the world is doomed

Can you see how this is condescending and disparaging? It also shows "thought police" tendencies. The Ra material made it quite clear that conflict in late third density is of a pressing concern, so people can discuss that if they wish. Can you see how you stifle conversation? Can you see how disrespectful that comment is?

There are many other examples, but this little handful will suffice in making my point, which is that your delivery method removes the harmony and goodwill in a discussion, and creates an confrontational environment, which I certainly don't find enjoyable, because it's disharmonious.

There are ways to disagree with someone respectfully.

So you think that simply posting a Ra quote means the discussion is over? And that if I disagree with your interpretation of it, I must be doing so solely for the sake of being disagreeable? And that if I disagree with your interpretation of it, I must be doing so solely for the sake of being disagreeable?

It definitely appears that way when I provide you with the relevant quote to show your error, and then it's completely rejected by you.

At this point, you're basically calling me a liar by implying I'm arguing in bad faith.  Which I'm not.  I've even been explaining my motivations, but you're just ignoring that.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never alluded to you being a liar. My examples above show why I get the impression that you are more vested in disagreeing than an exchange of ideas. I have not been ignoring your motivations, I have responded to all of them.

And I didn't write that line about 'looking for confirmation' in response to your Ra quotes, which I addressed in a different reply.  I wrote it in response to a biased and inflammatory RT article, which I spent quite a bit of time deconstructing in hopes you would see how heavily-spun it was.  Instead, you wrote an incredibly heavy handed reply telling me to "click the X in the corner" if I see something I disagree with, while simultaneously accusing me of trying to stifle discussion.   Then you deleted that response's entire text and replaced it with a Hillary video after I replied to it.

I accidentally replaced that long post, for what it's worth. That was an honest boo-boo, and I just didn't have the strength to redo the entire post. You are also missing the gist of the RT article. You initially said in this thread that it's highly unlikely that Russia and China will form an alliance against the West, and my point is that in this overt display of joint strength, they can't make their message clearer to the US that they're together, given the current tensions over that marine territory. That's a clear show of solidarity on Russia's part. The sensationalistic style of the reporting doesn't negate my point. I could just as well have used a more neutral Reuters article to substantiate my point. I just didn't anticipate that my choice of news network would also lead to a point of contention.

What really makes me sad here is that I thought we'd reached an amicable conclusion.  You asked about RT and Al-Jazeera in America, I answered, and that was that.  Then I go to bed, and when I wake up, I discovered you had continued the argument hours later with a post that was almost nothing but personal attacks against me.

Yes, that was actually an attempt to find some commonality with you, but then I was lying in bed and thought to myself if you and I don't address our grievances with one another, then it's just going to continue in the same fashion as it had been for quite some time.

Yes, we clearly disagree on many things.  The difference is, I still respect your right to hold differing opinions and I'm not going to take it personally that you're disagreeing with  me.

I think you have been rather disrespectful and personal in some of your responses, as shown in my examples.

And I certainly wouldn't accuse you of insincerity just for disagreeing!   I'm simply posting my own honest views on these things.  But your last reply to me makes it sound like you're taking it as a personal affront that I have other points of view on these matters and I'm capable of expressing them.  We both have just as much right as the other to hold different opinions and post our views in a public discussion.  And again I ask, what is a discussion if it isn't an exchange of different points of view?

As I've shown above, the issue isn't that we disagree, it's your delivery method. There are ways to disagree while remaining respectful of someone. I have also become sarcastic in my responses to you, but mostly as a result of a number of condescending posts by you.  

It's entirely possible for us to agree to disagree without anyone calling anyone else insincere.  And i really hope that if you pay attention to nothing else I say, you'll at least take THAT message to heart because, seriously, attacking my motives for having a different opinion than you is not cool.

I never questioned your motives due to the fact that you hold different opinions, I have no issue with differing views. I have explained above what I do take issue with; your delivery method, which immediately removes the harmony and goodwill in any discussion.

[APeacefulWarrior]

No, Yinyang. This stops.  If you are so dedicated to tearing into me that you're seriously digging through my comment history looking for lines to cherry-pick out of the hundreds of posts I've made, there is absolutely no point whatsoever in continuing this.   After all, as Cardinal Richelieu (probably) said: "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged."

Nobody has a comment history which could survive such deliberate spinning.

And if your intention was to become so unpleasant and hostile that it would "force" me to cease attempting to communicate with you, you've succeeded.  If this is how you react to contrary opinions, and how far you'll go to discredit someone for holding them, I no longer think it's worth trying to engage in civil discussion with you.

Congratulations.  

[YinYang]

No, Yinyang. This stops.  If you are so dedicated to tearing into me that you're seriously digging through my comment history looking for lines to cherry-pick out of the hundreds of posts I've made, there is absolutely no point whatsoever in continuing this.   After all, as Cardinal Richelieu (probably) said: "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged."

Nobody has a comment history which could survive such deliberate spinning.

And if your intention was to become so unpleasant and hostile that it would "force" me to cease attempting to communicate with you, you've succeeded.  If this is how you react to contrary opinions, and how far you'll go to discredit someone for holding them, I no longer think it's worth trying to engage in civil discussion with you.

Congratulations.  

There was no other way for me to make you see the effect your condescending comments have on conversations, other than supply you with examples, and yet you remain unable to give it any consideration and continue to infer that I have an issue with differing opinions... so I rest my case.

[YinYang]

Some years ago the Russians reported detecting anomalous energies at the leading edge of the heliosphere, suggesting that the Solar System is moving into a new type of physical space:

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/0...Change.htm

Very interesting, so they've actually noticed that our solar system has spiralled into 4th density which they described as "moving into an area of energy that is different - that is higher". I have looked a little into this singularity movement. Have you seen their Future Timeline. If Quo is right though, we wouldn't have to worry too much about their predictions, since Quo said it's only another one or two incarnations give or take till harvest.

Elon Musk has been quite vocal about the dangers of AI, in this video he says there's only one company he's worried about, so they asked him if it's Google, and he just smiled and said "there's only one". So that would be Ray Kurzweil and friends, wonder what they're up to...



Love his quote in the video "freedom consists of the distribution of power, and despotism in its concentration".