10-30-2010, 10:35 AM
This is a question of accuracy - let's begin first by stating Ra's words on this subject:
First I want to ask why Ra say's in times/space and not space/time. I'm puzzled on this term usage.
Secondly, Ra says that these lines are 60,000 years old...Or does he? Is that what Ra is implying?
Scientists/Archeologists say the lines are somewhere from 1,500-2,000 years old - are they really off by that much? Maybe they are finding traces of people who were there 1,500-2,000 years ago and who came after whom ever built the lines?
Or did Ra get the date mixed up?
Any Archeologists in here?
Quote:Questioner: Were the lines at Nazca included in this?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
Questioner: I’m a little confused. These lines at Nazca are hardly understandable for an entity walking on the surface. He cannot see anything but disruption of the surface. However, if you go up to a high altitude you can see the patterns. How was it of benefit to the entities walking on the surface?
Ra: I am Ra. At the remove of the amount of time/space which is now your present it is difficult to perceive that at the time/space 60,000 years ago the earth was formed in such a way as to be visibly arranged in powerful structural designs, from the vantage point of distant hills.
Questioner: In other words at that time there were hills overlooking these lines?
Ra: I am Ra. This will be the last full question of this session.
The entire smoothness, as you see this area now, was built up in many places in hills. The time/space continuum has proceeded with wind and weather, as you would say, to erode to a great extent both the somewhat formidable structures of earth designed at that time and the nature of the surrounding countryside.
Questioner: I think I understand then that these lines are just the faint traces of what used to be there?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
First I want to ask why Ra say's in times/space and not space/time. I'm puzzled on this term usage.
Secondly, Ra says that these lines are 60,000 years old...Or does he? Is that what Ra is implying?
Scientists/Archeologists say the lines are somewhere from 1,500-2,000 years old - are they really off by that much? Maybe they are finding traces of people who were there 1,500-2,000 years ago and who came after whom ever built the lines?
Or did Ra get the date mixed up?
Any Archeologists in here?