C's Misses?

[othree]

Others here have responded to different points you've made; I'll take the part highlighted above.

Watching politics for many years, I've learned that the devil is in the details.

This is something I mentioned to my son, weeks ago. Ppl are telling you to move or they are moving to a red state...But what if the Governor changes? What if it's a set up to lure ppl to?....and I did use Florida as an example...Then I found the following:

View attachment 53625

BILL SB 2006 was signed and approved by Florida Governor Ron Desantis back in May 3, 2021.

While the bill was advertised and sold as a 'landmark deal' banning jab passes and 'government overreach' it also gave the government the right to remove, quarantine and jab anyone who poses a 'threat' to the public.

This is a mirrored version of New York's Assembly Bill A416 which could be voted on as the next legislative session begins tomorrow January 5, 2022.

AN OBSERVATION Florida saw the most growth in population this past year, it would make sense as to why they are overcrowding that area for their sick plans. Advertising it is a "free state" but in fact has the NWO agenda hidden in plain sight, all under the guise of freedom... Source Senate Bill 2006 (2021) - The Florida Senate BILL SB 2006 PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/2006/BillText/er/PDF
*edited for spacing

Yes, I'm aware of that text of that bill. Somebody commented though, that the language about the forced vaccinations was already in the original version of the bill, which predated DeSantis.

But I agree, this can be just a ruse or a smokescreen. And the bill is worded in a way which opens the door for future totalitarian measures, most definitely. That's why I said as of now, some US states remain the freest on the planet. Also: there is a whole bunch of other US states, not just Florida and Texas, which passed anti-vaccine mandate laws. It is possible though that they all have laws on the books like the one you quoted which can be enforced when it suits them.

 

[Joe]

I don't think anyone here but you think that the C's are perfect ro should be perfect. What you are suggesting has been Laura's modus operandi from the beginning. Laura and the team around her have taken measures to the best of their abilities to counteract our biases and still always been very suspicious of what comes through.

Yeah, there seems to be a lot of projection going on here @othree. It may be the case that you have believed in the past that the Cs predictions were 100% correct, but few of the rest of us ever did. Maybe try and remember that when you post. You're welcome to work through this issue by posting here and asking questions, but maybe you should take some time to calm down a bit, reflect a little more on where your apparent 'angst' is coming from, and then proceed.

 

[seek10]

But this should logically include also a "miss list", if one was honest about wanting to research the C phenomena as objectively as possible. Just looking at their "hit list" without their blunders, looks like wishful thinking to me, like looking for confirmation of one's own believes. I'd like to strive to see things as realistically as possible, not as I want them to be ... and I would want the channel to be always correct and perfect, but it's not. I realize that I often forget that.

Publishing "miss list" is the only way of being objective? Publishing itself means one is sure that it is a "miss" in a complex variability reality. Laura and team constantly ask C's and people discuss here what they thought prediction went wrong. Is every thing has to be hit or miss, can't it be part of bigger process of learning?

Let's say some body give a prediction of 99.999% , you round it 100. The prediction didn't happen, still one can even attribute it to .001% what is the point of all this?

 

[othree]

Is this the session you were referring to? Because I do believe that the question was not about the US but about Russia.

No, this is not the session I was referring to.

There were several sessions (at least 2, possibly 3) where Laura either asked or stated that the turmoil will be biggest in the US and UK, in comparison with rest of the world less (paraphrasing here). And it was either confirmed by the C's or answered in the affirmative.

And I wouldn't be too sure that the vaccine mandate in the US is completely out of the question, as planned by the Biden Administration. All the supreme court declared was that OSHA had no jurisdiction to mandate workers in the US to vaccinate, but it could still be implemented by so many other means.

I agree. All sorts of hell can still break loose where things will change in the future and where the US will be turned into the biggest hellhole on the planet.
But AS OF NOW, some US states are the only states in the world which have prohibited the use of vaccine passports, or banned mask mandates or have passed some other legislation to directly counter a medical totalitarian system. Please, correct me if you find examples to the contrary.

And, I don't think it actually matters that much at this stage, he announced a mandate in November, and in January it was ruled against by the supremer court, yet.... that was enough to have millions of people vaccinated in the interim, whether the mandate was legal or not was never the question, and that's all the supremer court declared, the mandate did become real enough to have corporations mandate vaccinations.

Let's not forget all that happened with the airlines, none of them waited for it passing or the outcome of the lawsuits, they ran with it. So did the pentagon, and cities and states. And at this stage, while it does feel like a nice breather as it provides a legal recourse for workers, in practice I actually have not seen it make a difference where I live.

Where I live in the US there's no mandate for any restrictions in the entire state, yet everyone's wearing a mask and lining up for tests and boosters. The Supreme Court shutting down the mandate made no difference, people have been so responsive that a mandate isn't needed anymore, all they have to do is publish a few statistics and figures about hospitals and cases and people jump into the adequate action.

Now, of course this is how things look to me at the moment, I could always be wrong.

 

[othree]

Love that quote of Ark's that Approaching Infinity posted above..

I always liked thinking about the answer the C's gave in one session years ago when asked to estimate their own accuracy so far.. I can't find it now, but they said 67% or something around that IIRC (not sure of the exact number). What if that answer itself was 67% accurate? Then it'd be about 45%.... but if that was 45% accurate it'd be just over 20%... but if that one was about 20% accurate......... oh no!

What an amazing experiment :)

Yes, I remember that. The number was above 70% though. But the way they calculated it was not very clear to me at least ... They were going word by word and were giving each word a correct or incorrect or neutral value, or something like that. Or a true/untrue value. Given that it's a % they gave themselves, it's not clear how believable or trustworthy it is ...

 

[Joe]

@othree: in another thread you wrote:

So, I'm wondering: will the psychos in power first try to crash those pockets of resistance and clear signs of their agenda failing, or will they simply let this slide, and move on to the next attack? I tend to believe they will move on to the next thing they can unleash upon us, which seems to be food shortages, cyberattack coupled with a financial crash and instituting of a digital currency. They are probably thinking that they will eliminate the rebel pockets with their next assault. But the risk here is that their next attack will be just as poorly executed as the first, due to incompetence and narcissism. But we'll see I guess ...

Imagine you are the Cs, and I asked you the questions in the above, with a request for specifics in terms of places, people, dates etc. How would you respond, and how much accuracy do you think you would achieve? To the extent that your answers turned out to be inaccurate as actual events unfold, what reasons would you give for that inaccuracy?

 

[othree]

@othree,
It is difficult to discern what is true and what’s not in terms of giving a binary value to interpretations of events.

The C's use binary values themselves ... if we should not trust those, then it's just another good reason to better re-examine and remain skeptical about the C's answer.

Truth values as defining snapshots of reality, when allocated from the future, become history, and history can be wrong, as we can be wrong in assuming Cs being our collective future selves as opposed to Laura’s future selves and vice versa. Perhaps the failed predictions are true predictions in the Cs history?
By history I mean the doccumentation of consumed processes not a timeline of events.
So for me it is interesting how or rather what did the Cs do to change from the 3d allthe way to the 6d, and indeed what are they doing at the moment when they are not communicating with ‘us’.
Personally, I am not looking for ‘predictions’ in the Cs communications. I am interested in any piece of information that might help me to understand them better, thus creating a better environment to understand one of the many paths to change, transition and survival to higher densities.

But you use language and concepts used by the C's, so it's clear you believe or bought into them to a degree. So, you clearly made already a determination that what they're saying is true, or at least part of it.

 

[othree]

We are in the age of instant gratification with real time communication, able to share information instantly (whoever is looking- properly) driven by technology that runs on only binary (1/0 ). We have been bombarded with social media that runs on likes/dislikes , Govt. that runs on your-with-me/against-me while peddling narration of lone gun man theories for the population that only has to believe in one god (monotheism). The main loser in the process is the "context" ( i.e. "experience") and people became instantly triggerable based on the handful of media outlets narration became demanding and entitled.

Even one consider the imaginary case of there is no PTB peddling their dream project of reducing the global population, where does the authorities bring some cure for the phantom virus like "Covid" when people addicted to instant solution? Every body is making up some thing like head-less chicken, using the front of some "paid expert", covering their buns pushing for the magical bullet of "Vaccine". This is what happens when context goes out of picture for any problem. Reality is LOT more complex with all sorts of interests c

Sure, that's how masses are programmed to react.

Why does it need to be "Perfect" when it can make person to think and convey true meaning of reality - variable future on a individual/collective level(up to some extent). C's also said 3D proof's doesn't apply.

So why is there a "C's hit list"?

 

[Chad]

Bearing in mind Joe's post above, i would just ask, othree, that you provide the C's quotes that you wish to discuss, along with your reasoning. A few of us here have asked and you have yet to do so, despite claiming that you want to go about this objectively.

But this should logically include also a "miss list", if one was honest about wanting to research the C phenomena as objectively as possible.

As others have said; not necessarily. Because we're already working on the assumption that what the C's say is up for discussion; that it's not automatically a 'hit'.

I'd also note that, when we discuss a hit, we don't just label it a hit and move on, taking the exact quote as gospel and that nothing else was learned. Any hit is also nuanced, and often leads to other understandings and investigations, that can also be the case with these 'misses' that you're referring to.

Which is why on the Jesus/Caesar topic i asked if you had read Laura's book, From Paul to Mark, which was the fruit of decades of labour from those seemingly 'imperfect' exchanges. And i'm still wondering, have you?

 

[othree]

Yeah, there seems to be a lot of projection going on here @othree. It may be the case that you have believed in the past that the Cs predictions were 100% correct, but few of the rest of us ever did. Maybe try and remember that when you post. You're welcome to work through this issue by posting here and asking questions, but maybe you should take some time to calm down a bit,

This coming from someone who has apologized to me about his past "non-calm" behavior?
How about you lead by example?

reflect a little more on where your apparent 'angst' is coming from, and then proceed.

Talking about "projecting" ...

 

[Jo Bugman]

I think it's important to remember the C's are not here to convince us to believe them, as seek10 quoted. Predictions seem to be a common basis for testing a source, but remember 'time' does not progress in a straight line as we perceive it. There are endless dimensions with endless possibilities, add in the fact that the past and future are open, it seems folly to put stake in any chance of knowing the 'future'. That's why there's a hit list, because it's impressive to get things correct, imo.

Also:

A: Don't deify us. And, be sure all others with which you communicate understand this too!

 

[othree]

@othree: in another thread you wrote:



Imagine you are the Cs, and I asked you the questions in the above, with a request for specifics in terms of places, people, dates etc. How would you respond, and how much accuracy do you think you would achieve? To the extent that your answers turned out to be inaccurate as actual events unfold, what reasons would you give for that inaccuracy?

I am not sure I would ask the C's those questions. What I wrote reflected an inner monologue, that's some thoughts I would throw out when sitting with a bunch of friends around a fire place or so. I don't think I would ask anyone to tell me what will happen. At the most I would ask them what they THINK will happen. About their opinion.

I don't think that there is a source, a book, an expert, anything which knows everything correctly at all times.

I think this is one possible source of corruption in the material. The C's are not never asked about their opinion, but the questions are posed as if towards an all-knowing source of truth or an oracle. It may be that this is not what the participants are thinking, but that's how it comes across when reading the sessions. The questions are never worded as "What do you, the C's think about xyz?" but instead "What is xyz?" or "Is xyz correct or not?". Maybe that's the reason why I sometimes let down my guard ...

 

[Adobe]

The primary reason for our communication is to help you to learn by teaching yourselves to learn ...BINGO!

Thank you seek10

 

[othree]

How long have you been here? 10 years, and only now are you realising that there is no channel which is 100% correct.

I don't think that this is a logical deducation from my post. You may want to re-read it.

Laura has said over and over again, that she herself is very sceptical about everything which comes from the C's and that what has been gained is by 90% hard researching and 10% inspiration from the C's. Yes, Laura calls it inspiration and not truth according to the C's. Yet it appears that you have read the C's transcript and taken them to be the gospel and now that things are different from how you have been interpreting the C's then you are getting all steamed up. It sounds like you are venting and that you have chosen to pull the C's down by posting several threads about how the C's are wrong.

If it was simply to knock the idea out of your own head that what the C's say is the gospel then it is indeed good. It has been said over and over, both by the C's aswell as by Laura and others, not to worship the C's but isntead to study, network, learn and become aware of our reality.

I don't think anyone here but you think that the C's are perfect ro should be perfect.

What you are suggesting has been Laura's modus operandi from the beginning. Laura and the team around her have taken measures to the best of their abilities to counteract our biases and still always been very suspicious of what comes through.

So I am just wondering what is going on with you personally since you after 10 years of mostly silence have decided to spit the dummy. Was there a particular topic in the last year which rubbed you the wrong way? Are the pressures all around getting to you? This would be understandable but I think opening up a thread or several threads, to question the C's and their lack of 100% perfection is barking up the wrong tree as that has never been the working hypothesis in regards to the communication with the C's.

It feels like there is a lot of emotional attachment on your part to what the C's are saying ....

If no one believes that the C's are perfect or should be perfect and people don't believe them blindly, as you say, then a "miss list" or an examination of their blunders should not be a problem ... and yet, judging from the triggered and hostile response by some of the "supermoderators" it seems that this is a problem ...

 

[othree]

Bearing in mind Joe's post above, i would just ask, othree, that you provide the C's quotes that you wish to discuss, along with your reasoning. A few of us here have asked and you have yet to do so, despite claiming that you want to go about this objectively.

I will make separate threads on their single misses. This will require some time. But a clue that they are valid points is given by the fact that none of the supermoderators or superadministrators has refuted any of them so far ...

As others have said; not necessarily. Because we're already working on the assumption that what the C's say is up for discussion; that it's not automatically a 'hit'.

If it's up for discussion, then it should be up for discussion in any direction ....

I'd also note that, when we discuss a hit, we don't just label it a hit and move on, taking the exact quote as gospel and that nothing else was learned. Any hit is also nuanced, and often leads to other understandings and investigations, that can also be the case with these 'misses' that you're referring to.

Which is why on the Jesus/Caesar topic i asked if you had read Laura's book, From Paul to Mark, which was the fruit of decades of labour from those seemingly 'imperfect' exchanges. And i'm still wondering, have you?

I tried to read a few of Laura's books, but couldn't get through. As much as I admire her work, and love watching her talk (a pity she hasn't kept it up on Youtube), she is one of the all time worst writers in history, I believe. I read her co-authored book with Pierre Lescaudron and that was really good, but judging from her past works, I assume this was mostly Pierre's doing. So, no I haven't read much of her books. I did read some of her blog posts and other internet articles, though.