Have the Transcripts been changing..?

[Woodsman]

I hope this doesn't sound too silly, but it just happened again and so I am going to ask this time...

-Is it just me or is anybody else experiencing their memories of the transcripts not lining up with what they are today?

I know memory is plastic, and as time passes, our recollection can and probably does slip and slide.., but several times over the past year, I have found myself unable to re-locate certain passages I have strong memories of, or when reading passages and quotes people add to their comments, having the feeling that new material has been added or existing material is changed/expanded upon.

I was around early on, reading the transcripts and Laura's notes as they were being published back in the 90's, and I have been through them dozens of times since, so not being able to find certain pieces, and coming across this "New Stuff" sensation really feels weird.

Is that even something which can happen? I've had the idea of reality splitting on my mind a lot lately, and I wonder if I'm just inventing the sensation by over-thinking.

And there's also the fact that I'm getting older. Maybe I'm just losing it.

This is a check-in to see what other people are experiencing.

 

[Joe]

I think I know what you mean. There have been occasions where I recalled something in the transcripts about a specific topic and I thought I knew what it was. I always find the reference, but now and again it turns out to say something slightly different to what I thought it said. I put this down to changes in understanding in a broad way between the first reading and now. When first read, the section of the transcript was filtered though my understanding at the time, and I drew a conclusion based on that understanding, kind of like "oh, so that means x". But now, with a slightly broader understanding of things in general, I re-read the same transcript and I get a slightly different meaning, making me think I misread the transcript, but technically I probably didn't, I just misinterpreted it, or interpreted with a particular perspective/perception at that time, which has changed since then.

If you have a specific example, maybe you could post it here.

 

[Christine]

Thank you for approaching problem. :)
I also have the same feeling sometimes that the new hardware has been added or existing equipment is modified / extended on or even having read a sentence in a session and not being able to find it, it's exhausting to have to look thinking to have actually read and that's what sometimes makes me the error of my understandings.
Perhaps age or maybe something else ... I do not know.

 

[Gawan]

I think I know what you mean. There have been occasions where I recalled something in the transcripts about a specific topic and I thought I knew what it was. I always find the reference, but now and again it turns out to say something slightly different to what I thought it said. I put this down to changes in understanding in a broad way between the first reading and now. When first read, the section of the transcript was filtered though my understanding at the time, and I drew a conclusion based on that understanding, kind of like "oh, so that means x". But now, with a slightly broader understanding of things in general, I re-read the same transcript and I get a slightly different meaning, making me think I misread the transcript, but technically I probably didn't, I just misinterpreted it, or interpreted with a particular perspective/perception at that time, which has changed since then.

I had a similar thought when reading your experience Woodsman. And as you wrote memory is plastic and especially with time things seem to change. But it is rather what Joe wrote, you got new knowledge and understanding and interpreting the transcripts and all the other stuff you read from what you newly learned and experienced. It also happens to me from time to time, where I was totally fascinated reading something several years ago and when reading it now it is more down to earth and less emotional clouded, maybe that's the reason something doesn't appear too fascinating anymore. What would be good, having an example - just any - to understand this phenomenon a bit better, but I also don't have one right now.

 

[Aeneas]

I can relate to this too and I think what Joe says explains it. A lot of time has passed and so has our understanding, thus things appear new or different due to our understanding having changed in the meantime. Certain things make a lot more sense now, than they did the first time around. One example is that the world that was described back in the early sessions in the 90'ies, at the time looked too totalitarian, too police state like, too Orwellian and yet now, that world is here and is what we experience. One could even say that it is even scarier than what was predicted

And we and our understanding and experience has also changed over the years.

 

[3DStudent]

I've not noticed this, but because I don't go back to transcripts much these days. But in the past when I was a somewhat new member and was on an information gorge fest, I recall I would remember a few words or exact phrases of what sessions or members would say. And that was really useful in searching for things because I could find the exact location where it was said.

But I don't have that recall anymore, maybe because my reading has lessened and/or become more broad. So I can't remember the exact phrase someone said and quote them and connect dots as much. So I cannot say for sure if it's the past timeline changing because I don't notice any "Mandela Effects", because I just don't recall the exact words. But I do agree that it's probably more of us connecting more dots and kind of digesting the material as we gather more knowledge.

 

[Voyageur]

I can think of one example, whereby if one goes back and reads in careful detail the transcript publications (1994/1995 sessions) for instance, it can be interesting to see what one understand now versus what was understood then of the words and ideas; of ones memory of them - so added contrast of all the years forward may add layers or strips them away that were not seen/understood before, type of thing; if that makes any sense.

 

[lainey]

I experienced that when I read High Strangeness for the second time. It was like reading a brand new book because it was the first of Laura's work that I read. I went on to read the Wave series after it, then back to High Strangeness again with a new understanding of the concepts within.
It goes to show that it pays to revisit the works every so often so that it can be understood with fresh eyes so to speak. I'm sure there are many more layers of knowledge and learning within.

 

[Corvus]

It goes to show that it pays to revisit the works every so often so that it can be understood with fresh eyes so to speak. I'm sure there are many more layers of knowledge and learning within.

I can say from my experience that as more times I read some work every time some new or clearer understanding surfaces, or I understand something that before I did not, but most of the works require some time to digest them fully, if ever, and there is always new work to read, from books, sott, forum so it is bit difficult to manage it when it comes to time, but as said repetitio est mater studiorum. But I think it is also natural for brain to automatically throw old understanding when there is new information, it is energy consuming and has no more relevance.

One example is that the world that was described back in the early sessions in the 90'ies, at the time looked too totalitarian, too police state like, too Orwellian and yet now, that world is here and is what we experience. One could even say that it is even scarier than what was predicted

I am reading transcripts from 1994 in book format and it seems this is the time they were talking about, and most of information came or is coming to fruition. Makes you wonder.

It also happens to me from time to time, where I was totally fascinated reading something several years ago and when reading it now it is more down to earth and less emotional clouded, maybe that's the reason something doesn't appear too fascinating anymore. What would be good, having an example - just any - to understand this phenomenon a bit better, but I also don't have one right now.

I can relate when it comes to reaction, maybe because in that time those wires in brain were never used before but now that kind of wiring in brain has become daily routine, but in my case it was like all else in life, first time there is always excitement, emotions, but with time it becomes harder and harder because there is no more that kind of stimuli. I think it is experience and growing. Every fruit is sweet when it is tasted for the first time.

 

[Buddy]

I haven't been looking at, or thinking about, transcripts that much anyway, so I guess that's why I wouldn't have noticed the specific issue brought up. What I *have* noticed is that the more I learn and grow, the more that just about anything I read becomes subject to even more possibilities of interpretation.

With respect to memory as such, I once read an article that suggested that the facts stored in memory don't change and we don't actually recall the actual facts as they were stored in memory at the time anyway; instead, what we do is recreate memories by creating new copies of what's in memory on the fly. Then, what we "get" in the present has been filtered by our current configuration which consists of our censors and current value system and the conceptual filters currently in use.

It's just a theory. But it suggests a possible reason why it might seem like it's the transcripts that changed. To be any more specific, I'd have to see and compare original transcripts with the "changed" version, but both would have to be in writing, otherwise nothing conclusive would suggest itself.

Forgot to add: I've had the experience of practically swearing up and down that something was said in an email and I was remembering it perfectly because it upset me at the time and stayed with me for about 6 months. I mentioned it to my wife once and she asked to see the email. When I finally dug it out, we both read it and to my consternation it was different than I had been remembering it.

 

[Woodsman]

Thanks for the feedback and reality-check, guys.

I tend to agree.

But I do have one specific example which I can't shake...

A few weeks back, I was writing something and remembered this one quote I thought would be appropriate to add. So I went hunting for it, and I couldn't find it. It turned into a two day, fruitless search, using both on and off site indexing and just lots of reading.

The quote, as I remember it went something like this:

When talking about the higher self and the plans we each have for a given lifetime, it was asked how much control we have on the conscious layer over that lesson plan and the course of our lives.

The answer (paraphrasing)...

"You have about as much control as a neanderthal flying aboard a 747."

The exact wording I don't have, but I definitely remember the caveman reference, the jumbo jet reference and I specifically recall the metaphor being used to describe how much control over the course of one's life we have.

Anyway...

It's just not there! -There are a couple of similar word usages, but they're not even in the same ballpark in terms of meaning.

This drove me to distraction, and I hunted through a couple of other sources, thinking, "Maybe Pleiadians or Ra or something?" I finally gave up.

 

[Buddy]

I don't know, but there's a reference in the online Wave regarding crystals and neanderthals that mentions a 747:

The Wave Chapter 4: The Cassiopaeans Get Taken Out of the Closet and Go for a “Test Drive”

We have talked about locations of such crystals on the Earth and why they were not destroyed in the cataclysms that destroyed Atlantis and the answer was that the engineered function of these crystals was such that massive amounts of energy interacting with them is absorbed and transmuted, so to speak. If you put an atomic bomb on one of them, it would absorb the energy and transduce it. It was the design function.
When we asked if our present technology could decipher how to use these crystals, and the response was “would a Neanderthal know how to fly a 747.” [Laughter]

And there are other google results you can look at if you haven't already seen them. Just copy and paste this into a browser search bar:

"neanderthal" + "flying" + "747" +"lesson" + "control" site:cassiopaea.org

I haven't checked any of the rest of the results, though. If you have the time to search 10 pages of results, you could use:

"neanderthal" site:cassiopaea.org

 

[Woodsman]

I don't know, but there's a reference in the online Wave regarding crystals and neanderthals that mentions a 747:

The Wave Chapter 4: The Cassiopaeans Get Taken Out of the Closet and Go for a “Test Drive”

We have talked about locations of such crystals on the Earth and why they were not destroyed in the cataclysms that destroyed Atlantis and the answer was that the engineered function of these crystals was such that massive amounts of energy interacting with them is absorbed and transmuted, so to speak. If you put an atomic bomb on one of them, it would absorb the energy and transduce it. It was the design function.
When we asked if our present technology could decipher how to use these crystals, and the response was “would a Neanderthal know how to fly a 747.” [Laughter]

And there are other google results you can look at if you haven't already seen them. Just copy and paste this into a browser search bar:

"neanderthal" + "flying" + "747" +"lesson" + "control" site:cassiopaea.org

I haven't checked any of the rest of the results, though. If you have the time to search 10 pages of results, you could use:

"neanderthal" site:cassiopaea.org

Oh yes. Been there, done all that.

What I'm suspecting now is that I might have transposed that excerpt and "plastic-memoried" it into something it was not.

It was such a visceral memory, though; hard to discount even though rational thinking says, "Discount it".

I was nodded along while you described the 6 month old email which your partner had you excavate to show her what had been bugging you, only to discover it other than you remembered. I've been there and done that as well.

Knowledge itself doesn't change, but the lens we see it through does; that's what all this work is about.

But...

Though...

And yet...

I don't doubt for a second that reality hopping is an actual phenomenon. All intellectual exploration and instinctual nudgings insist it is so. So.., keep looking but stay grounded, I suppose.

Thanks again, folks, for the words of grounding.

Cheers, all!