Imminent Alien Disclosure?

[msasa79]

It seems to me that the confusion in the term density begins by not establishing that matter IS consciousness. A VERY DENSE consciousness. The C's used the word density to fit our level of understanding assuming that density can be used in the following way:

Bolded part in quote above seems to be corroborated by what was discussed in the April 5, 1997 session with the C's referenced in Laura's post, where the C's said that an atom (primal constituent of matter) has an objective existence, but does not exist (like everything else) if there is no observer which must be consciousness, which together implies that an atom (matter) is a consciousness being an observer (of itself).

Q: But still, what you said still implies that an atom has an objective existence. Is this correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Would you please tell us what constitutes objectivity?

A: The effort on the part of the observer to leave prejudice "at the door."

Q: How does the effort on the part of the observer to leave prejudice at the door relate to the objective existence of an atom?

A: An atom, as with absolutely everything else, cannot exist without an observer.

Q: So, in the case of the objectivity of an atom, if the human observers are not objective, where is the observer who makes the atom objective, or does the atom not exist if there is no observer?

A: Yes. to the latter comment.

Q: Yes to which part?

A: The latter comment.

Q: So there must be an observer. Must the observer be human?

A: The observer must be a consciousness.

Q: If you say that an atom has an objective existence, yet it only exists if it is perceived by a consciousness, then an atom does not have an objective existence, correct?

A: No.

Q: Okay, what is the distinction? You say that objectivity is the ATTEMPT on the part of the observer to leave prejudice at the door.

A: Without consciousness, there is neither objective or subjective!!

Q: So the crux is the attempt to leave prejudice at the door in the same manner as one would be non-anticipatory in order to create?

A: Yes.

Q: Well, that is a VERY tricky... (A) Is consciousness objective?

A: Consciousness is objective, until it has the capacity to choose to be otherwise.

Q: (L) What is the stimulus for the change, for the giving of the capacity to choose?

A: The introduction of prejudice.

Q: In a cosmic sense, cosmic consciousness, in the sense of The One Unified Consciousness, what is the stimulus there for the ability to choose?

A: When the journey has reached union with The One, all such lessons have been completed.

Q: But, that doesn't answer the question.

A: Yes, it does!

 

[msasa79]

When a body is immersed in a fluid, the fluid exerts a force perpendicular to the surface of the body. This force per unit area is called pressure.

At a given level, the atmospheric pressure is equal to the weight of the column of air above that level, up to the upper limit of the atmosphere. Therefore, the higher the altitude, the lower the atmospheric pressure. The higher the altitude, the less air remains above, which therefore weighs less and exerts less pressure.

Using the analogy, when you go up in density level, the lower the pressure on the consciousness. BUT! for the consciousness to rise to the next level, it is the consciousness that becomes less dense. For example, Helium gas is less dense than the air we breathe and that is why it rises and floats.

Becoming less dense in the context above, can be accomplished by reducing the amount of consciousness in the Being or/and by enlarging the Being encompassing the consciousness in question. Although that seems obvious enough without saying.

IOW, I think that "becoming less dense" with respect to the consciousness advancing to the next level of density, does not mean 'becoming less material', i.e. it doesn't deal with physicality/materiality in general as in density of matter, but with the consciousness in particular in the sense of how dense the consciousness (in its Being) is. And consciousness is not per se equal to matter, i.e. materiality, but the other way around, as can be seen in @Wandering Star post above.

 

[msasa79]

Session 15 June 1996? Pretty much the whole session is about gravity and unstable gravity waves.
[...]
As to the link between gravity and consciousness (Session 6 August 2005):
[...]
And more recently, about "inverting" gravity to find consciousness (Session 10 December 2022):

If everything that exists is a consciousness being an observer (of itself), and gravity binds everything together, then de facto gravity is an act of observation which binds consciousness with its Being, OSIT.

 

[hesperides]

Retired army Sgt. Major Robert Dean, a militar involved during 40 years in secret space projects, summarizing within two minutes the way he feels about all the deep military secrets being errased from public awareness:

I'm now watching a recent interview between him and Kerry Cassidy on rumble. I'm half way through it, surprisingly he asserts in passing having met face to face with Annunaki, don't know what to make out of it, but al least he seems quite knowledgeable about secrecies held around the moon and Mars, and much more topics.

Robert Dean - Secret space program-Kerry Cassidy Interview (updated Adrenochrone links in descript)

 

[Chaze]

I keep coming across UFO and human trafficking linked stories, and this guy’s story seems to be genuine as well. I did a few online searches to some of the things he claims, and it supports his veracity.

I really hope this avenue of exploration and exposure continues in this specific area of the UFO phenomenon.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

A very nice compilation:

It includes some interview footage with James MacDonald which I hadn't seen before (starts at 11:45). That man was a treasure.

 

[Alejo]

Has anyone else come across this one? And if so, what are your thoughts?

It has been reported on a few Spanish speaking countries, not in English, so I could not find an English video, however the video claims that this is a UFO that was shot at by the Iranian army, and it could not be shot down.

what's your take on this?

 

[Luis Miguel]

It has been reported on a few Spanish speaking countries, not in English, so I could not find an English video, however the video claims that this is a UFO that was shot at by the Iranian army, and it could not be shot down.

what's your take on this?

According to this article in Spanish, the governor of Bandar Anzali said it was an anti-aircraft exercise using decoy flares as targets.

Here's another video of a different exercise:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1679937332630175781

 

[Kawika]

I keep coming across UFO and human trafficking linked stories, and this guy’s story seems to be genuine as well. I did a few online searches to some of the things he claims, and it supports his veracity.

I really hope this avenue of exploration and exposure continues in this specific area of the UFO phenomenon.

Here is part 2 in the series.

The Whistleblower Marathon continues with former Army Combat Veteran DC Long. DC and his Father, then government contractors, were tasked with standing up a shoot house at Range 19. Before they knew it, they were ushered underground at gunpoint only to encounter a "Monolithic Slab."

Long shares his story in great detail, recounting the sights and sounds of this UAP / UFO. Long describes a series of events that unfolded post his encounter that would ultimately separate he and his Father for life. This episode is a cold, hard look at how sinister the aftermath of such an encounter can be.

 

[Dotini]

There are new milestones in the Congressional investigation of UFO secrets.

‘Non-human intelligence’: Schumer proposes stunning new UFO legislation

Fortunately, the public may not have to wait for the new legislation to become law to learn more about what the U.S. government knows about UAP.

thehill.com

My comment:
We are hearing a lot of well-meaning but uninformed talk about aliens and extraterrestrials. But just because the source of the phenomena may be non-human does not necessarily mean ET is involved. The paranormal and/or religious implications of the phenomena may be what is motivating military sources, their paid politicians and contractors to so earnestly stonewall further release of documents, witnesses, photos and videos.

 

[JEEP]

There are new milestones in the Congressional investigation of UFO secrets.

‘Non-human intelligence’: Schumer proposes stunning new UFO legislation

Fortunately, the public may not have to wait for the new legislation to become law to learn more about what the U.S. government knows about UAP.

thehill.com

Hmm - maybe the real intent is to distract from all the Hunter/Joe Biden crime family corruption aided by federal agencies running interference! Plus, that little scuffle involving Ukraine, Russia, NATO, Syria, Turkey, China, Poland . . .

I mean really --- maybe the aliens really can make it all better!

 

[Alejo]

According to this article in Spanish, the governor of Bandar Anzali said it was an anti-aircraft exercise using decoy flares as targets.

Here's another video of a different exercise:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1679937332630175781

Ahh nice, good catch Logos!

Thanks a bunch, I knew there must have been something about it!

 

[Neil]

I don't really know what to make of all of this disclosure business. In the past this has always been a huge disappointment and I'm half-expecting it to be rather lame. After all of the hullabaloo, I would expect the conclusion to be something along the lines of "We have documented things we cannot explain. Maybe it was aliens, but we can't prove it and we'll never really know." "Disclosure" would inch forward a tiny bit, but it would still be essentially a nothingburger. Now introducing some kind of breakaway civilization returned to Earth would be somewhat interesting even if it is a lie, it would shake the paradigm enough for the normies that some intriguing things might slip out into the public domain while providing a good cover for government corruption and black projects somewhat out in the open, but it wouldn't be enough to create total chaos because there would be no "aliens." It's a Goldilocks disclosure that provides the PTB a release valve for not having to maintain quite such strict secrecy, while still not disclosing much of actual value. I only see them allowing it if they perceive externalities forcing their hand to disclose small truths in service of maintaining the greater control matrix.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I don't really know what to make of all of this disclosure business. In the past this has always been a huge disappointment and I'm half-expecting it to be rather lame. After all of the hullabaloo, I would expect the conclusion to be something along the lines of "We have documented things we cannot explain. Maybe it was aliens, but we can't prove it and we'll never really know."

That's pretty much the official direction so far judging by AARO statements and all other executive branch agencies who have commented.

"Disclosure" would inch forward a tiny bit, but it would still be essentially a nothingburger. Now introducing some kind of breakaway civilization returned to Earth would be somewhat interesting even if it is a lie,

More like a partial truth, if that civilization is framed as coming from underground (cryptoterrestrials), and if the Cs are right about the underground peeps. Part of the story, but not the whole story by any stretch of the imagination.

it would shake the paradigm enough for the normies that some intriguing things might slip out into the public domain while providing a good cover for government corruption and black projects somewhat out in the open, but it wouldn't be enough to create total chaos because there would be no "aliens."

I think even opening up this much might be 'dangerous'. It might satisfy some, but once such an admission is made, it opens up the space for a whole lot more questions of an inconvenient nature.

It's a Goldilocks disclosure that provides the PTB a release valve for not having to maintain quite such strict secrecy, while still not disclosing much of actual value. I only see them allowing it if they perceive externalities forcing their hand to disclose small truths in service of maintaining the greater control matrix.

Pretty much how I see it too.

 

[Keit]

I would like to share something interesting. Not too long ago Joe speculated on one of the "NewsReal with Joe and Niall" shows about possible reasons for disclosure. He said jokely among other things that maybe it's US's answer to Russia or Putin: Putin talks about a "multipolar world", then we will create a "galactic world"! A brave new world, a paradigm shift.

And here's a quote from the book "Three body problem" by Liu Cixin:

Scholars found that, contrary to the happy wishes of most people, it was not a good idea for the human race as a whole to make contact with extraterrestrials. The impact of such contact on human society would be divisive rather than uniting, and would exacerbate rather than mitigate the conflicts between different cultures. In summary, if contact were to occur, the internal divisions within Earth civilization would be magnified and likely lead to disaster. The most shocking conclusion of all was that the impact would have nothing at all to do with the degree and type of contact (unidirectional or bidirectional), or the form and degree of advancement of the alien civilization.

This was the theory of “contact as symbol” proposed by sociologist Bill Mathers of RAND Corporation in his book, The 100,000-Light-Year Iron Curtain: SETI Sociology. Mathers believed that contact with an alien civilization is only a symbol or a switch. Regardless of the content of the encounter, the results would be the same.

Suppose that the nature of the contact is such that only the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence is confirmed, with no other substantive information—what Mathers called elementary contact. The impact would be magnified by the lens of human mass psychology and culture until it resulted in huge, substantive influences on the progress of civilization. If such contact were monopolized by one country or political force, the significance would be comparable to an overwhelming advantage in economic and military power.

Apparently this particular quote and this particular sociologist (Bill Mathers of RAND Corporation) drew a lot of talk online. People were either looking for this individual and his book, or they were speculating if he is actually a real individual. Here's an article by an individual who works at RAND Corporation, and he did a research on the topic.

Where Chinese Science Fiction and RAND History Meet

Senior policy analyst Sale Lilly read about renowned RAND researcher Bill Mathers in an award-winning Chinese science fiction trilogy—but somehow had never heard of him before.

www.rand.org

It appears that Bill Mathers doesn't exist, and that there were no such reports done by RAND, even if there are some similar ones. They are particularly interesting considering Game Theory and everything we learned from the Wave.

So the above quote is fictional and from the science fiction book. But it still rings true. And who knows, maybe there is indeed truth to Joe's comment made in a tongue in cheek manner. We know that "they" have a schedule and some other things may intervene first. But they probably also did their "game theory" calculations and maybe reached the same conclusion just like in the quote. At least the second part. Maybe someone thinks that having a "monopoly" on alien disclosure in whatever form will give the US or the West more power. Just some thoughts.