Session 23 March 2019

anka

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
All who seek to graduate to 4th density must seek knowledge. In 4D, eventually it will be your job to engineer lifeforms on new worlds.
This begs a question how the knowledge is gathered and implemented by those who walk the path of Monk, Fakir and Yogi. There must be some other process involved too or they will simply have to start switching and accommodating the 4th Way methods in 4D once they get there.

A: Learning how to think has been a big part of the destiny. Now, it must be combined with belief of a particular kind. Belief that is based on subjective wishful thinking is entropic. Belief that is based on firm knowledge of nature is empowering. This is what your grouping has lacked. You now have the opportunity and tools to change that.

Q: (Pierre) Yeah, that's a big change. If I correctly remembered, we were about knowledge is good, belief is bad. Now, they introduce a distinction: there is bad belief based on wishful thinking, and there is good belief based on objective assessment of reality and knowledge. They already mentioned Belief Center earlier, and I was thinking, "Belief Center? Power?" I think they allude to the fact that when knowledge is taken a step further and used to fuel a strong belief in this truth, it has a different effect on you. Not only you know, but...

(L) It unlocks something. Years ago, the Cs talked about needing to have the wrong locks removed. They also said something about faith… “When you have found something of truth you will receive demonstrations which locks in your faith. “

(Pierre) You KNOW in your belief center, and that's empowering. I think they even allude to some of the steps in 4th density where this creative thinking is due to the fact of a knowledge-based belief center.
I have not read Behe's books yet but from the to-date information available on the Forum I could understand that point. You need Faith/Belief supported by Knowledge. On some occasions you can only rely on the output of one of the centers to make decision and you can only do so when you have grown the others together, i.e. at some moments you need to Believe your intuition is right without actually knowing it but your reliance is based upon your previous hard work in gathering and implementing Knowledge so your decision is the best you could come up with. This gives one a sort of guarantee that s/he can still make a mistake but that mistake should not be fatal.

I can surely relate to what Chu and luc wrote in their comments above.

Anyway, a fantastic session. Thank you girls at the board, all in the room and the team for transcribing the event. Excellent stuff to ponder! :wizard::flowers:
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Thanks for the session.

Was wondering, is this the book ya'll are referring to? Prehistoric Life (book) - Wikipedia

Yep, that's the one. The book is well illustrated with types of creatures and plants from each era. Here are a few of the images that made Laura think that someone was just experimenting!

First one is a 'Chalicotherium' which Laura described as a horse-faced gorilla with backward feet! :lol:

chalicotherium.JPG

Here's a different rendering.

chalico.jpg

Then there was Opabinia!:umm:

opabinia.JPG

And these were some of the first 'trees'

tree.JPG
 

genero81

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I have the feeling many things the C's have said over the years are going to have greater clarification.

"When one begins to separate limiting emotions based on assumptions
Belief that is based on subjective wishful thinking is entropic.

From those that lead to unlimited possibilities

Belief that is based on firm knowledge of nature is empowering.

One is preparing for the next density."

Indeed a whole new world is opening up before us! Fantastic session! Learning is even funner than it already was!
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
But how can we be so sure that there is any "natural selection" at all? Those new environmental conditions could also be part of the design, like a cook deciding to increase the temperature of the oven, adding more salt or whatever. Sometimes the meal goes wrong, and they do discard it.

I think we can be sure there is natural selection - it just gets elevated to an unrealistic degree by Darwinists. For example, read the section in Darwin Devolves about the Galapagos finches. All natural selection means is that organisms with certain traits can no longer survive in their environment for whatever reason. It could be as simple as a particularly harsh winter. And accidents can cause extinctions, like a volcano or meteor explosion.

As for new environmental conditions which are themselves designed, I agree, kind of. But I don't think it's as direct as a cook increasing the temperature. Lifeforms themselves seem to have terraformed the planet, creating different chemical conditions and affecting environments in various ways to support new forms of life that couldn't have existed in the previous conditions. Changes like that could be planned in the sense of a desired progression from "World A" to "World B", etc. Basically, "OK, we need more oxygen now, so we need to make these kinds of organisms." The conditions change drastically, and then it's a matter of just watching to see which parts still work and which don't. The ones that don't will die off. Parts can be reused, or maybe those forms serve no purpose in the new phase of life.

But even those life forms that go extinct did work in the time they had. A truly bad design wouldn't survive long enough to appear in the fossil record. The very fact that they do shows that they were doing something right in the conditions in which they found themselves. They found a niche in the total biosphere; they fulfilled a purpose in those specific conditions. But conditions and purposes change, and some that were previously useful can become obsolete, just like with human businesses and technology.

So if we use the cooking analogy, the meal is always edible, but it gets tastier (more complex) with time, and certain ingredients that were useful and interesting in the early stages don't work so well over time, so that to reintroduce them would actually make the meal worse.

Why wouldn't it be possible that they aren't different specific creations with similar "parts", not linked in a linear fashion, via degradation and natural selection? A degradative mutation implies that the organism is worse off. However, none of those animals are worse off than the others within their environment, and continue to live and reproduce within their group. Haven't finished all Behe yet, so maybe I'm missing something.

Yeah, it is possible. I'm primarily going off what Behe proposes. Here are some quotes:

Species and genus classifications seem ephemeral likely because they are based on accidental attributes - on the caprice of random mutation and natural selection - which can arise through any number of serendipitous paths. Classifications at the level of family and beyond, on the other hand, are much more well grounded, because they very likely are based - directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously - on the apprehension of a purposeful arrangement of parts, that is, on aspects of the intentional design of the organism. ...

What variation can exist within a family? For the dog family, it's the difference between a domestic dog and a wolf and a fox. For the cat family, it's the difference between a lion and a leopard and a lynx. ... That degree of variation can likely be achieved by random mutation and natural selection. What is the difference between members of two separate families? For birds, it's the difference between a swift and a hummingbird, or a woodpecker and a toucan, or a thrush and a starling. For mammals it's the difference between a cat and a dog, or a rat and a muskrat, or a porpoise and a narwhal. If my argument is correct, those differences required explicit design.

I couldn't find another quote I was looking for. I'm pretty sure at one point he said that he thought it was possible that SOME genera and species can be designed. But I did find another quote where he talks about humans (which he sees as needing intelligent design, even if they're classified as Hominidae), and that giraffes and okapis seem too different to be a result of RM/NS. So he wonders if perhaps they shouldn't be considered members of the same family.

And one of his main points in the book is that degradative changes don't necessarily make organisms worse off. They may 'break' genes, but they do so in a way that makes them better adapted to their environments:

It's quite reasonable to think, then, that degradative mutations can help organisms to adapt and in the process can sometimes shift them into new minor categories of genus and species. At some level, however, new positive additional genetic information is needed to differentiate one category of organism from another, and family seems a strong candidate for that level.

Later in the book, he gives several examples of how degradative mutations do this.

Possible. And maybe the short wave cycle is important, as the Cs mentioned, for intensive learning. Consciousness gets "heavier" (for lack of a better word) as the organism learns over and over again, and at some point, it is ready to reincarnate into a different set of genetics, a different body. Like when the Cs said that soul and genetics marry. But within one life, the organism stays within the body that it was given. I.e., just because, say, a doggie learns a lot in his interaction with good humans in this life, he cannot become something else within the same life span. He will still be a dog till his death. But on his next life, he may reincarnate as a 3D being if he's ready to learn 3D lessons. And that's one of the reasons why I think it is so ridiculous for some people to claim they are ready to graduate, that they don't belong in this world, etc. When there is so much to learn, and when the more you learn the more you realize you don't know, it's pure hubris and ignorance to think we're ready for something else. That comes when it comes, just like going to 4th grade comes when we've learned the syllabus from 3rd grade.
:thup:
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Fantastic session!! Brings a lot of recent research together. I was always a believer as knowledge provided by C's have stood the test of time. I have been reading and re-reading Michael Topper of late complemented with Gnosis ie centers and other afterlife material to understand Love better and how that links to the soul progression and role played by physical body. Its the proteins and specifically the type of proteins which create the magic. Below my take.

Its seems, the Christ consciousness described by MT is like an omnipresent field of energy, a medium of sorts via which cosmic love can be tapped into by consciousness units with stronger being to produce highly intelligent designs and perform creative acts. The R&D performed and results are then shared back into the cosmic consciousness to grow the universal library further which is made available to other consciousness units automatically. The creator avails us with Love which is light which is knowledge and we use that to create more life via correct expression of that love.

All of the hard work is done in creating the blueprint, testing/writing the code and uploading it to a super computer of sorts which is connected to the "Information Field" which is present everywhere. Then the proteins are created which carry the blueprint and automatically receive the information from the "Information Field" via the soul. If the soul is not present then the proteins cannot tap into the Information field. If you imagine workload of the R&D alone, one can conclude such to be highly selfless acts done in the service of the creator. And only STO oriented consciousness units are capable to doing such acts. Would it not fill you up with abundant joy seeing a whole planet come alive with flora and fauna of different varieties due to your efforts? That in itself is the biggest reward for such expression of love.

STS oriented consciousness units are incapable of such expression as they hate and detest creativity. They hate the creator for freely making such love available when it ought to be rationed and controlled. Their polarity prevents them from tapping into that cosmic love so, they must steal in order to survive. They must travel to furthest of constellations and solar systems to find 3D/4D planets with beings present and covertly take over their bodies and destroy their souls by making those beings believe in their own lies. During the takeover, they perform experiments of their own though always fail to produce a healthy blueprint hence the bodies co-opted/created by them eventually die. And that's why they are a dying race!!

Much more to ponder and read...

Excellent summary!
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
And let us not forget that the 4d engineers cannot fully understand the entire mystery of life and soul. Otherwise there would have been no experiments, no trials and errors, no learning, no creation...

I think the mystery there might have to do with free will, which is perhaps why it is such an important thing in all of creation. You can create something, give it life essentially, but then you have to step back and watch what it does. What it does is dependent on, well, free will, and where does that 'come from'? What IS free will as a 'force' that animates and provides infinite variegation for all of creation. That's a real mystery and perhaps as close as we can get to understanding the application and function of the infinite.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
While protein folding is not well understood, what is clear to me is that the whole thing is much more complex that previously thought, and apparently amino-acid sequence, while certainly one of the major factors, is not the whole banana.

Which in my mind renders the whole thing even more mind-boggling!

A solution to the Levinthal Paradox, where protein folding is not random but also does not follow a single pathway, could be that the protein folds in different ways at different times based on some 'external' input, i.e. the 'antenna' referred to in the session that receive information inputs from the 'field'.
 

Alejo

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
To your point Chu,

It’s like, using a true scientific method to study God with the goal of truth and forever open to the knowledge that will present itself.

I don’t see how you could conclude anything else than, there’s an intelligent design that produced our incredibly and yet unoticably complex existence.

It’s funny because I have been recently listening to John Keel and he mocks the way “science” is practiced as a way to unreasonably attack an old interpretation of reality and defend a current one. But he’s concluded, through simply investigating and being open to what he saw, that the mainstream science is dead wrong and willfully blind. Obviously he’s approaching it within the Fortean context, but still.

Which goes to Joe’s point, how can you conclude otherwise? Witnessing the incredibly compelling evidence of an intelligence higher than ours, and the response to that is... “welp, that must have simply happened by accident” which is unreasonable and unscientific.
 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I think the mystery there might have to do with free will, which is perhaps why it is such an important thing in all of creation. You can create something, give it life essentially, but then you have to step back and watch what it does. What it does is dependent on, well, free will, and where does that 'come from'? What IS free will as a 'force' that animates and provides infinite variegation for all of creation. That's a real mystery and perhaps as close as we can get to understanding the application and function of the infinite.

And what really got on my nerve lately is that those idiot materialists have the gall to deny free will even exists!! That's almost as bad, if not worse, as the postmodernist "we're all living in our heads" nonsense. The audacity! And look how such ideas, like denying the existence of free will, shape our minds and culture, mostly on an unconscious level. Time to reclaim our sanity!
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
A solution to the Levinthal Paradox, where protein folding is not random but also does not follow a single pathway, could be that the protein folds in different ways at different times based on some 'external' input, i.e. the 'antenna' referred to in the session that receive information inputs from the 'field'.
One way this is done is using a chaperone protein folding machine:


 
Top Bottom