Session 9 December 2017

[Chacara]

Thank you for another thought-provoking session! So there is really "some devious plan" behind the collection of Russian RNA samples and Putin was right to question it publicly, besides the most of Russian scientific community tried to convince people that there was nothing to worry about...

 

[zulhelmi]

Amazing session, thank you for sharing!

 

[bjorb]

Many thanks for sharing, very interesting session to say the least if you ask me


The following below, didn't the C's once said that the PTB hope that Laura or the group in general may one day ''pull the sword out''. It was meant as a methaphor for something, could this be it? I can't find the exact session, and perhaps I'm just confusing it with something else. Anyhow it crossed my mind.

(Ark) It's not clear, but among the physicists that were talking a lot about paranormal and vacuum, there was this CIA guy Puthoff. And the CIA is still studying this subject. How much did they progress? Is it in military use, or is it too fragile and depends on consciousness and so on?

A: They are frustrated by inconsistency of results. They do not realize the implications of STS vs STO on information in the vacuum.

Q: (Arky) Okay, I'm done.

(L) Well, I want to ask: What are the implications of STS vs STO on the vacuum?

A: STS is constrictive and inhibits flow.

Q: (Pierre) Since their project is based on STS motivations, it doesn't work very well because the foundation is decoding in interaction with information field and it doesn't flow.

A: Yes

Q: (L) So in other words, there is some truth to issues of good and evil in terms of STS and STO, and in terms of what can and cannot be manifested?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Don't have many people of the right orientation...

(L) I remember the C's said something one time about some kind of... what was it? The Ark of the Covenant could only be handled or used by somebody who had a pure STO profile because anybody else would be killed. Is that basically what we're looking at here?

A: Yes. Close.

 

[jhonny]

Thanks for sharing this very interesting session ;)

 

[Lamp of Orion]

To all the people that think substances are the key to advancement of any sort:

There are no shortcuts.

Don't even bother trying.

Keep in mind that one of the conditions of having had undergone the "second fall" is that we will learn the hard way. And that means making mistakes, over and over and over again until you have reached bankrupcy, and then perhaps the light will shine in. Not by running after gold, or soma, or some seaweed in God-knows-where or in shrooms. Not by simply thinking you've learned. Not by believing some god with the EQ of a toddler (or sometimes worse) will bring you salvation. Not by sending love and light to the people who least deserve it, let alone those who would rather devour the light within you.

These are all lies. Lies, I tell you! If you believe a lie, then you have set in motion a cascade of making the same mistake over and over again, as per usual occurence, until you have no choice but to look for alternatives.

But don't be discouraged. We will forever more learn, and learning doesn't have to be this painful. This forum is one way to lessen the pain :P

 

[AnotherIdiot]

The forum discussion/comments around soma reminded me of the latest 'soma' to hit the Internet, namely C60. Some exceptional longevity and health claims are being made for C60 (Carbon 60 , also known as Buckminsterfullerene) mixed in olive oil, or coconut oil, a preparation process that takes some time. C60 is also apparently found in Shilajit and Shungite.

Here is a link to an article on the experiment done with C60 olive oil on rats:
https://prezi.com/maa3zhdvvzvy/the-prolongation-of-the-lifespan-of-rats/

Here is an interview with Fathi Moussa, the scientist who conducted the C60oo longevity study on rats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLZS1WQl_1E

Here is Clif High on C60
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FydCcJ691Pk

It would be interesting to hear what the Cs have to say about C60.

 

[goyacobol]

Many thanks for sharing, very interesting session to say the least if you ask me


The following below, didn't the C's once said that the PTB hope that Laura or the group in general may one day ''pull the sword out''. It was meant as a methaphor for something, could this be it? I can't find the exact session, and perhaps I'm just confusing it with something else. Anyhow it crossed my mind.

(Ark) It's not clear, but among the physicists that were talking a lot about paranormal and vacuum, there was this CIA guy Puthoff. And the CIA is still studying this subject. How much did they progress? Is it in military use, or is it too fragile and depends on consciousness and so on?

A: They are frustrated by inconsistency of results. They do not realize the implications of STS vs STO on information in the vacuum.

Q: (Arky) Okay, I'm done.

(L) Well, I want to ask: What are the implications of STS vs STO on the vacuum?

A: STS is constrictive and inhibits flow.

Q: (Pierre) Since their project is based on STS motivations, it doesn't work very well because the foundation is decoding in interaction with information field and it doesn't flow.

A: Yes

Q: (L) So in other words, there is some truth to issues of good and evil in terms of STS and STO, and in terms of what can and cannot be manifested?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Don't have many people of the right orientation...

(L) I remember the C's said something one time about some kind of... what was it? The Ark of the Covenant could only be handled or used by somebody who had a pure STO profile because anybody else would be killed. Is that basically what we're looking at here?

A: Yes. Close.

bjorn,

The "sword from the stone" or The Sword in the Stone is probably a reference to an Arthurian legend.

About the Arthurian Legend when put to the Cs:

Session 12 July 2014

Q: (Atriedes) I have a question. Is Caesar also the inspiration for the Arthurian legend?
A: Yes.
Q: (Atriedes) And was him pulling the sword from the stone a reference to his sword, Crocea Mors?
(L) His what?
(Atriedes) Was the sword in the stone story a reference to Caesar's sword, Crocea Mors - the Yellow
Death? Because it was made in Bronze...
(L) That was Caesar's sword?
(Atriedes) Yes.
(L) Says who?
(Atriedes) We sat down and read it together! There's a myth from Nennius about his sword getting
stuck in his shield. The Yellow Death was its name.
A: Close.
Q: (L) So, I'd say it's close, but Nennius did something to it.
(Atriedes) Well, of course he did something to it.
(L) Okay, um...
(Perceval) Did Caesar himself ever kill anyone?
A: Many, certainly.
Q: (Perceval) So, given the times around then being very war-like, with a lot of fighting and death
going on in general... and with some kind of a Great Soul at the time coming down and... it doesn't
necessarily have to be a peacemaker kissing people's feet like Jesus... But is there some thing like what
we would understand as a prohibition against killing other people as a requirement for being "spiritually
evolved"

In reference to pulling the sword from the stone and possible connections to the information field there is this session:

Session 18 January 2003

Q: What do G and P expect to get from us?
A: Whatever you find there.
Q: Who is behind them?
A: Just think of it as "Illuminati" and that will get you close enough.
Q: Why is it that we have attracted so much interest from the "spy vs. spy" types? After all, if there is something out there they are
after, why do they need us?
A: They cannot "see" or "draw the "sword from the stone."
Q: (A) It means they have some kind of knowledge, but they really can't make anything of it? Well, then there is the question. They
are helping us, and they want to get something. Shall we continue and pretend that it doesn't bother us?
A: Absolutely. All eyes open, however.

I am not sure if the "G and P" reference is possibly Puthoff for the "P" part or not. Maybe others can clarify that.

The only session reference to Puthoff I found was here:

Q: (L) Okay. (Ark) Question 1: Gravity. There is a man by the name of Harold Puthoff. And this Harold Puthoff invented a new kind of
gravity which is based on the idea that there is a thing called physical vacuum. He did not really invent it, but he propagated it and
developed it. (L) Who invented it? (Ark) Probably 19th century. But the main idea is that gravity is an effect of what we call
permeability of the vacuum; electric and magnetic. So this way we can have a kind of unified field theory also. And I would like to
know whether the main idea about gravity being based on flat space and time, and that all gravity is in the properties like this
permeability of the physical vacuum, whether this idea is going in the correct direction?
A: Not even wrong.
Q: (Ark) But I like this idea! (laughter) It fits my own idea. Is my own idea also not even wrong?
A: If you think that gravity is an effect.
Q: (Ark) Alright, that's enough for first question. I was badly beaten. Back to the drawing board. Second question concerning space
and time: Sometime ago, we have been told that Einstein's idea of space-time is not the correct one, and that we should go back to
some other ideas. Now these other ideas are that space and time of Galileo when we have absolute time - time is distinguished and
it's absolute. Before that, there was the idea of Kant. For Kant, there was separate space and time - absolute space, and absolute
time. And I am thinking that maybe the correct idea is the third one, which is to have absolute space but not absolute time. Am I on
to something?
A: Getting close.
Q: (Ark) What should I do to get even closer? Anything?
A: Remember that time does not exist except as a perception.

As you might notice this was in reference to the vacuum and gravity.

 

[realitybugll]

Nice session

 

[Rose7]

Thank you for a very interesting session! :)

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= you goyacobol]bjorn,

The "sword from the stone" or [...][/quote]

Thank you goyacobol! I was kind of hoping in silence somebody else knew which session I was talking about, I really couldn’t find it, and apparently there are several refences that might have something to do with, or not. Anyhow, it may be interesting.

 

[Redrock12]

Fascinating session folks. Many thanks for all your effort and work in bringing the rest of us these sessions with the Cs.

 

[Mikey]

Its so nice to go through a session with so much information. These last few sessions have revealed some significant information which will assist us on our growth path. Gurdjieff and now Ayahuasca !.
A special thanks to the Cassiopaean family for taking on such a Momentous task to assist entities on this materialistic plane.
The journey must continue in 2018.

The journey must continue, indeed!

 

[Mandrak]

(L) Well, I want to ask: What are the implications of STS vs STO on the vacuum?
A: STS is constrictive and inhibits flow.
Q: (Pierre) Since their project is based on STS motivations, it doesn't work very well because the foundation is decoding in interaction with information field and it doesn't flow.
A: Yes

As I recall reading the Vedas, it is stated that there are demons (Asuras) and demigods (Suras, Devas) above the human level (above - by level of power, but people are in the middle between them regarding polarities), and that demons rely more on technology than demigods, because the demons do not have so much developed mystic powers.
It is difficult to find this text (this is an extensive literature) and if someone finds it before me I would like if he/she quote it.

 

[anka]

Many thanks to the crew for another communication & its transcript

(Joe) Right. But obviously it's not just a matter of belief. In fact, maybe it's not a matter of belief at all, but instead the beliefs that RESTRICT the ability to do that, right?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) So it's not about having the right belief, but more about not really having any fixed belief at all.

A: Yes

Quiet the other way around than one would expect, isn't it? Instead of focusing on the belief approach in a New Age style wishful thinking that you create your own reality one shall work on dissolving false, blocking (and mostly) unconscious beliefs that we can't do. That's what seems to stop the 'impossible' from happening. So the knowledge, experimentation and networking bring the fruit.

 

[Maat]

Thanks for the session !

As for this part :

A: Matter as manifestation of consciousness as a function of algebra between dimensions

It made me think of the work of Emmanuel Ransford. Just thought I should mention it even if I'm not in position to say if he's really onto something or off the mark. I just hope it could help and not be a waste of time. And if he's really off, I would be interested to know how, why and what. I read several of his books and found them very interesting, but I'm not a physicist ! Maybe I was just hooked by this "reconciliation" of consciousness/spirit and matter.

Hi Maat,
I'm reading a book from E. Ransford and just asked a physicist-engineer friend about him. He told me that he is inventing words to talk about concepts not even related to physics, so that it is not serious.
It sounds to me pretty close to word salad, even if interesting anyway...

Thanks for your anser Sow. Just one objection is that these new words he introcuces, he defines them. And some important question is, "how open" is your physicist-engineer friend ? Because it's could change all ! But all in all I thank you, because with your input, i put this in the same category of sci-ficition that I loved to read since my bearth it seems, BUT gived me a lot to ponder...