Is Disclosure happening right before our eyes?

[PauliEffect]

I mean he is trying to force his truth on others by saying we are evolved from primates and "that is a fact, like it or not".

Of course.

We have evolved from sea otters.
---

[heliac]

I mean he is trying to force his truth on others by saying we are evolved from primates and "that is a fact, like it or not".

There is a lot of good information in there, but near the beginning of the speech he resorts to absolutes by forcing his truth on those (many) who do not share that truth. Thus he is, for many, tainting the validity of the rest of his information.

If your view of evolution is that of Darwinian science too (that we are a chance result of billions of years of evolution from single-celled organisms to sea creatures to reptiles, birds, apes and then man), then you would obviously feel better about accepting the rest of the information presented. Most of it is good information.

What I'm simply trying to say is the good information may not be heard when those who have a different truth of evolution are trying to get past what was force-fed to them near the beginning of the video.

Maybe I'm unique in the fact (my fact) that proposing absolutes about evolution is quite a distraction.

Hopefully that is a bit easier to understand. It is only my view on it and I presented it as part of the thread as one possible view point.

I hear ya AstralCB, i think his understanding of evolution is probably academic and research based. Maybe he has years of research in the matter and is equating the theory of evolution as fact in the same way that anyone of us would equate other less controversial scientific theories as fact.

Like germ theory, there are a bunch of tested ideas that explain why we get sick that support germ theory.The theory of evolution also has a bunch of ideas supported by evidence that explains why we evolve. It's possible in his mind evolution theory is not very controversial because of his knowledge base on the evidence that supports evolution as a reasonable theory.

As our understanding of things grows theories naturally change and are updated all the time but in order for something to be considered a scientific theory any alternative explanation will be tested. If an explanation can't be tested it won't pass a theory.I also think maybe people who believe in evolution get frustrated with other explanations that are not testable. In their minds some of the untestable explanations are a bit silly which is where the feisty "THIS IS HOW IT IS" statements come from.

[Sinera]

Well, this thread might get derailed now a bit into human origin topics. Btw, if you're interested, we had a recent interesting thread about this here. (And it also explains why Pauli chose the otter example and wasn't so randomly joking as it might look at first. )

[PauliEffect]

I hear ya AstralCB, i think his understanding of evolution is probably academic and research based. Maybe he has years of research in the matter and is equating the theory of evolution as fact in the same way that anyone of us would equate other less controversial scientific theories as fact.

In what way is man's origin from primates controversial?

[AstralCB]

That is a multi-layered question and we are going off topic here.

To answer that completely (which I won't do) would take a LOT more time than I have. I truly cannot go into this without, in some way, picking apart the Darwinian theory... which is not what I wish to do. While my knowledge and guidance shows me something far different than Darwinian theory, it is not my place to tell you what is right or wrong for you.

You can, if you really want to expand your awareness in this area, research the many theories of evolution. There are various religious theories, scientific, new age, etc.

[AstralCB]

I hear ya AstralCB, i think his understanding of evolution is probably academic and research based. Maybe he has years of research in the matter and is equating the theory of evolution as fact in the same way that anyone of us would equate other less controversial scientific theories as fact.

Like germ theory, there are a bunch of tested ideas that explain why we get sick that support germ theory.The theory of evolution also has a bunch of ideas supported by evidence that explains why we evolve. It's possible in his mind evolution theory is not very controversial because of his knowledge base on the evidence that supports evolution as a reasonable theory.

As our understanding of things grows theories naturally change and are updated all the time but in order for something to be considered a scientific theory any alternative explanation will be tested. If an explanation can't be tested it won't pass a theory.I also think maybe people who believe in evolution get frustrated with other explanations that are not testable. In their minds some of the untestable explanations are a bit silly which is where the feisty "THIS IS HOW IT IS" statements come from.

I agree.

[ButterflyWoman]

I have to agree that debating creation (or whatever) versus Darwin-based evolutionary theory is pretty much off topic for this thread. There's another thread, as noted, which goes into this at some length if people want to continue talking about it. But for now, maybe it's a good idea to get back on the topic of this thread (which I admit, I haven't been following, but it was called to my attention, so I dropped in to see what was up).

The origin discussion (at least the latest one): http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/sho...ans-come-about

I don't mean to come off all moderator-finger-shaking or anything, just pointing out that it's probably best to keep this discussion a bit more on topic (before it goes completely off the rails ) and you're welcome to discuss the secondary topic in another thread (the one linked above or start your own, whatever).

[AstralCB]

I have to agree that debating creation (or whatever) versus Darwin-based evolutionary theory is pretty much off topic for this thread. There's another thread, as noted, which goes into this at some length if people want to continue talking about it. But for now, maybe it's a good idea to get back on the topic of this thread (which I admit, I haven't been following, but it was called to my attention, so I dropped in to see what was up).

The origin discussion (at least the latest one): http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/sho...ans-come-about

I don't mean to come off all moderator-finger-shaking or anything, just pointing out that it's probably best to keep this discussion a bit more on topic (before it goes completely off the rails ) and you're welcome to discuss the secondary topic in another thread (the one linked above or start your own, whatever).

Thank you.

[Sinera]

... it was called to my attention, so I dropped in to see what was up ...

from my last post, lest someone might think...


Anyway, on topic again: I watched it now in its entirety and it really blew me away. I am still not convinced of every point he makes, at least I am missing more evidence, but all in all it is very recommendable. And the manifestations within the CSETI groups are fascinating indeed. It is also a relief for me that he is another one who's NOT of that Ancient (Evil) Alien fraction, and what he also says about this I already wrote in my first post here, is that most of the perceived negativity is based on fear and hollywood-movie-like anthropomorphism.

Still I am undecided what to think about all those secret government conspiracies. I don't see any proof that they really have scalar weapons by now to take down instantly materialising ET Ufos (which is the stated reason why they only manifest energetically among the CSETI people.). Sounds still a little incredible to me.

I have however read about this from some 'channelled' material and this confirms many of which he too claims. I felt especially reminded of the "Ra material" which is also available online. Here's "Ra" about government UFO crafts, bases underground or under water, the 'quarantine' imposed on Earth by ET civilisations, and also the secret government's 'star wars' weaponry that supposedly is in place. It might be a hoax though. Just, as always, keep an open mind about it:

http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?c=UFOs&ss=1

excerpts:

"Your peoples have, at this time/space present, the technological achievement, if you would call it that, of being able to create and fly the shape and type of craft known to you as unidentified flying objects. Unfortunately for the social memory complex vibratory rate of your peoples, these devices are not intended for the service of mankind, but for potential destructive use. This further muddles the vibratory nexus of your social memory complex, causing a situation whereby neither those oriented towards serving others nor those oriented towards serving self can gain the energy/power which opens the gates to intelligent infinity for the social memory complex."

"These of which we spoke are of third density and are part of the so-called military complex of various of your peoples’ societal divisions or structures.
The bases are varied. There are bases, as you would call them, undersea in your southern waters near the Bahamas as well as in your Pacific seas in various places close to your Chilean borders on the water. There are bases upon your moon, as you call this satellite, which are at this time being reworked. There are bases which move about your lands. There are bases, if you would call them that, in your skies. These are the bases of your peoples, very numerous and, as we have said, potentially destructive."

"These craft are constructed one by one in two locations: in the desert or arid regions of your so-called New Mexico and in the desert or arid regions of your so-called Mexico, both installations being under the ground"

I also have conflicting information about the greys. I agree to Greer that they are sth more like Androids or Robots but I still cannot grasp why and how they should be created, managed and operated by humans alone. He says he has proof by eye witnesses working now in and for his team, but that is still not proof for me. And moreover, it does not make much sense, how could they manage such a large and highly comlex operation with thousands of people, involving levatiting humans, involving also condensed and distorted time of the experiences, as well as dematerialisation and out-of-body states?

Also his statement that ETs are not interested in our DNA development is contradictory to the fact that we might have been seeded by ET races in the first place. (If I remember correctly he mentions this shortly once).

Furthermore, many projectors have seen or met ETs including the "greys" in the Astral (or "where"ever in NPMR). This includes, from very recently, also me. In my case they looked a little like greys but were actually more 'white' light beings. This for me contradicts the fact that the "grey archetype" is solely represented in a 3D-material form. Maybe they are the 'masters', creators, operators of the 3d-greys?

Here's by contrast some information on the greys (bolds mine) gained by past live regression by subjects 'channelling' their higher selves or other ET/higher entites. It makes a little more sense to me. It confirms indeed the thing about the little greys being "robots", but not their being created or operated in a kind of psyop or whatever mission by human military or gov. organisations.

... they [the greys] frequently remove people from their homes at night, perform both biological and mental tests on them whilst on-board their craft, then replace them back in their homes without them ever knowing anything took place. This is common practice and happens to many, many people all over the world.
Subsequent years of research into this area have revealed that these little greys possess incredible abilities to manipulate both the human mind and human body. Many abductees report feelings of paralysis, one of having no control over their body throughout an experience. In fact, the only reason why ‘some’ people remember these experiences is due to the high concentration of chemicals and pollutants in their bodies. These chemicals alter the function of the brain on a molecular level and are the result of our large-scale pollution of the environment and atmosphere as well as our ingestion of genetically modified foods injected with drugs, additives and preservatives. As a result, these memories sometimes surface unexpectedly and are often distorted. The little greys have the ability to remove memories, implant memories and take people for days, weeks and even months, then return them several minutes after they were originally taken. Dolores learned that some people have had experiences with ET’s from early childhood and that often multi-generational relationships exist between Earth family lineages and ET races.
The little greys have in fact been created as a type of biological robot by another race far more advanced than humanity. This explains why so many people report the little greys to be extremely cold, almost removed of any emotional expression. The race that created them are the much taller greys with very slim torsos, skinny limbs and large, black eyes.
Throughout her adventure into ET and UFO exploration, Dolores came into contact with numerous ET entities who come through her subjects to deliver information and understanding. There truly is a wealth of life out there in the universe existing in all shapes, forms and sizes.
source: http://dolorescannon.com/about#p8

IMHO, I see more credibility in deep-trance regression material than in ANY material by a channeller (Ra, Kryon, Seth, Bashar, whoever). It's just my personal conviction of course. I like to believe that in deep trance we indeed 'channel' or experience our higher selve(s), which I cannot prove to me to be true of a channeler who only puts him/herself into trance like state (or not, which is the question) and receives messages of a probably dubious question. So, in a nutshell, the regression hypnosis material is better and more relevant in my opinion and less subject to people or entities who are out to dupe you.

On the other hand, well, we don't really KNOW anything do we? I decided to keep an open mind about everything and not to create unflexible 'beliefs' about it. Although the many conflicting views and theories on this baffle my mind sometimes. There are times when I tell myself not to think about it anymore as I might not arrive at any satisfying conclusions, leaving the only choice remaining:

Live gracefully with uncertainty.

[PauliEffect]

The many ET sightings of Greer and his followers may very well
be those beings from Monroe Focus 34/35 who are watching
"Earth Changes".

I have a little difficult to believe Greer when he states that multi
national corporations already since 1950es - 60ies know how to
produce unlimited power by Zero Point Field energy. I wonder if
Greer is over-interpreting some things.

I also have a little difficult believing Greer when he states that
the "robotic" greys are manufactured by humans.