Messages

Pardon the revival of an ancient thread.  Did anything worth noting happen when Nibiru passed by?  I've seen a lot of supposed photos, but other than that it's another case of outsiders saying "we're gonna change everything on Earth" just to get attention.

I think fasting could have a great effect on projections, or rather, eating as often as we do has a negative effect.

I woke up the yesterday in a very interesting mood.  For once in a long time, I had a sense of focus - my mind didn't wander between useless routine thoughts or fall into depression.  The difference, I noticed, is how hungry I felt. When I went to the refrigerator to get something to eat, I already felt myself falling back into the useless unfocussed state of mind I hit every morning, so I refused to eat anything.  You know that dreamish state you're in when you first wake up?  Like you have a sense of purpose?  I never lost that state throughout the day.  It actually worked.

Digestion uses a lot of energy, and shouldn't be thought of as a passive process that has no effect on your mind.  I think a major reason we have dreams toward the end of sleep is because digestion is over and you have enough energy to ease into awareness, likewise I think it's why people can astral-project more easily in the morning.

It's not that fasting gives us 'extra' energy and awareness, it's that digestion puts a damper on it.  We're normally in a constant state of digesting because we feel hungry every time the stomach empties.  We're perpetually more groggy than we should be.  Food gives us energy, but that energy goes to waste if you're spending it all digesting more food.

Though, I'd say its just as negative to go all-out and see how long you can go without food.  I think one should just keep in mind, before eating, that digestion cuts down on your energy and consciousness.

It could have been someone with keen senses, or a ghost who was blending in with the crowd.  I think Jingo covered all the possibilities.

What's interesting is that you had an astral door over your house, as though someone led you to the restaurant, or possibly someone had been regularly using that door to go back and forth between the two places.  If this woman was a ghost, she may have hung out around your house regularly and sometimes went to the restaurant through the door, now acting surprised to see you as a spirit.

Just wild speculation on my part.

Jahovah?  From what I read, he stays somewhere outside the atmosphere, but people usually take tunnels to get to the location, so he could be just above the clouds or clear across the galaxy - it's real uncertain.

Appearance-wise, people see him looking much like a star.  A huge bright orb with other spirits constantly entering and leaving.  I only know what I've heard, so I can't describe it too well.

Interesting.  I figured the key to it would be paralysis - bringing it on manually.  Numbness would theoretically mean you're detaching from the nerves, so perhaps I'll experiment with ways to cause manual paralysis.

Argh, I have the same problem.  I've always been psionic enough to make vibrations occur without even lying down, but I never get past that point.  I can even feel the spirit hitting the skin as I try to get out, but can't get loose.

If there were an explanation on what keeps the spirit from detaching at any given moment...

Then the other annoying question:  If you - in spirit - were duplicated precisely, which clone's eyes would you see from?  By the rules of the universe, you probably can't make a precise clone, but I'm sure you can come close enough.

Thanks to spirits' thought relaying, you'd probably see with both clones.  That's just how our consciousness tends to work.  I think our minds already consist of several smaller spirits acting as one, so this shouldn't be unusual.

Still, anyone else have a take on the clone thing?

Is this in reference to our physical human bodies dying, or is it if our spirit bodies get burned up then the spirits body can restore it's existence after getting burned up?

Ah, pardon, I word things strangely sometimes. It refers to spirits, bodies, and anything physical, cause I think time works in frames and the universe is refreshing itself over and over to create movement, which would mean we're being destroyed and recreated with every frame.

One possibility is that EGO might be a product of brain structure (which has been constructed from every experience to date). Consiousness might be an emergent property of the brain.

I always thought about that too.  Well, we know thought is something the spirit does, but I have a theory that our 'spirits' or minds are made of multiple spirit orbs which communicate and function as the same mind, and the ego is de-centralized.  This would explain all sorts of personality conflicts, and theoretically the orbs can come and go at will, meaning you can gain mind power or lose it depending on how well you deal with new 'additions' to your thought pattern.  The only thing centralizing the ego could be the brain.

This theory comes from the simple fact that spirits communicate thoughts so fast they might as well have the same mind.  Plus, observations of really powerful spirits where I wondered: Where do the big-shot spirits get all their energy?  And noticed how they function like multiple spirits in one, merging and splitting with other spirits freely and always being surrounded by smaller 'orbs', or sparkles or points of light.  This info comes from NDEs I've read where the person is swept away by the strong spirit's energy and it feels like there's a life force in every atom.  The spirit's power could come from their ability to think intricately with many orbs relaying thoughts back and forth.

Anyway if this is true, the ego and memory lie in several spirit orbs (perhaps the chakras?), and killing one would only lower your ability to think, and the other orbs might instinctively scatter away.  To completely destroy an ego might be next to impossible.

Mister is right about the energy thing.  Everything appears and disappears with each frame of reality - it's just the structure of quarks and atoms that allow objects to continue between frames, and organisms and memories allow our thoughts to continue like this.  It's remarkable that we can exist as long as we do.

Still, I wonder:  If your spirit were reconstructed after absolute death with the memory and structure intact, would you be the one existing as the new spirit?  That question of ego always annoyed me, partly because I was raised with the belief that we're indestructible and despise the fact that we can die completely.  But, if I'm right about reality working in frames, we're disappearing completely and reappearing a bazillion times per second, and surely there's a way to restore one's existence.

An art teacher who knew the spectrum well said he left the body in an NDE and identified about 20 new primary colors, though, this took place in one of the spirit cities, which exist at the edge of the atmosphere where high-level radiation isn't as scarce as it is down here.

I remember leaving my body for a few moments and everything was cloudy.  I guess the annoyance of seeing a wider spectrum is that certain gasses aren't invisible anymore.

What do you look like as a spirit?  Your color, your structure, material?  Are you cloudy, solid, or translucent?  If translucent, can you see anything under your skin?  Are you red? Blue? Black? Or some other color outside the normal spectrum?

Furthermore, how do things look from a spirit's perspective?  Brighter? More precise?  More blue or more red?  More or less color?  I'm trying to figure out how a spirit works and it'd be great to have input from different people.

Total oblivion?  It happens.  Though spirits have a huge length of evolution behind them, they're still organisms like anything else, and can be killed.  It just takes a lot more trouble to do so.

Several NDE stories state that when a person (spirit form) is approaching a powerful spirit, they're told to approach slowly or else they'll 'burn up', though, they're usually told they 'can't handle it' as a less intimidating choice of words.  But the phrase 'burn up' slips out now and then, and while total death from this is unlikely, it's possible, and that would be the 'end'.  A bombardment of high-level energy would do it.

No time = no movement.  Stuff doesn't happen when it doesn't move.  Movement wasn't an invention, as the inventor would have to move to make it, and it's incredibly obvious how it came to exist: inevitability.

Frank is pretty close, really.  The word 'time' itself began with a baseless meaning because of lack of understanding.  It was just a form of measurement back then.  Now it's pretty obvious to most that things change by cause and reaction, so the meaning now is more scientific.

And nothing needs to prove its own existence.  I intend to figure out where something came from.  Is that so hard to grasp?

Dimension is an issue of space measurement; it doesn't take events into account.  You have no insight into the logical side of this situation if you don't understand the most basic fundamentals, so you can't stick around clouding a thread with baseless information from whatever dogma you're trying to reenforce.

Time is when things happen.  Things progress simply from cause and effect, and intelligence can't just be there when the whole universe is a single point.  The elements can't be right when they're all indistinguishably fused together.

I did say God is inevitability.  Well, maybe implied it.  Intelligence requires a lot of factors to come together; those factors can't be intelligent without advancement, hence time is needed before it has intelligence.  The universe can't actually think in its current state.  Parts of it can (us for example) but, by default, it's just idle matter until it can be used for intelligence or life.

Does anybody have the slightest bit of input?  I'm looking for logic, and a bunch of nihilism doesn't explain anything.  At least give it a shot; it's not like anything bad will happen.

That was just my point.  The origin of the universe is inevitability; from inevitability you get cause and reaction. That's what time is; it's not a creation.  Intelligence can't just 'be there', it has to form, using time.  So the questions are still unanswered.

Thing is that 'universe' indicates 'everything' so nothing can precede it, plus God is an intelligent life form and intelligence requires several elements to function, so with that sort of complexity, he'd have to have come from somewhere first.  So, assuming souls came from God, one has to figure out where God came from.

The records of Jesus' youth (Book of the Infancy of Jesus Christ) said he killed people and brought others back to life willingly.  I dunno where the Holy Spirit thing came from as it doesn't appear to have any basis.  I'm guessing the scribes from the Church shoehorned that in to fit more 'updated' ideas, and removed his childhood because religious kids are supposed to set and obey authority and never speak against the tyrants trying to control them.

Omnipotence is a logical impossibility since it lacks context (up comes the old 'can God make a rock too heavy for him to lift and lift it?' bit) so that goes out the window.  Thing is that, when some people are amazed out of their minds at an occurrence, and they can't explain it, they like to think this means *nobody* can explain it, so we end up with all sorts of baseless beliefs and eventual fear of people with a sense of logic who can throw these beliefs out like yesterday's garbage.

I guess this is natural though, as most people saying "I'm logical and smart!" are idiots with even less comprehension who just want to believe 'The whole thing was a great big fake and never happened and nobody has any proof against my ideas because I said so.' and whatnot.

So I'd like to probe everyone's deep knowledge for a moment.  We talk about souls a lot around here, obviously, but where do you suppose they came from?

My greatest guess is they originated in a star system somewhere, probably pretty far away, probably a long time ago.  It'd be nice if I could study a soul and come up with a more detailed theory on how its formed, but I'm a little too attached to my cellular body and don't have much luck leaving it.  Plus I hear the soul tends to hang around the back of your head, so, yeesh.  Sucks when the essence of your existence is so hard to see.

One big issue is whether cellular life preceded energetic life, the other way around, or both formed separately.  There's a slew of possibilities:
1. We came from - maybe - an animal somewhere out there who spawned a personal spirit as a means of evolutionary preservation (invincibility of complete death) and we came from there.
2. A species evolved to live on a higher frequency due to harsh low-freq conditions on the planet, and was able to come here at one point or another.
3. We originated on a higher frequency (ie. the star system theory) and invented cellular life manually, but Earth's materials could only produce low-freq bodies.
4. A species somewhere had a dying environment and needed a means of interstellar travel.  Invented souls capable of holding memories, living in space and shooting over long distances almost instantly.  (The soul is a very advanced, very capable thing; we might be some sort of technology.)
5. Cellular life AND energetic life came about separately, but energetic life forms learned to alter cellular forms so we could control them.

And of course a bazillion others.

I personally wouldn't believe for a minute that cellular life originated on Earth (on its own).  It's very young, the system is very young, and the possibilities are one in a trillion.  In the time this would take, countless other species from older, more suitable planets could have come to Earth and left its mark.

The soul itself is a real smoking gun for this; our very essence is something capable of moving near or past light speed between planets, systems, and can go unharmed by the vacuum of space.  Could something have just popped up out of an Earthly human's body one day with all these capabilities?  I doubt it.

I guess it's a tad pitiful that the mainstream evolutionary theories have complete ignorance of energetic life and millions of other factors. I didn't feel like setting around whining about it, so I thought I'd correct it.

Anyone else have any input on the makeup of the soul or where it came from?  I'm no expert on what it's like outside the body, so it'd be cool to have more real facts to work with.

Well there are ways of altering DNA by screwing with your energetic fields; altering the cellular body according the energetic one instead of the other way around. That much is pretty much proven, and I have a few theories on DNA/field interaction, but nothing solid yet, and I'm no expert the on cellular aging process so I wouldn't know which fields to screw with.

There's always the whole 'ascendance' deal where, I'm guessing, your energetic form becomes indistinguishable from the cellular one and you can change frequencies and whatnot, but all the people who have done that seem to be extremely stingy with the details and don't want anyone else to know how it works.

Hmm, I had a recollection a while back that involved God (or Gaia or whatever name you prefer for the given being) first looking over the solar system.  The accuracy of this recollection was unusually detailed; planets were the correct distance apart, given their size, as I found out later, and the being, which outsized them by quite a few times...  It had sort of a human form to it and that's all I can remember about it).

Oh, and when I say 'recollection', it tends to mean an approximation of outside reality, sort of like a vision but a lot more accurate because of a theoretical system of 'proximal thought' I conceived of a long time ago.. I won't bother you with the details.

But when I look back into the recollection, Earth was just sort of a lifeless rock, kinda like our Moon really, and, even stranger, Mars looked like it was capable of sustaining life. It had water here and there, but the details of Mars and Earth were hard to recall (I didn't even notice a difference until later when I looked back into the vision; they sort of paled in comparison to the gigantic being between them).

So Earth was just a big dead object and Mars had something going on it; very unusual in retrospect (though from my point of view they looked incredibly small).  I'm taking a shot in the dark here but this being seemed to act as sort of a soul migrator.  A friend of mine mentioned something about life on Earth stemming from that of Mars, and he's a friend who really knows his stuff so I hope I heard him correctly, but this being seemed to have been made up a whole lot of other beings, just judging by his size and capacity of thought. My guess is that this being was made up of combined souls from Mars and used for making Earth livable. I have a few reasonable hunches this was made possible by some sort of technology they had come up with, but of course, the whole migration theory itself doesn't have much backing it up. I could be wrong about the entire thing.

Heh, and the funny part is I was writing about it on a webpage a while back, trying to get the details out, and I was listening to that song called 'Hellbound' by Kenna, all the while trying to recall where, in the Solar System the being was situated, and suddenly the lyrics "Between Pluuuutoooo and God" came up. It didn't help any but I was still like 'wtf'.

Heh, I guess that's what they're debating right now: What qualifies as a chunk of rock and what gets to be a planet, cause Earth in the same sense is also a chunk of rock.

Oh and they're pretty certain it won't disappear soon because they seem to have mapped its orbit. By the looks of it, it'll be around for a few thousand years before leaving the general area (then coming back a few millenniums later).

Anyway none of this is helping at all. Whatever Clover just blurted is probably not worth reading, and it seems this topic ran dry only a few posts after it began.

It was a little fun, I guess, but I can't keep coming back here just to read strings of bickering and off-subject word games. If the subject at hand confuses you then at least say so or don't add anything, otherwise it wastes space. So meanwhile, I'm going to hang out in the other threads and look around on Google for anyone who might have something to say.

Still, Hephaestus' post was certainly useful. I'm glad I read it.