The Arthurian Maji Grail King Lineage

[Marietta]

Books have been written on the Indigo Children too but that is not an acceptable answer in this forum. Please tell me exactly how you apply the term righteousness when talking about the lahmed vav nik?

[Marietta]

It gets even better: According to this teaching, at any given time there are at least 36 holy JEWS in the world ie the lahmed vav niks:

[path_of_one]

Hi, Marietta-

Originally Posted by Marietta

My reply: I don’t know what special powers you are asking about?

I am referring to your OP #8.

My reply: Once again we are in agreement.

Here is the first sentence from the third post I made in this thread about the Indigo’s.

“The Indigo Children are not to be considered “superior or elite” in comparison to other humans, but rather viewed as living demonstrations of the dormant abilities that are NOW beginning to rapidly unfold among ALL HUMAN POPULATIONS.”

My point is that these abilities were not dormant. Traditional societies generally had shaman that had the capacities to soul-journey, interact with the spirit realm, heal, etc. We just recognize these things as really different now because these people have no particular role in our modern society. These traits were always in human populations, and every culture has a different way of viewing them. To make the assertions about such people that you make, with the scientific proof of DNA alterations and so forth- that is the issue for me. Without strong scientific evidence, the assertions are unfounded. It is sufficient to say that some people have greater abilities in these areas, and this is most likely to be like every other human trait- fluctuating in populations (we all have strengths and weaknesses).

I think you are going by claims made by other people not Azurite Press.

The claims that these people are hosts to Nephilim souls, that they have altered DNA, that they are other races (angelics, etc.) is the claim your OPs make, and what I am challenging. I don't challenge that people can heal or perceive beyond the 5 senses or whatever. I challenge the very elaborate, very fantastical, and very unsupported reasons why this is that your organization puts forth.

My reply: That’s not how anyone in our group views it or feel about it.

From Azurite Press, last paragraph on the page:
Welcome

Sounds an awful lot like stroking egos to me- very much a "we are so special, with a special purpose, and you are so courageous for believing in your special-ness." Sorry, but it's just what I see. I may have a lot of these traits, but I still think I'm just a human being like everyone else on the planet. I don't need complicated and unsupported histories of angelics and nephilim and feline hominids and mutated/activated DNA and so on to deal with who I am. I think part of the problem here (from my personal standpoint, aside from the claims of scientific authenticity that are not supported) is that it depends much on labels- labeling everybody and all this stuff. And labels, in my honest opinion, are virtually worthless in spiritual matters. Labels limit rather than progress. In short, I just find it (1) unsupported by evidence and (2) not very helpful to have people think they are some sort of semi-human that are being targeted by the Illuminati (ah-ha, more conspiracy theory).

Why not just stick to the basic stuff that is not only true, but supported by common sense and is actually useful? That is, that all people have gifts that can be used for love, unity, beauty, and goodness? Why separate out these or those people and come up with all this unsupported stuff?

My reply: What I am talking about is knowing things that you have never studied or heard of and then finding out that it is accurate. Also past life memories of places that you have never been to and can describe accurately.

What many people experience as knowing things they never heard of is actually their subconscious mind assimilating information that it picked up, which later is pushed into consciousness and appears to be coming from nowhere. There has been good work on the dreams of indigenous hunters, who believed animals sent them dreams to lead them to where to hunt. The studies showed that hunters were exceptionally adept at picking up subtle cues (broken branches, a bit of hair, etc.) from their environment, which they were constantly roaming each day. But this was picked up at a subconscious level. In their dreams, this information was organized and packaged in a way the conscious mind could understand it and act on it.

My point is that just because a person *feels* that they experienced things a certain way doesn't make it reality. To think so ignores the complexity of the human brain and how we perceive, store, process, and act on information.

That said, I don't think it explains everything, but neither would I call it cellular memory, as I think it has nothing whatsoever to do with our cells. I had ideas about string theory and quantum mechanics by the time I was five. I picked up on stuff going on in the world like famines by the age of two. However, science simply doesn't support that any of this stuff was in my DNA. DNA codes for what the body will produce for its growth, development and maintenance. DNA is not a memory system in the sense of recording information about other stuff. So, I think there is some other system by which this information is stored and processed that science hasn't figured out yet. Some have proposed a universal consciousness that some people tap into. Some have proposed a universal human consciousness. Some propose it's reponsiveness to a sensitivity to energy, and thought is a form of energy. We don't know, but it is much more honest to say science doesn't have this information yet than to act like science supports something it doesn't.

I personally don't have an issue with past life memories in terms of a belief. I do have an issue of claiming scientific evidence where there is none and misusing scientific concepts to "prove" a point when there is no proof. To me, an organization that does that is manipulating the public (who generally know little about science) into thinking proof exists where it doesn't. If an organization has no peer-reviewed studies and no references, it simply isn't a scientific organization. But people know that the general public doesn't know this. They know that people in the public will accept anything that sounds intelligent and complicated, and talks about the same concepts (DNA, physics) even if it doesn't have any grounding in these sciences at all. And it is this manipulation of people that really bothers me about all sorts of organizations that claim scientific grounding but fail to live up to even the most basic tenets of scientific inquiry.

My reply: I’ve answered every question asked of me that I am physically able to answer.

My point is that the claims you made, or referenced to your organization, you are unable to answer. So it becomes a matter of faith and not science, and this makes me very wary of an organization that purports to be scientifically grounded but is, in fact, not giving any of the supportive materials to its members. That seems manipulative and not useful to me.

I’ve said that I will debate with anyone who has a working knowledge of the topic. How do you debate with someone who only wants to make promote an argument and fun of the material without knowledge of the material.

I understand you aren't saying this if for everyone. Your organization, however, claims certain "truths" about properly classifying people, how these people obtained these abilities, and so forth that are not just about a personal path- they claim to have the truth about entire groups of people, including ethnic/religious groups such as the Jews. You must understand there is a distinction between following a path and making generalized unsupported statements about other human beings. One of the paths I follow is Druidry. It's not for everyone. That is fine and dandy. But if the Order of Druids I belong to put out materials that said the Jews were really this, and the Torah and Bible were corrupted, and all these people are really nephilim that are hanging out in human bodies, and people like those people have altered DNA... you see how this is extending out their belief in reference to others? Claiming a truth that is unsupported about other people, or a broad group of people is the issue I take.

My reply: First I would suggest going back and reading the articles I posted. What kind of evidence do you want?

The organization says it is scientific.

Azurite Press Melchizedek Cloister Emerald Order

It says it is a science-spiritual tradition. It distinctly claims "science" several times, and you yourself in your posts have used scientific claims.

However, none of the evidence presented anywhere is scientific. If you want to argue that an organization and its claims are scientific, I ask for scientific evidence.

Scientific evidence is collected in a particular way (the scientific method provides the foundation) and is published in peer-reviewed sources (articles in peer-reviewed journals, academic presses for books). Without this type of publishing, there is no litmus test to separate out any person's claims and opinions and real science.

I can’t make you believe something you have determined you will not believe no matter what material I quote.

I will believe when I see material quoted that are real, scientific, peer-reviewed references. If you claim science as a tradition and support, then support the claims with the tradition and support of science. Or, alternatively, we can say that our claims are simply our own beliefs, without any supporting material. Which is fine- I have plenty of those. I just don't claim they are science.

Unless it comes from your little corner of learning, it is not valid to you so what is the point.

It is hardly "my little corner of learning" to ask for ANY peer-reviewed scientific reference. I'm not restricting from which field of science, or which universities, or which journals- nothing. I'm asking for ANY peer-reviewed scientific references that support the claims about DNA, nephilim, feline hominids, etc. that you claim is part of a tradition that is a science.

What I'm saying is- if you claim scientific support, then there should be SOMEWHERE in science, some support. ANYWHERE. Science is a very broad mode of inquiry with many disciplines and tons of peer-reviewed journals and presses.

You are claiming that your tradition is scientific and has scientists, yet there are no references provided anywhere in the body of scientific literature to this effect. Can you understand why people are therefore skeptical?

I have provided the material I have, Good Morning American did a segment on the Indigo Children and so did ABC new do a segment on them but unless it comes from one of your cronies, you simply will not acknowledge the validity of the source.

I would hardly call the millions of scientists around the world, in all sorts of disciplines "my cronies." Any scientist recognizes the difference between popular presses, television shows, and magazines (which have NO standards for data, analysis, or methodology) and the value of peer-reviewed sources that do have standards to uphold the integrity of the research.

I can create a website on my own that says anything, claiming scientific basis. What makes a source scientific is that it has shown, through the peer-review process, that it has methodological integrity- that data were really collected, really analyzed, and that the conclusions are not just the opinion or flight of fancy of some person but are actually based on something solid.

What I can tell you is that I can see the indigo blue auric field around these people which is where the term Indigo children came from, but can I tell you who has what DNA activated providing doctors reports, no I cannot.

Then why don't you just stick with your experience and leave out stuff for which there is no evidence? If you said this from the get-go: "I think there are people who are Indigo children and like me in ways XYZ because I see blue auras around them" I wouldn't have an argument with that. It's how you see the world, how you process the information, etc. It is claiming stuff that is based on "science" and extending this to generalizations about groups like the Jews that is the problem from a logical and scientific standpoint.

Does this mean that testing has not been don’t, NO it doesn’t. It simply means that I am no privy to these reports other than second hand.

But does this mean testing HAS been done, and proven the points of your organization? No, it doesn't. It could mean some person made something up somewhere, and you bought into it. Without any evidence, no one knows. And that is my point. Science is built on evidence, not unsupported claims.

If you have specific questions about the Indigo children I will do my best to provide an answer but if you are wanting me to convince you, I don’t have the power or desire to do this.

I am not asking to be convinced. I am asking that if someone claims something is supported by science, that it be supported by science. If not, there is nothing wrong with simply leaving belief in the realm of belief, without proof. It is the claim that proof exists, and then none actually does, that is an issue.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by path of one

From Azurite Press, last paragraph on the page:
Welcome

Wow! What a lucrative business.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by Excerpts from The Freedom Teachings: A Brief Primer

The greatest benefit that the FT's offer you is the gift of uncommon knowledge, through which some of the mysterious aspects of reality can be understood ... and, through this, the majesty of personal experience can be re-discovered.

Understanding these things is what will set you free, not 'assumptions' or paradigms that teach you nothing about your true power, abilities or potentials. In the brief sampling of summary materials which follow this introduction you can begin to discover a pretty detailed review of critical historical events which span billions of years; the presence, role and purpose of certain earth inhabitants known as the “Angelic Humans” and “Indigo Children” (as well as many other non-human species); the content and context, the processes and mechanics of Multi-dimensional reality, as well as the essential and corresponding aspects of your own personal Multi-dimensional anatomy. These components are some of the many which have been hidden, forbidden or suppressed. It is through such an apparently dramatic discovery as this that a greater personal discovery can be made: that a bridge is now available between genuine, passionate, but under informed spiritual aspiration and the meaningful actualization of potent spiritual participation. A specific result of such a major paradigm-shift is that your understanding of, access to, and integration of your “higher self”, as a direct expansion of conscious awareness and potential expression, can be more certainly, safely and thoroughly developed.

See, the problem I have with your organization is that it claims to have what is known as "uncommon knowledge". And that this is knowledge "which have been hidden, forbidden or suppressed". So the immediate implication is that this "Azurite Press Melchizedek Cloister Emerald Order" has exculsive access to this knowledge that no other organization in the whole of history has obtained. But in order to prove its exclusiveness, it must make the case that everyone else has had it all wrong. So one of the tactics is to cast an unfavorable light to current conditions with statements like:

Contemporary reality demonstrates that the idea that individuals can significantly alter the conditions of their personal experience, contribute to improved collective well-being, growth, harmony and creative expression has grown ever less attainable as our world has become more "civilised". What contemporary humans have learned, by default, is the lesson of powerlessness and victimhood. But, these all too prevalent circumstances are simply a reflection of what is taught or imposed, what is believed or accepted, and what is otherwise 'necessarily' assumed in the absence of adequate prescriptive facts. The apparent futility of life has, for many people, either elevated "God", “Masters”, Angels, or "ET's" as the only viable means of human “liberation” or has otherwise supported their respective denigration; either way, promoting hope and trust in all manner of alternate forms of external authority, at the expense of nurturing the remaining vestiges of spiritual potency, loving self-expression and personal sovereignty.

Basically this is trashing all of our religious and cultural traditions as being inadequate to address the need. We are apparently caught in the futility of life. So I guess this means that any of our established beliefs are useless to us and we must "discover" the truths that APMCEO has to offer, plus shipping and handling.

The other tactic is to confuse the reader with obtuse terms in order to introduce something new (and improved). But all this does is confuse the potential new member, but since they don't want to appear ignorant, they accept the terms as legitimate, especially since they are Capitalized. Such fun-sounding terms as:

Freedom Teachings
Sacred Creation
Keylontic Science
Sparks of Source
Co-Creative Power
Source-Creation
Divine Substance
Divine Right Relationship
Creation Ethic
First Creation
Crystal Body
DNA Template
Primal Life Source Currents
Sacred Keys
Stellar Activation Cycle (SAC) - Can't forget those important acronymns can we?
Inner Chistos Law of ONE - Hey, this one employ the ALL CAPS emphasis. Better write this one down.
Merkaba Mechanics

Boy, I must be missing out on something. I better get on the ball because I realize from these terms just how much knowledge I've yet to learn. Excuse me while I go find my checkbook.

[Marietta]

This was so long it has to be a two parter.
Part one
Dear Kim, Thank you for your thoughts.

---Quote: From one of my posts: “The Indigo Children are not to be considered “superior or elite” in comparison to other humans, but rather viewed as living demonstrations of the dormant abilities that are NOW beginning to rapidly unfold among ALL HUMAN POPULATIONS.”
You replied:My point is that these abilities were not dormant. Traditional societies generally had shaman that had the capacities to soul-journey, interact with the spirit realm, heal, etc. We just recognize these things as really different now because these people have no particular role in our modern society. These traits were always in human populations, and every culture has a different way of viewing them. To make the assertions about such people that you make, with the scientific proof of DNA alterations and so forth- that is the issue for me. Without strong scientific evidence, the assertions are unfounded. It is sufficient to say that some people have greater abilities in these areas, and this is most likely to be like every other human trait- fluctuating in populations (we all have strengths and weaknesses).

My reply: The Shaman, Physics, Indigo's, ect. have always had these abilities activated, but this is only a very, very, small percentage of the world population. All humans have these abilites.
The Indigo Recessive Type-3 is the most common type of Indigo Child presently incarnate on Earth. Type-3 Indigos began birthing in very small numbers about 200 years ago. There are about 2,500, 000 indigo Recessives incarnate now. Indigo Dominants type-2 is the next most common type of Indigo Child. Isolated numbers of Type-2 Indigos birthed 75-100 years ago, most since the late 1950's. There are about 500,000 Indigo dominants incarnate now. Indigo Composite type-1 is the most rare type of Indigo. Most entered incarnation in the 1960's-1970's. There are presently about 350 Type-1 Indigos on Earth, with another 5,000 scheduled to birth between 2--5-2017.

---Quote---Why not just stick to the basic stuff that is not only true, but supported by common sense and is actually useful? That is, that all people have gifts that can be used for love, unity, beauty, and goodness? Why separate out these or those people and come up with all this unsupported stuff?

My reply: My I suggest that if it is your desire to stick to the basics that you stick with all the "BASIC" stuff while I advance myself into other fields of study. I would never suggest to another person to sit back and follow the norm. Someone along the way decided not to follow the norm and set out to prove the Norm wrong, such as Einstin, Newton, If this was not the case we would not have the ability to sit in front of a computer having this conversation. Do you realize that when telephones were first introduced, the a lot of people, Christians being a large contributer of the thought that this were Mystic and of the devil, along with a whole array of other inventions and new scientific thought. A large portion of the population stills debates the Big Bang, making claims that some big mean, jealous, low self asteme Male God up in the sky somewhere (that they call heaven, but at the same time dispute higher dimensions) said poof and it all appeared out of no where. Now there are many educated, scientist within the Christian community and they have written peer articles claiming to prove creationism. Just because something is given a peer review does not validate. Darwinism has had peer review that contradicts the Creationist peer review.

---Quote----What many people experience as knowing things they never heard of is actually their subconscious mind assimilating information that it picked up, which later is pushed into consciousness and appears to be coming from nowhere. There has been good work on the dreams of indigenous hunters, who believed animals sent them dreams to lead them to where to hunt. The studies showed that hunters were exceptionally adept at picking up subtle cues (broken branches, a bit of hair, etc.) from their environment, which they were constantly roaming each day. But this was picked up at a subconscious level. In their dreams, this information was organized and packaged in a way the conscious mind could understand it and act on it.

My reply: How do you define the subconscious mind? Where is this memory held? How do you tap into it? Who pushes it into the conscious mind? What is the conscious mind? Where is this memory stored?
Where did the hunters dreams come from? How do they learn in the dream state? Who is teaching them? Please explain the difference in the dream state and awake state?
I agree that we learn in the Dream State. I agree that some of the teachers we encounter in the dream state can look like animals.

--Quote---My point is that just because a person *feels* that they experienced things a certain way doesn't make it reality. To think so ignores the complexity of the human brain and how we perceive, store, process, and act on information.

My reply: Little is understood about the complexity of the Brain, its neurotransmitter, and their relationship to DNA, cells, Atoms, electrons, protons, quirks and so on. Science is merely at the threshold of understanding the relationship between these.

---Quote: I don't think it explains everything, but neither would I call it cellular memory, as I think it has nothing whatsoever to do with our cells.

My reply: I would call it cellular memory.

--Quote---I had ideas about string theory and quantum mechanics by the time I was five.

My reply: How did you at age five know what you knew about string theroy and quantum mechanics? Have you advanced the study in any way? Debating aside, If you understood these things at age five you must have written about the and I personally would like to read what you have written on the subject. Could you share it with me.
Did you develop your ideas further or did your surroundings as a child and later the education you received stifle you innate abilities halting advancement of your knowingness?

---Quote---- I do have an issue of claiming scientific evidence where there is none and misusing scientific concepts to "prove" a point when there is no proof.

My reply: The misuse of scientific concepts as you state is a matter of which side of the scientific fence you sit. As you have stated, in the scientific community, one person merely builds upon a foundation already formulated thus I must ask: Where did the foundation come from? What peers were there to give review of the foundation. Thus, the second person who added to this foundation, who was available to give peer review and what publications was it written up in? One well know example that everybody knows it Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, when he came up with his theory it was rejected, by peer review, however that did not mean he didn't have a valid concept. All new scientific though is rejected in the scientific community. There is a select group of who get together and determine which science will be promoted and which will not. Once this SELECT groups writes an article and publishes it one of their journals, it becomes fact. If other people want to parriot what they are trained to believe that is fine with me but personally I desire to know, that I know, what I know: aside from what someone else tells me. This isn't to say that I am not open to accepting other paradigms of thought which I can personally validate for myself, as opposed to being told that I must adhere only to what someone else says is fact. The Organized Scientific community does not own the patent on developing new science thought.

[Marietta]

Part two
--quote---Your organization, however, claims certain "truths" about properly classifying people, how these people obtained these abilities, and so forth that are not just about a personal path- they claim to have the truth about entire groups of people, including ethnic/religious groups such as the Jews. You must understand there is a distinction between following a path and making generalized unsupported statements about other human beings.

My reply: How is this different from any other belief system on this planet. Most religions make claims about their version of History and the raced lines and where they came from, so why do the Freedom Teachings intimidate you so badly?

--Quote---It says it is a science-spiritual tradition. It distinctly claims "science" several times, and you yourself in your posts have used scientific claims.

My reply: What comment are referencing in regards to the above quote? I have never said that we were not a group of study Science, History and race lines.
--Quote---Scientific evidence is collected in a particular way (the scientific method provides the foundation) and is published in peer-reviewed sources (articles in peer-reviewed journals, academic presses for books). Without this type of publishing, there is no litmus test to separate out any person's claims and opinions and real science.
My reply: This is merely your form of Science and the special people who claim that nothing that they haven't reviewed and agreed with is valid. Just because a particular Scientific though has not been peer reviewed by the special group of people you keep talking about who have set themselves up as authority over scientific thought does not negate other scientific thought as truth.

---Quote---I will believe when I see material quoted that are real, scientific, peer-reviewed references. If you claim science as a tradition and support, then support the claims with the tradition and support of science. Or, alternatively, we can say that our claims are simply our own beliefs, without any supporting material. Which is fine- I have plenty of those. I just don't claim they are science.
My reply: We do not follow "TRADITION," We are free thinkers who prefer to think outside the box.

---Quote---It is hardly "my little corner of learning" to ask for ANY peer-reviewed scientific reference. I'm not restricting from which field of science, or which universities, or which journals- nothing. I'm asking for ANY peer-reviewed scientific references that support the claims about DNA, nephilim, feline hominids, etc. that you claim is part of a tradition that is a science.

My reply: It doesn't matter which college or peer review Journal as long as it is "accredited" by the Science community. All universities follow the strict guidelines as to what is taught. All the Scientific Journals adhere to the same guidelines set by the same group of Scientist who approve any new scientific idea. Therefore you are saying that unless my beliefs are accredited by this select group of peers it is not acceptable. But I ask not acceptable to whom? Maybe it isn't acceptable to you or this select group but it is acceptable to thousands of people around the world.
--Quote---I would hardly call the millions of scientists around the world, in all sorts of disciplines "my cronies." Any scientist recognizes the difference between popular presses, television shows, and magazines (which have NO standards for data, analysis, or methodology) and the value of peer-reviewed sources that do have standards to uphold the integrity of the research.
My reply: What I meant by your cronies was those who all follow the same set of specific guidelines set by a select group of people who have set themselves up as authority, that you do.
--quote--Then why don't you just stick with your experience and leave out stuff for which there is no evidence? If you said this from the get-go: "I think there are people who are Indigo children and like me in ways XYZ because I see blue auras around them" I wouldn't have an argument with that. It's how you see the world, how you process the information, etc. It is claiming stuff that is based on "science" and extending this to generalizations about groups like the Jews that is the problem from a logical and scientific standpoint.
My reply: This is a very strange statement coming from someone who claims to be a scientist. Let me muse myself a bit here to make my point: Why don't all scientist merely stick with what is obvious? Why aren't they happy with the exterior form instead of trying to figure out how things work? Why does the way in which I view the world threaten you or your scientific beliefs? Why do you keep bring up the Jews? You said that you are not BB and said that you are not Jewish? What has been stated in the Freedom Teachings that you find offensive regarding the Jews? We have quite a few Jews in our group and they don't find anything in the teachings offensive. Why do you? It is the Jews who have set themselves up as superior, stating that the world can't exist without their 36 lahmed vav niks who are here to justifying the purpose of mankind in the eyes of God and if there were not here the world would END. It is the Jews who call all other races Goy, which means a body period and understood to mean without a soul. It is written in the Jewish Mishnah that it is ok to cheat, lie to and impose strict taxes among other gross things, on the Goy because they don't have a soul. It says that a man can marry a child at the age of two this means to consummate the union. If you want to discuss Judaism and the Jews I am well equipped to do so however I do not care to put my energy into this topic. Nothing stated about Judaism and or the Jews has come from the Freedom Teachings. What I quoted about the lahmed vav nik was a direct quote from the source link provided by BB. You will not find the lahmed vav niks mentioned in the freedom teachings.
You know what I find peculiar about all this discussion? It is the fact that this thread originally posted in 2006 was dormant for two years and when someone made a post back in January asking how they could know if they were an indigo type 3, all of a sudden one of the Moderators (bananabrain) come in and makes a snide remark which I ignored. Then six month later another person responds and all of a sudden one of the moderators (bananabrain) again pops in again defending his rude-ness by saying that this site is about serious spiritual seeking. THIS IS MY SPIRITUAL PATH and I take my spiritual seeking very, very seriously. (caps not intended as yelling, just to emphasize my point). At this point I reentered the form to let BB know that this is a very serious spiritual path. Then all of a sudden after two years there are several moderators and several other people who take part in the Judaism section that are here bashing this thread. What is truly going on here? Not one person is serious about this thread, each person here is here with the intent to bash it, without any knowledge about the topic. Each person taking part in this thread at present is upset because "THEY THINK" (without validation) that the Indigo might be superior to them. Nothing in the Freedom Supports this as being true, they are not superior or better. You have shared how at the age of two you knew this and that, "does this make you better." Do you feel that you are superior to those who didn't know physics at a young age? Are you being accused of promoting superiority because you knew these things? What makes you feel so inferior to the Indigo information?

---Quote--- am not asking to be convinced. I am asking that if someone claims something is supported by science, that it be supported by science. If not, there is nothing wrong with simply leaving belief in the realm of belief, without proof. It is the claim that proof exists, and then none actually does, that is an issue.
My reply: Keylontic Science can be validated but it takes interested Scientists doing their peer review for it to be established by mainstream Science. Thus far your peers have not don't so. It would give me great pleasure if you would do a peer review on Keylontic Science and write about in your journal. Please do so and send me the article, because at present I am unaware of such a review. As far as the Indigo children, according to the lecture done at some of the Universities there have been a review written regarding them. I personally do not know how or where to find these reviews or if they have been made public.
Love and Light, Marietta Still smiling

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by Marietta

Do you realize that when telephones were first introduced, the a lot of people, Christians being a large contributer of the thought that this were Mystic and of the devil, along with a whole array of other inventions and new scientific thought.

I've never heard of this. Do have a reference?

A large portion of the population stills debates the Big Bang, making claims that some big mean, jealous, low self asteme Male God up in the sky somewhere (that they call heaven, but at the same time dispute higher dimensions) said poof and it all appeared out of no where.

Do you know what a singularity is in relation to the Big Bang? Almost nothing--POOF!

Now there are many educated, scientist within the Christian community and they have written peer articles claiming to prove creationism.

I'd like to see one of these 'peer-reviewed' publications on creationism. Can you direct me to one?

I would call it cellular memory.

Because....? Why?

What part of the cell has the memory?

One well know example that everybody knows it Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, when he came up with his theory it was rejected, by peer review, however that did not mean he didn't have a valid concept.

Which theory are you referring to? He had several, and I wasn't aware that any of them were rejected.

How is this different from any other belief system on this planet. Most religions make claims about their version of History and the raced lines and where they came from, so why do the Freedom Teachings intimidate you so badly?

Because most religions give a reasonable attempt in providing some kind of basis for those connections, based on internal and external references. Something that your have yet to provide.

Keylontic Science can be validated but it takes interested Scientists doing their peer review for it to be established by mainstream Science. Thus far your peers have not don't so. It would give me great pleasure if you would do a peer review on Keylontic Science and write about in your journal. Please do so and send me the article, because at present I am unaware of such a review.

Are you serious? I thought you and your group do not require peer reviews. You've spent a better part of the last couple of posts lambasting the concept of peer-review. And now you want someone to peer-review Keylontic Science?

[Marietta]

Greetings, I would like to address those who have come into this thread with the intent to bash it and while at the same time let those who do not post but only read know what is taking place.
I am well aware that each person here who is bashing this thread all take part in the Judaism section and are in agreement with each other in that section of this forum. Anyone reading this can go into that section and read how they respond to each other. This said, it would appear to me that this thread has struck some kind of trigger emotionally among the Jewish community of this forum.
They have accused those who study the Freedom Teachings of having a superiority complex without studying the teachings or meeting any of the people involved in the teachings. If they had studied the material before trying to debate it they would have found that this is not true. They each claim to be scientific in their research however this has not been the case with the Freedom Teachings. In Science a concept is taken and evaluated (tested) and then if there is fault found in the science presented they show there research and compare their findings to that of the Idea they have found confusion with, from their study of the topic. None of the people who are trying to debunk these teachings has gone through the true Scientific protocol of scientific investigation to be able to have enough knowledge to debate the topic.
Each and every person who is here trying to debunk the validity of the Freedom Teachings is doing so merely on the basis of lack of a “PEER REVIEW” article. True Scientists know that such a Review only happens when a group of Scientists take interest in a topic and do an investigation into the topic and then after (usually, years) of debate and testing, this group of people who claim to be the “Superior Powers” of what will be “APPROVED” as Scientific evidence in their magazine, will write what is called a Peer REVIEW. If the people in here are part of the formal Scientific Community they should be well aware of this, which would mean that they are merely spouting the term “peer review” as a means of confusion because it is the only means of debunking these teachings. The freedom teachings stand on their own and do not need ‘peer review.’ If a person wishing to debunk the teachings wants to truly debunk them they need to investigate them to see if they can find any true Scientific flaws in them. If true Scientific evaluation has found them to be flawed then this should be put on the table for discussion along with their findings. This has not happened.
The freedom teachings do not seek nor do they need peer review to be validated for those of us studying, evaluating, and testing them and following them. Each and every one of us is self sovereign and able to do our own research into the matter of testing and evaluating these teachings. We do not need someone else validating them for us, we each take that responsibility upon ourselves.

Love and Light, Marietta
Still Smiling!!!

[bgruagach]

***Moderator Note***

This thread is closed since there seems little point in continuing as the discussion has devolved to bickering rather than discussing.

Please note that the button that looks like a triangular red "caution" sign in the bottom left area of each post is a "Report This Post" button. If you feel a post violates the Code of Conduct, please report the post using that button rather than derailing the discussion thread by trying to discuss moderation issues.

It would be helpful for everyone to review the Code of Conduct and keep in mind that we encourage respectful discussion here. It's also important to remember that no point of view is above being questioned.

Ben Gruagach
moderator, Alternative section of Comparative-Religion.com