Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [anthroposophy] Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev

Expand Messages
  • DRStarman2001@aol.com
    ... *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don t reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don t they? Or fallen angels---don t you
    Message 1 of 23 , Jul 16, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:11:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, pacbay@... writes:

      > I have just re-read this post with some interest and asked where the beings mentioned actually "live" -certainly not in the subways of New York....

      *******Same place leprechauns do, I'd say.

      >
      > In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the ones mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they could not be same. In all reports both public and governmental, these short gray beings do not talk!. In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and descriptions. All communications are done telepathically and in the earth language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering off the ground at times. In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is procreation. They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic and artificial womb technologies according to most reports. One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this dilemma through the use of human
      > fertility.

      *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don't reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don't they? Or fallen angels---don't you think?
      And why would levitating beings travel in space ships?

      -starman
    • DRStarman2001@aol.com
      ... ******In fact, if you look at the Goetheanum glass windows, you ll see portrayals of Ahrimanic beings burying themselves in the netherworld below our
      Message 2 of 23 , Jul 16, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        lightsearcher1@... writes:

        > My informal perspective – fully in accord
        > with prior discussions here – is that these
        > creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
        > Andreev's physically precise descriptions).
        >
        > Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
        > residing in a lower level of "physical"
        > – a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical –
        > than even where we ourselves physically
        > reside.
        >
        > I think this would comport with RS'
        > implicit/explicit statements about the
        > existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.
        >
        > Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
        > than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
        > types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
        > the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
        > described...including having some
        > physical effects in our domain.

        ******In fact, if you look at the Goetheanum glass windows, you'll see portrayals of Ahrimanic beings burying themselves in the 'netherworld" below our feet. The interior of the earth is completely different from what materialist philsophy would hold.... and not disconnected from us, or the sky.

        Starman
      • studioeditions2002
        I haven t read the book by Andreev but appreciate the post making so much clear from it... [I hope I am not repeating what may have discussed earlier by this
        Message 3 of 23 , Jul 16, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          I haven't read the book by Andreev but appreciate the post making so
          much clear from it... [I hope I am not repeating what may have
          discussed earlier by this group.] I did read two books by Christopher
          O'Brien titled The Mysterious Valley and Enter the Valley, in which
          the author attempts to make sense of the cattle mutilations and other
          peculiar phenomena in the area of the San Luis Valley, which is in
          south & central Colorado, although he does not seem to be a Christian
          or an esoteric Christian. These mutilations are not peculiar to this
          area, but have occurred very frequently there. The cattle are found
          with the reproductive systems having been rapidly bored out and
          removed, as though with lasers. It has not occurred only with cattle;
          humans, including a teen-aged girl, have been found in this
          condition. There is also peculiar light phenomena, and seeming
          "military" phenomena, such as hovering, noiseless and disappearing
          helicopters, always yellow. All of these phenomena would seem to be
          in preparation for Ahriman's incarnation in the west, and my own
          educated guess is that this will occur between 2012 and 2033, with
          2033 a very significant year, in the western US. RS has said that
          Ahriman wants to take over or tear out the instinctual or
          reproductive life of human beings and use it; this ties in with what
          is said about Andreev's visions in the post. South-central Colorado
          is close to Trinity, which might be described as a hole opened up on
          the surface of the Earth by the backward Archai or Asuras, the opened
          pit out of which the demonic, Ahrimanic beings have emerged onto the
          Earth's surface. I do believe that very dark forces are presently
          secretly at work in Phoenix, Arizona, based on a brief but
          unmistakable encounter with a satanic personality there. Christopher
          O'Brien has recently connected these dark enterprises, spiritually,
          with Meso-American practices of human sacrifices.

          Some of the UFO-based beings are not altogether evil or dark, but are
          apparently "friendly."

          RS said that Ahriman in his incarnation would be a great magi or
          magician, working wonders, and this "magic" can be seen in the UFO
          phenomena (not to mention computers), such as the UFO reported by
          three police departments independently in the northern midwest: the
          UFO seen was described as being the size of a football field. From
          all of this satanic magic, humanity can wrest much for his own
          further development, including, apparently, secrets of hovering
          spacecraft, levitation and the capacity for materialization and de-
          materialization, as well as the computer marvels.

          Obviously, Osama Bin Laden is an instrument of Ahriman, and has said
          expressly that his hope is to generate as much fear as possible among
          Americans, and others, such as Israeli's, at this time. Ahriman feeds
          on this type of fear and anxiety. All of this is preparation.

          I hope this contribution is helpful.

          Cordially,

          Martha



          --- In anthroposophy@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:
          > In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:11:32 PM Eastern Standard
          Time, pacbay@a... writes:
          >
          > > I have just re-read this post with some interest and asked where
          the beings mentioned actually "live" -certainly not in the subways of
          New York....
          >
          > *******Same place leprechauns do, I'd say.
          >
          > >
          > > In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the ones
          mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they could
          not be same. In all reports both public and governmental, these short
          gray beings do not talk!. In fact they barely have slits for mouths
          from drawings and descriptions. All communications are done
          telepathically and in the earth language appropriate to the listener.
          They also do not walk normally but have some energetic method of
          moving or hovering off the ground at times. In addition, one of the
          issues in their visitations is procreation. They cannot procreate any
          longer and have mastered genetic and artificial womb technologies
          according to most reports. One of the reasons that they are here is
          to solve this dilemma through the use of human
          > > fertility.
          >
          > *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don't
          reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don't they? Or
          fallen angels---don't you think?
          > And why would levitating beings travel in space ships?
          >
          > -starman
        • jla
          I continue to warn APs and others on the spiritual journey not to assume, project or mix theories in these areas. As I pointed out in the Andreev book, the
          Message 4 of 23 , Jul 16, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            I continue to warn APs and others on the spiritual journey not to assume, project or mix theories in these areas. As I pointed out in the Andreev book, the similarities end quickly between his descriptions of sub humans and grays. The gray levitation ability are limited and infrequent by the way. Its a hyper etheric force it seems but not strong enough to propel them through space.
             
            .
            There is an incredible knowledge gap between certain paranormal phenomena and esotericism at present and early 20th century claims may be outdated or not sufficient to the task. Whether for right or wrong reasons, one field is out pacing the other at least in the public arena.
            Case in point: John Edward and Crossing Over show on Fox and the Sci-Fi channel. Is he a medium and as such and promoting false psychic ideas? Hardly. His vague perceptual abilities are often highly accurate concerning information and facts between the dead and the living. Some may say that he is being "used" by the dark forces to promote a spiritualistic form of work; and on the other hand he may be of great use and value and is the best we have now in bridging the gap between the living and the dead. He is not "materializing the dead" but trying to create a bridge of awareness between the living and the dead. Ahriman's work and appearance may also be in the midst of various forms of social and spiritual phenomena that he may not have anything to do with directly.
             
            Jeff
             
             

            I haven't read the book by Andreev but appreciate the post making so
            much clear from it... [I hope I am not repeating what may have
            discussed earlier by this group.] I did read two books by Christopher
            O'Brien titled The Mysterious Valley and Enter the Valley, in which
            the author attempts to make sense of the cattle mutilations and other
            peculiar phenomena in the area of the San Luis Valley, which is in
            south & central Colorado, although he does not seem to be a Christian
            or an esoteric Christian. These mutilations are not peculiar to this
            area, but have occurred very frequently there. The cattle are found
            with the reproductive systems having been rapidly bored out and
            removed, as though with lasers. It has not occurred only with cattle;
            humans, including a teen-aged girl, have been found in this
            condition. There is also peculiar light phenomena, and seeming
            "military" phenomena, such as hovering, noiseless and disappearing
            helicopters, always yellow. All of these phenomena would seem to be
            in preparation for Ahriman's incarnation in the west, and my own
            educated guess is that this will occur between 2012 and 2033, with
            2033 a very significant year, in the western US. RS has said that
            Ahriman wants to take over or tear out the instinctual or
            reproductive life of human beings and use it; this ties in with what
            is said about Andreev's visions in the post. South-central Colorado
            is close to Trinity, which might be described as a hole opened up on
            the surface of the Earth by the backward Archai or Asuras, the opened
            pit out of which the demonic, Ahrimanic beings have emerged onto the
            Earth's surface. I do believe that very dark forces are presently
            secretly at work in Phoenix, Arizona, based on a brief but
            unmistakable encounter with a satanic personality there. Christopher
            O'Brien has recently connected these dark enterprises, spiritually,
            with Meso-American practices of human sacrifices.

            Some of the UFO-based beings are not altogether evil or dark, but are
            apparently "friendly." 

            RS said that Ahriman in his incarnation would be a great magi or
            magician, working wonders, and this "magic" can be seen in the UFO
            phenomena (not to mention computers), such as the UFO reported by
            three police departments independently in the northern midwest: the
            UFO seen was described as being the size of a football field. From
            all of this satanic magic, humanity can wrest much for his own
            further development, including, apparently, secrets of hovering
            spacecraft, levitation and the capacity for materialization and de-
            materialization, as well as the computer marvels.

            Obviously, Osama Bin Laden is an instrument of Ahriman, and has said
            expressly that his hope is to generate as much fear as possible among
            Americans, and others, such as Israeli's, at this time. Ahriman feeds
            on this type of fear and anxiety. All of this is preparation.

            I hope this contribution is helpful.

            Cordially,

            Martha

             

            --- In anthroposophy@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:
            > In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:11:32 PM Eastern Standard
            Time, pacbay@a... writes:
            >
            > > I have just re-read this post with some interest and asked where
            the beings mentioned actually "live" -certainly not in the subways of
            New York....
            >
            > *******Same place leprechauns do, I'd say.
            >
            > > 
            > >  In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the ones
            mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they could
            not be same. In all reports both public and governmental, these short
            gray beings do not talk!. In fact they barely have slits for mouths
            from drawings and descriptions. All communications are done
            telepathically and in the earth language appropriate to the listener.
            They also do not walk normally but have some energetic method of
            moving or hovering off the ground at times.  In addition, one of the
            issues in their visitations is procreation. They cannot procreate any
            longer and have mastered genetic and artificial womb technologies
            according to most reports. One of the reasons that they are here is
            to solve this dilemma through the use of human
            > > fertility.
            >
            > *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don't
            reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don't they? Or
            fallen angels---don't you think?
            >     And why would levitating beings travel in space ships?
            >
            > -starman



            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
            Unsubscribe:
            anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
            List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          • jla
            ... From: DRStarman2001@aol.com To: anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM Subject: Re: [anthroposophy] Phenomenon source: aliens &
            Message 5 of 23 , Jul 16, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
              Subject: Re: [anthroposophy] Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev

              In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:11:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, pacbay@... writes:

              > I have just re-read this post with some interest and asked where the beings mentioned actually "live" -certainly not in the subways of New York....

              *******Same place leprechauns do, I'd say.



              *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don't reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don't they? Or fallen angels---don't you think?
                  And why would levitating beings travel in space ships?

              -starman
              They have and can reproduce in a limited way  but cannot sustain their race, it is said, due to a defect in genetics and/or sexual forces. Just as in the future sexuality will end (Steiner said in about 5000 years!)for us, how will our human race continue? Another means will have to used to procreate or at least create infant bodies. This was mentioned in the History of the Contents lectures series, I recall, and I came upon it again in lecture recently.
               
              jeff



              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
              Unsubscribe:
              anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
              List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
            • studioeditions2002
              There are no theories referred to here, but reference and witnesses to observable phenomena. We have an obligation at all times to apply what esoteric
              Message 6 of 23 , Jul 17, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                There are no theories referred to here, but reference and witnesses
                to observable phenomena. We have an obligation at all times to apply
                what esoteric knowledge or experience we have acquired to what is
                happening in the here and now. What we have in our time is an
                escalation in tension between the forces of Christ and Anti-Christ.
                We cannot precisely rely on what was given in the early 20th century;
                the time to fall back on teachers, authorities and books ceases at
                some point and we must assess independently what is happening in our
                contemporary world and think and act accordingly. Much is very
                unpleasant, even ridiculous-sounding (so were the ovens in WWII,
                discovered after the fact), but that is the Nature of the Anti-
                Christ. Evil is not creative or original or very clever and at times
                is so obvious and stupid as to be unbelievable. It's not very
                difficult after all: Christ or not or the opposite? Does Christ live
                within the heart of John Edwards, or is Christ awakening in that
                heart? It is Christ in the etheric world who makes possible what John
                Edwards is accomplishing. Right in the here and now, the
                "entertainment industry" and off-shoots have discovered the "dead"
                are not dead after all. It's opening yet more floodgates.

                In regard to other issues occurring within this discussion group: it
                is better not to write about an individual in a publication because
                the point can always be made, and better made, without causing the
                enormous suffering to an individual and his followers. Why write a
                book pointedly about someone's flaws or failures? Something is
                clearly wrong in the motivation to this approach even though there
                may be truth in it. Have understanding and tolerance as to the stage
                someone is at... They are talking about Love at the Ark group... It
                is the Christ Who can help us to love the person and understand what
                stage they are at; to have tolerance. I was once awed by authority,
                such as the "Class Reader," and would have avoided a book on the word
                of that authority. I may have once been awed by the AP "star." We
                learn better, fortunately. As to the happenings in the AP Society, if
                they are thoughtless, careless, dangerous or corrupt, just don't give
                them your money or support. This seems to be a sinking boat, really,
                if it hasn't already gone under. Just accept and go on. Perhaps what
                Stanley Messenger has said about RS is correct: he'd presently like
                to be free of AP and the Society
                and go on....


                Martha
                --- In anthroposophy@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                > I continue to warn APs and others on the spiritual journey not to
                assume, project or mix theories in these areas. As I pointed out in
                the Andreev book, the similarities end quickly between his
                descriptions of sub humans and grays. The gray levitation ability are
                limited and infrequent by the way. Its a hyper etheric force it seems
                but not strong enough to propel them through space.
                >
                > .
                > There is an incredible knowledge gap between certain paranormal
                phenomena and esotericism at present and early 20th century claims
                may be outdated or not sufficient to the task. Whether for right or
                wrong reasons, one field is out pacing the other at least in the
                public arena.
                > Case in point: John Edward and Crossing Over show on Fox and the
                Sci-Fi channel. Is he a medium and as such and promoting false
                psychic ideas? Hardly. His vague perceptual abilities are often
                highly accurate concerning information and facts between the dead and
                the living. Some may say that he is being "used" by the dark forces
                to promote a spiritualistic form of work; and on the other hand he
                may be of great use and value and is the best we have now in bridging
                the gap between the living and the dead. He is not "materializing the
                dead" but trying to create a bridge of awareness between the living
                and the dead. Ahriman's work and appearance may also be in the midst
                of various forms of social and spiritual phenomena that he may not
                have anything to do with directly.
                >
                > Jeff
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > I haven't read the book by Andreev but appreciate the post making
                so
                > much clear from it... [I hope I am not repeating what may have
                > discussed earlier by this group.] I did read two books by
                Christopher
                > O'Brien titled The Mysterious Valley and Enter the Valley, in
                which
                > the author attempts to make sense of the cattle mutilations and
                other
                > peculiar phenomena in the area of the San Luis Valley, which is
                in
                > south & central Colorado, although he does not seem to be a
                Christian
                > or an esoteric Christian. These mutilations are not peculiar to
                this
                > area, but have occurred very frequently there. The cattle are
                found
                > with the reproductive systems having been rapidly bored out and
                > removed, as though with lasers. It has not occurred only with
                cattle;
                > humans, including a teen-aged girl, have been found in this
                > condition. There is also peculiar light phenomena, and seeming
                > "military" phenomena, such as hovering, noiseless and
                disappearing
                > helicopters, always yellow. All of these phenomena would seem to
                be
                > in preparation for Ahriman's incarnation in the west, and my own
                > educated guess is that this will occur between 2012 and 2033,
                with
                > 2033 a very significant year, in the western US. RS has said that
                > Ahriman wants to take over or tear out the instinctual or
                > reproductive life of human beings and use it; this ties in with
                what
                > is said about Andreev's visions in the post. South-central
                Colorado
                > is close to Trinity, which might be described as a hole opened up
                on
                > the surface of the Earth by the backward Archai or Asuras, the
                opened
                > pit out of which the demonic, Ahrimanic beings have emerged onto
                the
                > Earth's surface. I do believe that very dark forces are presently
                > secretly at work in Phoenix, Arizona, based on a brief but
                > unmistakable encounter with a satanic personality there.
                Christopher
                > O'Brien has recently connected these dark enterprises,
                spiritually,
                > with Meso-American practices of human sacrifices.
                >
                > Some of the UFO-based beings are not altogether evil or dark, but
                are
                > apparently "friendly."
                >
                > RS said that Ahriman in his incarnation would be a great magi or
                > magician, working wonders, and this "magic" can be seen in the
                UFO
                > phenomena (not to mention computers), such as the UFO reported by
                > three police departments independently in the northern midwest:
                the
                > UFO seen was described as being the size of a football field.
                From
                > all of this satanic magic, humanity can wrest much for his own
                > further development, including, apparently, secrets of hovering
                > spacecraft, levitation and the capacity for materialization and
                de-
                > materialization, as well as the computer marvels.
                >
                > Obviously, Osama Bin Laden is an instrument of Ahriman, and has
                said
                > expressly that his hope is to generate as much fear as possible
                among
                > Americans, and others, such as Israeli's, at this time. Ahriman
                feeds
                > on this type of fear and anxiety. All of this is preparation.
                >
                > I hope this contribution is helpful.
                >
                > Cordially,
                >
                > Martha
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In anthroposophy@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:
                > > In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:11:32 PM Eastern
                Standard
                > Time, pacbay@a... writes:
                > >
                > > > I have just re-read this post with some interest and asked
                where
                > the beings mentioned actually "live" -certainly not in the
                subways of
                > New York....
                > >
                > > *******Same place leprechauns do, I'd say.
                > >
                > > >
                > > > In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the
                ones
                > mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they
                could
                > not be same. In all reports both public and governmental, these
                short
                > gray beings do not talk!. In fact they barely have slits for
                mouths
                > from drawings and descriptions. All communications are done
                > telepathically and in the earth language appropriate to the
                listener.
                > They also do not walk normally but have some energetic method of
                > moving or hovering off the ground at times. In addition, one of
                the
                > issues in their visitations is procreation. They cannot procreate
                any
                > longer and have mastered genetic and artificial womb technologies
                > according to most reports. One of the reasons that they are here
                is
                > to solve this dilemma through the use of human
                > > > fertility.
                > >
                > > *******Beings that hover, communicate by telepathy and don't
                > reproduce sexually sound an awful lot like angels, don't they? Or
                > fallen angels---don't you think?
                > > And why would levitating beings travel in space ships?
                > >
                > > -starman
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                > ADVERTISEMENT
                >
                >
                >
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                > Unsubscribe:
                > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                > List owner: anthroposophy-owner@y...
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                Service.
              • Joel Wendt
                ... Dear Martha, I take you haven t read the book either, in which case your characterization why write a book pointedly about someone s flaws or failures
                Message 7 of 23 , Jul 17, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 09:02, studioeditions2002 wrote:
                  > In regard to other issues occurring within this discussion group: it
                  > is better not to write about an individual in a publication because
                  > the point can always be made, and better made, without causing the
                  > enormous suffering to an individual and his followers. Why write a
                  > book pointedly about someone's flaws or failures? Something is
                  > clearly wrong in the motivation to this approach even though there
                  > may be truth in it.

                  Dear Martha,

                  I take you haven't read the book either, in which case your
                  characterization "why write a book pointedly about someone's flaws or
                  failures" doesn't really wash.

                  SOP is only the subject of G's book to the extent that he has inserted
                  his personality into his own writings, and to the extent that there is a
                  belief within wide segments of the AS regarding the quality of that
                  work.

                  You assume a motive "against" someone, when the real motive is to try
                  to make whole what has suffered because of someone's excesses.

                  What is being made whole is the integrity of the idea of "evolution of
                  conscious" in its details as are needed by those striving modern souls.
                  That idea, given as a gift from Steiner and the spiritual beings who
                  worked with him, is central for people who want to understand either
                  their own soul life in the present or all the social implications of
                  this dynamic process as it effects modern life from behind the scenes -
                  from the invisible.

                  SOP is teaching a serious distortion of this idea. To let that pass,
                  simply on the basis that someone's feelings might be hurt, or SOP's
                  followers might have to wake from their slumbers is no reason at all.
                  Would you have Christ not disturb the money changers in the Temple,
                  because it makes a mess and a loud noise?

                  fiery regards,
                  joel
                • studioeditions2002
                  Children, love one another, quoth John. Will you reach an age when you forget about SOP and G, or take it to your grave? Fiery regards, Martha ... it ...
                  Message 8 of 23 , Jul 17, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Children, love one another," quoth John. Will you reach an age when
                    you forget about SOP and G, or take it to your grave?

                    Fiery regards,

                    Martha

                    --- In anthroposophy@y..., Joel Wendt <hermit@t...> wrote:
                    > On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 09:02, studioeditions2002 wrote:
                    > > In regard to other issues occurring within this discussion group:
                    it
                    > > is better not to write about an individual in a publication
                    because
                    > > the point can always be made, and better made, without causing
                    the
                    > > enormous suffering to an individual and his followers. Why write
                    a
                    > > book pointedly about someone's flaws or failures? Something is
                    > > clearly wrong in the motivation to this approach even though
                    there
                    > > may be truth in it.
                    >
                    > Dear Martha,
                    >
                    > I take you haven't read the book either, in which case your
                    > characterization "why write a book pointedly about someone's flaws
                    or
                    > failures" doesn't really wash.
                    >
                    > SOP is only the subject of G's book to the extent that he has
                    inserted
                    > his personality into his own writings, and to the extent that there
                    is a
                    > belief within wide segments of the AS regarding the quality of that
                    > work.
                    >
                    > You assume a motive "against" someone, when the real motive
                    is to try
                    > to make whole what has suffered because of someone's excesses.
                    >
                    > What is being made whole is the integrity of the idea of
                    "evolution of
                    > conscious" in its details as are needed by those striving modern
                    souls.
                    > That idea, given as a gift from Steiner and the spiritual beings who
                    > worked with him, is central for people who want to understand either
                    > their own soul life in the present or all the social implications of
                    > this dynamic process as it effects modern life from behind the
                    scenes -
                    > from the invisible.
                    >
                    > SOP is teaching a serious distortion of this idea. To let
                    that pass,
                    > simply on the basis that someone's feelings might be hurt, or SOP's
                    > followers might have to wake from their slumbers is no reason at
                    all.
                    > Would you have Christ not disturb the money changers in the Temple,
                    > because it makes a mess and a loud noise?
                    >
                    > fiery regards,
                    > joel
                  • Sieglunda
                    Martha, I m beginning to wonder WHO S grave. There are ideas, which we all have, share and discuss...then there are fanatics who expect ALL to share their
                    Message 9 of 23 , Jul 17, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Martha, I'm beginning to wonder WHO'S grave. There are ideas, which we all
                      have, share and discuss...then there are fanatics who expect ALL to share
                      their ideas.

                      [psssst - use your mailer's filter...my ulcer might be healing, after all.
                      :) ]

                      Sieglunda

                      > "Children, love one another," quoth John. Will you reach an age when
                      > you forget about SOP and G, or take it to your grave?
                      >
                      > Fiery regards,
                      >
                      > Martha
                    • studioeditions2002
                      God bless you, Sieglunda. And SOP, and G (wherever you both are). ... we all ... share ... after all. ... when
                      Message 10 of 23 , Jul 17, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        God bless you, Sieglunda. And SOP, and G (wherever you both are).

                        :) M.
                        --- In anthroposophy@y..., "Sieglunda" <sieglunda@e...> wrote:
                        > Martha, I'm beginning to wonder WHO'S grave. There are ideas, which
                        we all
                        > have, share and discuss...then there are fanatics who expect ALL to
                        share
                        > their ideas.
                        >
                        > [psssst - use your mailer's filter...my ulcer might be healing,
                        after all.
                        > :) ]
                        >
                        > Sieglunda
                        >
                        > > "Children, love one another," quoth John. Will you reach an age
                        when
                        > > you forget about SOP and G, or take it to your grave?
                        > >
                        > > Fiery regards,
                        > >
                        > > Martha
                      • jla
                        Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure. And I think you are right about this.
                        Message 11 of 23 , Jul 23, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure.
                           
                          And I think you are right about this. Many Ufologists pooh pooh metaphysical explanations because it violates some vaulted idea of science. To many of them, ufo phenomena can be explained as evolutionary extensions  similar to what  we are going through now. And its certainly conceivable that in the vast cosmos there must be more physical worlds than just the earth. In this regard, imagine were we will be in 500 or 5000 years if things continue as they have. We have gone from biplanes to space travel in just 50 years. If the space shuttle can now go back in forth into space with ease, what will things be like in another 50 years. If we do not destroy ourselves first, surely the technology will be created to travel to any of the planets and maybe beyond in that time. Thus ufo proponents have a hard time imagining or believing in non physical beings as part of the picture.
                           
                          I have a friend by the way in the field. She has been a lecturer for many years on the subject. She is also convinced that some of the grays are not physical but from another dimension entirely. The problem again is: there is ample antidotal evidence that some are physical and we know it. Some have  been examined and probed by the military and may actually be "working" with the government in deep secret. As hard as this is to swallow, there are available video interviews of people who are no longer involved in secret projects who have actually seen these beings walking around and interacting with military personnel in research facilities. (see: Bob Lazar, Jesse Marcel, and Lt.Col. Corso).
                           
                           
                          Jeff
                          -----
                           
                           Original Message -----
                          Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:10 PM
                          Subject: [anthroposophy] re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev


                          Jeff:

                          In your post reply you offered
                          some "on-target" pondering about...

                          > " ....where the beings mentioned (do) actually "live" –
                          certainly
                          not in the subways of New York....
                          >
                          >  In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the ones
                          mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they
                          could not be same. In all reports both public and governmental,
                          these short gray beings do not talk!.
                          >
                          > In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and
                          descriptions.
                          >
                          > All communications are done telepathically and in the earth
                          language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk
                          normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering
                          off the ground at times.
                          >
                          > In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is procreation.
                          They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic
                          and artificial womb technologies according to most reports.
                          >
                          > One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this dilemma
                          through the use of human fertility...

                          = = = = = = = = = =

                          Jeff:

                          My informal perspective – fully in accord
                          with prior discussions here –  is that these
                          creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
                          Andreev's physically precise descriptions).

                          Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
                          residing in a lower level of "physical"
                          – a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical – 
                          than even where we ourselves physically
                          reside.

                          I think this would comport with RS'
                          implicit/explicit statements about the
                          existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.

                          Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
                          than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
                          types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
                          the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
                          described...including having some
                          physical effects in our domain.

                          = = = = = = = = = = = =

                          When I read "Rose of the World,"
                          I was truly impressed to see how
                          Andreev addressed – decades in
                          advance – the characteristics and
                          intentions ("inter-mating" issue, etc.)
                          as LATER came to the fore in the
                          personal accounts of the "honest"
                          but misguided "I was abducted" folks.

                          = = = = = = = = = = = =

                          Regards (and thanks),

                          Lightsearcher1












                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                          Unsubscribe:
                          anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                          List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                        • studioeditions2002
                          While studying Tudor Pole, I came across a question he answered about UFO s. He said that some were indeed physical or actual, and were appearing (especially
                          Message 12 of 23 , Jul 24, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            While studying Tudor Pole, I came across a question he answered about
                            UFO's. He said that some were indeed physical or actual, and were
                            appearing (especially from the mid-forties through the fifties) in
                            response to the threat to the universe from nuclear bombs; the beings
                            were not only alarmed and concerned that humanity might destroy their
                            beautiful blue planet, but also because what happened on Earth would
                            effect the entire universe. The Roswell incidents are interesting in
                            view of this.

                            Didn't RS state in a lecture that there would be actual visitations
                            of beings from other planets in the near future, and how they would
                            be received by us would determine the course of our future?

                            Martha


                            --
                            - In anthroposophy@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                            > Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the
                            book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure.
                            >
                            > And I think you are right about this. Many Ufologists pooh pooh
                            metaphysical explanations because it violates some vaulted idea of
                            science. To many of them, ufo phenomena can be explained as
                            evolutionary extensions similar to what we are going through now.
                            And its certainly conceivable that in the vast cosmos there must be
                            more physical worlds than just the earth. In this regard, imagine
                            were we will be in 500 or 5000 years if things continue as they have.
                            We have gone from biplanes to space travel in just 50 years. If the
                            space shuttle can now go back in forth into space with ease, what
                            will things be like in another 50 years. If we do not destroy
                            ourselves first, surely the technology will be created to travel to
                            any of the planets and maybe beyond in that time. Thus ufo proponents
                            have a hard time imagining or believing in non physical beings as
                            part of the picture.
                            >
                            > I have a friend by the way in the field. She has been a lecturer
                            for many years on the subject. She is also convinced that some of the
                            grays are not physical but from another dimension entirely. The
                            problem again is: there is ample antidotal evidence that some are
                            physical and we know it. Some have been examined and probed by the
                            military and may actually be "working" with the government in deep
                            secret. As hard as this is to swallow, there are available video
                            interviews of people who are no longer involved in secret projects
                            who have actually seen these beings walking around and interacting
                            with military personnel in research facilities. (see: Bob Lazar,
                            Jesse Marcel, and Lt.Col. Corso).
                            >
                            >
                            > Jeff
                            > -----
                            >
                            > Original Message -----
                            > From: lightsearcher1
                            > To: anthroposophy@y...
                            > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:10 PM
                            > Subject: [anthroposophy] re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's
                            and Andreev
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Jeff:
                            >
                            > In your post reply you offered
                            > some "on-target" pondering about...
                            >
                            > > " ....where the beings mentioned (do) actually "live" -
                            > certainly
                            > not in the subways of New York....
                            > >
                            > > In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the ones
                            > mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but they
                            > could not be same. In all reports both public and governmental,
                            > these short gray beings do not talk!.
                            > >
                            > > In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and
                            > descriptions.
                            > >
                            > > All communications are done telepathically and in the earth
                            > language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk
                            > normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering
                            > off the ground at times.
                            > >
                            > > In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is
                            procreation.
                            > They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic
                            > and artificial womb technologies according to most reports.
                            > >
                            > > One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this dilemma
                            > through the use of human fertility...
                            >
                            > = = = = = = = = = =
                            >
                            > Jeff:
                            >
                            > My informal perspective - fully in accord
                            > with prior discussions here - is that these
                            > creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
                            > Andreev's physically precise descriptions).
                            >
                            > Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
                            > residing in a lower level of "physical"
                            > - a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical -
                            > than even where we ourselves physically
                            > reside.
                            >
                            > I think this would comport with RS'
                            > implicit/explicit statements about the
                            > existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.
                            >
                            > Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
                            > than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
                            > types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
                            > the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
                            > described...including having some
                            > physical effects in our domain.
                            >
                            > = = = = = = = = = = = =
                            >
                            > When I read "Rose of the World,"
                            > I was truly impressed to see how
                            > Andreev addressed - decades in
                            > advance - the characteristics and
                            > intentions ("inter-mating" issue, etc.)
                            > as LATER came to the fore in the
                            > personal accounts of the "honest"
                            > but misguided "I was abducted" folks.
                            >
                            > = = = = = = = = = = = =
                            >
                            > Regards (and thanks),
                            >
                            > Lightsearcher1
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                            > ADVERTISEMENT
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                            > Unsubscribe:
                            > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                            > List owner: anthroposophy-owner@y...
                            >
                            >
                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                            Service.
                          • jla
                            Very good point and one that I missed. Having a physical body and principle does not necessarily mean mineral organic body! Jeff ... From:
                            Message 13 of 23 , Jul 27, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Very good point and one that I missed. Having a "physical body and principle" does not necessarily mean mineral organic body!
                               
                              Jeff
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:31 PM
                              Subject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev

                              The vocabulary we use itself is not clear; what is meant
                              by "spiritual" beings, and what is meant by "physical" beings? One
                              thing doctor Steiner taught me is that physical is not a synonym of
                              mineral density, for we did have a physical body as early as the
                              Saturn incarnation of the Earth. We should define some concepts.

                              The only things Steiner mentionned about beings on other planets that
                              I know of, is that he indirectly says that there are still some human
                              beings on Saturn (Occult Science).

                              Marc



                              --- In anthroposophy@y..., "VALENTINA BRUNETTI" <okcgbr@t...> wrote:
                              > Dear Martha,
                              > I've found very puzzling your statements on RS's insights
                              about "actual
                              > beings" who would visit the Eart in future..  Can you be so kind to
                              quote
                              > exactly the source?
                              > As I know, after having studied Steiner's work for 30 years , he
                              never
                              > talked about "dense-physical-mineral-sensible beings as we are" on
                              the other
                              > planets
                              > As you know this topic has been discussed for a while on the list
                              and I have
                              > a very different insight about it from others' (f.i. Jeff) but I'm 
                              always
                              > interested in learning new things.........
                              > Tks in advance
                              > Andrea
                              > ----- Original Message -----
                              > From: studioeditions2002 <tcpubs@m...>
                              > To: <anthroposophy@y...>
                              > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 8:52 PM
                              > Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's
                              and Andreev
                              >
                              >
                              > > While studying Tudor Pole, I came across a question he answered
                              about
                              > > UFO's. He said that some were indeed physical or actual, and were
                              > > appearing (especially from the mid-forties through the fifties) in
                              > > response to the threat to the universe from nuclear bombs; the
                              beings
                              > > were not only alarmed and concerned that humanity might destroy
                              their
                              > > beautiful blue planet, but also because what happened on Earth
                              would
                              > > effect the entire universe. The Roswell incidents are interesting
                              in
                              > > view of this.
                              > >
                              > > Didn't RS state in a lecture that there would be actual
                              visitations
                              > > of beings from other planets in the near future, and how they
                              would
                              > > be received by us would determine the course of our future?
                              > >
                              > > Martha
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > --
                              > > - In anthroposophy@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                              > > > Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the
                              > > book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure.
                              > > >
                              > > > And I think you are right about this. Many Ufologists pooh pooh
                              > > metaphysical explanations because it violates some vaulted idea of
                              > > science. To many of them, ufo phenomena can be explained as
                              > > evolutionary extensions  similar to what  we are going through
                              now.
                              > > And its certainly conceivable that in the vast cosmos there must
                              be
                              > > more physical worlds than just the earth. In this regard, imagine
                              > > were we will be in 500 or 5000 years if things continue as they
                              have.
                              > > We have gone from biplanes to space travel in just 50 years. If
                              the
                              > > space shuttle can now go back in forth into space with ease, what
                              > > will things be like in another 50 years. If we do not destroy
                              > > ourselves first, surely the technology will be created to travel
                              to
                              > > any of the planets and maybe beyond in that time. Thus ufo
                              proponents
                              > > have a hard time imagining or believing in non physical beings as
                              > > part of the picture.
                              > > >
                              > > > I have a friend by the way in the field. She has been a lecturer
                              > > for many years on the subject. She is also convinced that some of
                              the
                              > > grays are not physical but from another dimension entirely. The
                              > > problem again is: there is ample antidotal evidence that some are
                              > > physical and we know it. Some have  been examined and probed by
                              the
                              > > military and may actually be "working" with the government in deep
                              > > secret. As hard as this is to swallow, there are available video
                              > > interviews of people who are no longer involved in secret projects
                              > > who have actually seen these beings walking around and interacting
                              > > with military personnel in research facilities. (see: Bob Lazar,
                              > > Jesse Marcel, and Lt.Col. Corso).
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > Jeff
                              > > > -----
                              > > >
                              > > >  Original Message -----
                              > > >   From: lightsearcher1
                              > > >   To: anthroposophy@y...
                              > > >   Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:10 PM
                              > > >   Subject: [anthroposophy] re: Phenomenon source: aliens &
                              U.F.O's
                              > > and Andreev
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >   Jeff:
                              > > >
                              > > >   In your post reply you offered
                              > > >   some "on-target" pondering about...
                              > > >
                              > > >   > " ....where the beings mentioned (do) actually "live" -
                              > > >   certainly
                              > > >   not in the subways of New York....
                              > > >   >
                              > > >   >  In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the
                              ones
                              > > >   mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but
                              they
                              > > >   could not be same. In all reports both public and
                              governmental,
                              > > >   these short gray beings do not talk!.
                              > > >   >
                              > > >   > In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and
                              > > >   descriptions.
                              > > >   >
                              > > >   > All communications are done telepathically and in the earth
                              > > >   language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk
                              > > >   normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering
                              > > >   off the ground at times.
                              > > >   >
                              > > >   > In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is
                              > > procreation.
                              > > >   They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic
                              > > >   and artificial womb technologies according to most reports.
                              > > >   >
                              > > >   > One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this
                              dilemma
                              > > >   through the use of human fertility...
                              > > >
                              > > >   = = = = = = = = = =
                              > > >
                              > > >   Jeff:
                              > > >
                              > > >   My informal perspective - fully in accord
                              > > >   with prior discussions here -  is that these
                              > > >   creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
                              > > >   Andreev's physically precise descriptions).
                              > > >
                              > > >   Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
                              > > >   residing in a lower level of "physical"
                              > > >   - a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical -
                              > > >   than even where we ourselves physically
                              > > >   reside.
                              > > >
                              > > >   I think this would comport with RS'
                              > > >   implicit/explicit statements about the
                              > > >   existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.
                              > > >
                              > > >   Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
                              > > >   than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
                              > > >   types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
                              > > >   the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
                              > > >   described...including having some
                              > > >   physical effects in our domain.
                              > > >
                              > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                              > > >
                              > > >   When I read "Rose of the World,"
                              > > >   I was truly impressed to see how
                              > > >   Andreev addressed - decades in
                              > > >   advance - the characteristics and
                              > > >   intentions ("inter-mating" issue, etc.)
                              > > >   as LATER came to the fore in the
                              > > >   personal accounts of the "honest"
                              > > >   but misguided "I was abducted" folks.
                              > > >
                              > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                              > > >
                              > > >   Regards (and thanks),
                              > > >
                              > > >   Lightsearcher1
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                              > > >               ADVERTISEMENT
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                              > > >   Unsubscribe:
                              > > >   anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                              > > >   List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                              > > Service.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                              > > Unsubscribe:
                              > > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                              > > List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >



                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                              Unsubscribe:
                              anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                              List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                            • elf
                              My experience of extra terrestials (although i am a hybrid fairy / alien myself that is not what I am referring to but contact with another consciousness) The
                              Message 14 of 23 , Jul 27, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment

                                My experience of extra terrestials (although i am a hybrid fairy / alien myself that is not what I am referring to but contact with another consciousness)

                                The world has been ruled by two major factors in recent history, fear and greed.

                                Opposite sides of the same coin perhaps.  This fear has been so deeply rooted in the dna and the subconscious that part of :their: work is the activation, recognition and freedom from such conscious terror and unconscious terror

                                now put that in ya pipes and smoke it fastly

                                 

                                jla wrote:

                                Very good point and one that I missed. Having a "physical body and principle" does not necessarily mean mineral organic body!
                                 
                                Jeff
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:31 PM
                                Subject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev

                                The vocabulary we use itself is not clear; what is meant
                                by "spiritual" beings, and what is meant by "physical" beings? One
                                thing doctor Steiner taught me is that physical is not a synonym of
                                mineral density, for we did have a physical body as early as the
                                Saturn incarnation of the Earth. We should define some concepts.

                                The only things Steiner mentionned about beings on other planets that
                                I know of, is that he indirectly says that there are still some human
                                beings on Saturn (Occult Science).

                                Marc



                                --- In anthroposophy@y..., "VALENTINA BRUNETTI" <okcgbr@t...> wrote:
                                > Dear Martha,
                                > I've found very puzzling your statements on RS's insights
                                about "actual
                                > beings" who would visit the Eart in future..  Can you be so kind to
                                quote
                                > exactly the source?
                                > As I know, after having studied Steiner's work for 30 years , he
                                never
                                > talked about "dense-physical-mineral-sensible beings as we are" on
                                the other
                                > planets
                                > As you know this topic has been discussed for a while on the list
                                and I have
                                > a very different insight about it from others' (f.i. Jeff) but I'm 
                                always
                                > interested in learning new things.........
                                > Tks in advance
                                > Andrea
                                > ----- Original Message -----
                                > From: studioeditions2002 <tcpubs@m...>
                                > To: <anthroposophy@y...>
                                > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 8:52 PM
                                > Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's
                                and Andreev
                                >
                                >
                                > > While studying Tudor Pole, I came across a question he answered
                                about
                                > > UFO's. He said that some were indeed physical or actual, and were
                                > > appearing (especially from the mid-forties through the fifties) in
                                > > response to the threat to the universe from nuclear bombs; the
                                beings
                                > > were not only alarmed and concerned that humanity might destroy
                                their
                                > > beautiful blue planet, but also because what happened on Earth
                                would
                                > > effect the entire universe. The Roswell incidents are interesting
                                in
                                > > view of this.
                                > >
                                > > Didn't RS state in a lecture that there would be actual
                                visitations
                                > > of beings from other planets in the near future, and how they
                                would
                                > > be received by us would determine the course of our future?
                                > >
                                > > Martha
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > --
                                > > - In anthroposophy@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                                > > > Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the
                                > > book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure.
                                > > >
                                > > > And I think you are right about this. Many Ufologists pooh pooh
                                > > metaphysical explanations because it violates some vaulted idea of
                                > > science. To many of them, ufo phenomena can be explained as
                                > > evolutionary extensions  similar to what  we are going through
                                now.
                                > > And its certainly conceivable that in the vast cosmos there must
                                be
                                > > more physical worlds than just the earth. In this regard, imagine
                                > > were we will be in 500 or 5000 years if things continue as they
                                have.
                                > > We have gone from biplanes to space travel in just 50 years. If
                                the
                                > > space shuttle can now go back in forth into space with ease, what
                                > > will things be like in another 50 years. If we do not destroy
                                > > ourselves first, surely the technology will be created to travel
                                to
                                > > any of the planets and maybe beyond in that time. Thus ufo
                                proponents
                                > > have a hard time imagining or believing in non physical beings as
                                > > part of the picture.
                                > > >
                                > > > I have a friend by the way in the field. She has been a lecturer
                                > > for many years on the subject. She is also convinced that some of
                                the
                                > > grays are not physical but from another dimension entirely. The
                                > > problem again is: there is ample antidotal evidence that some are
                                > > physical and we know it. Some have  been examined and probed by
                                the
                                > > military and may actually be "working" with the government in deep
                                > > secret. As hard as this is to swallow, there are available video
                                > > interviews of people who are no longer involved in secret projects
                                > > who have actually seen these beings walking around and interacting
                                > > with military personnel in research facilities. (see: Bob Lazar,
                                > > Jesse Marcel, and Lt.Col. Corso).
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > Jeff
                                > > > -----
                                > > >
                                > > >  Original Message -----
                                > > >   From: lightsearcher1
                                > > >   To: anthroposophy@y...
                                > > >   Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:10 PM
                                > > >   Subject: [anthroposophy] re: Phenomenon source: aliens &
                                U.F.O's
                                > > and Andreev
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >   Jeff:
                                > > >
                                > > >   In your post reply you offered
                                > > >   some "on-target" pondering about...
                                > > >
                                > > >   > " ....where the beings mentioned (do) actually "live" -
                                > > >   certainly
                                > > >   not in the subways of New York....
                                > > >   >
                                > > >   >  In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the
                                ones
                                > > >   mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but
                                they
                                > > >   could not be same. In all reports both public and
                                governmental,
                                > > >   these short gray beings do not talk!.
                                > > >   >
                                > > >   > In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and
                                > > >   descriptions.
                                > > >   >
                                > > >   > All communications are done telepathically and in the earth
                                > > >   language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk
                                > > >   normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering
                                > > >   off the ground at times.
                                > > >   >
                                > > >   > In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is
                                > > procreation.
                                > > >   They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic
                                > > >   and artificial womb technologies according to most reports.
                                > > >   >
                                > > >   > One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this
                                dilemma
                                > > >   through the use of human fertility...
                                > > >
                                > > >   = = = = = = = = = =
                                > > >
                                > > >   Jeff:
                                > > >
                                > > >   My informal perspective - fully in accord
                                > > >   with prior discussions here -  is that these
                                > > >   creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
                                > > >   Andreev's physically precise descriptions).
                                > > >
                                > > >   Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
                                > > >   residing in a lower level of "physical"
                                > > >   - a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical -
                                > > >   than even where we ourselves physically
                                > > >   reside.
                                > > >
                                > > >   I think this would comport with RS'
                                > > >   implicit/explicit statements about the
                                > > >   existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.
                                > > >
                                > > >   Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
                                > > >   than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
                                > > >   types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
                                > > >   the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
                                > > >   described...including having some
                                > > >   physical effects in our domain.
                                > > >
                                > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                                > > >
                                > > >   When I read "Rose of the World,"
                                > > >   I was truly impressed to see how
                                > > >   Andreev addressed - decades in
                                > > >   advance - the characteristics and
                                > > >   intentions ("inter-mating" issue, etc.)
                                > > >   as LATER came to the fore in the
                                > > >   personal accounts of the "honest"
                                > > >   but misguided "I was abducted" folks.
                                > > >
                                > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                                > > >
                                > > >   Regards (and thanks),
                                > > >
                                > > >   Lightsearcher1
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                > > >               ADVERTISEMENT
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                > > >   Unsubscribe:
                                > > >   anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                > > >   List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                > > Service.
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                > > Unsubscribe:
                                > > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                > > List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >



                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                Unsubscribe:
                                anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                Unsubscribe:
                                anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                Do You Yahoo!?
                                Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

                              • elf
                                Truth of course cannot be implied - only experienced. Mind is not capable of knowing everything fully; it s always knowing something which is equal to knowing
                                Message 15 of 23 , Jul 27, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment

                                  Truth of course cannot be implied - only experienced.

                                  Mind is not capable
                                  of knowing everything
                                  fully;
                                  it's always knowing something
                                  which is equal
                                  to knowing nothing.

                                  Partial knowledge
                                  is no knowledge
                                  and any knowledge
                                  devoid of absoluteness
                                  doesn't free us.

                                  and thats the beginnin and end of that. 

                                   elf wrote:

                                  My experience of extra terrestials (although i am a hybrid fairy / alien myself that is not what I am referring to but contact with another consciousness)

                                  The world has been ruled by two major factors in recent history, fear and greed.

                                  Opposite sides of the same coin perhaps.  This fear has been so deeply rooted in the dna and the subconscious that part of :their: work is the activation, recognition and freedom from such conscious terror and unconscious terror

                                  now put that in ya pipes and smoke it fastly

                                  jla wrote:

                                  Very good point and one that I missed. Having a "physical body and principle" does not necessarily mean mineral organic body!
                                   
                                  Jeff
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:31 PM
                                  Subject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev

                                  The vocabulary we use itself is not clear; what is meant
                                  by "spiritual" beings, and what is meant by "physical" beings? One
                                  thing doctor Steiner taught me is that physical is not a synonym of
                                  mineral density, for we did have a physical body as early as the
                                  Saturn incarnation of the Earth. We should define some concepts.

                                  The only things Steiner mentionned about beings on other planets that
                                  I know of, is that he indirectly says that there are still some human
                                  beings on Saturn (Occult Science).

                                  Marc



                                  --- In anthroposophy@y..., "VALENTINA BRUNETTI" <okcgbr@t...> wrote:
                                  > Dear Martha,
                                  > I've found very puzzling your statements on RS's insights
                                  about "actual
                                  > beings" who would visit the Eart in future..  Can you be so kind to
                                  quote
                                  > exactly the source?
                                  > As I know, after having studied Steiner's work for 30 years , he
                                  never
                                  > talked about "dense-physical-mineral-sensible beings as we are" on
                                  the other
                                  > planets
                                  > As you know this topic has been discussed for a while on the list
                                  and I have
                                  > a very different insight about it from others' (f.i. Jeff) but I'm 
                                  always
                                  > interested in learning new things.........
                                  > Tks in advance
                                  > Andrea
                                  > ----- Original Message -----
                                  > From: studioeditions2002 <tcpubs@m...>
                                  > To: <anthroposophy@y...>
                                  > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 8:52 PM
                                  > Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's
                                  and Andreev
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > > While studying Tudor Pole, I came across a question he answered
                                  about
                                  > > UFO's. He said that some were indeed physical or actual, and were
                                  > > appearing (especially from the mid-forties through the fifties) in
                                  > > response to the threat to the universe from nuclear bombs; the
                                  beings
                                  > > were not only alarmed and concerned that humanity might destroy
                                  their
                                  > > beautiful blue planet, but also because what happened on Earth
                                  would
                                  > > effect the entire universe. The Roswell incidents are interesting
                                  in
                                  > > view of this.
                                  > >
                                  > > Didn't RS state in a lecture that there would be actual
                                  visitations
                                  > > of beings from other planets in the near future, and how they
                                  would
                                  > > be received by us would determine the course of our future?
                                  > >
                                  > > Martha
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > --
                                  > > - In anthroposophy@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                                  > > > Based on this discussion and your comments, I just received the
                                  > > book by mail and will read it. More later, I am sure.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > And I think you are right about this. Many Ufologists pooh pooh
                                  > > metaphysical explanations because it violates some vaulted idea of
                                  > > science. To many of them, ufo phenomena can be explained as
                                  > > evolutionary extensions  similar to what  we are going through
                                  now.
                                  > > And its certainly conceivable that in the vast cosmos there must
                                  be
                                  > > more physical worlds than just the earth. In this regard, imagine
                                  > > were we will be in 500 or 5000 years if things continue as they
                                  have.
                                  > > We have gone from biplanes to space travel in just 50 years. If
                                  the
                                  > > space shuttle can now go back in forth into space with ease, what
                                  > > will things be like in another 50 years. If we do not destroy
                                  > > ourselves first, surely the technology will be created to travel
                                  to
                                  > > any of the planets and maybe beyond in that time. Thus ufo
                                  proponents
                                  > > have a hard time imagining or believing in non physical beings as
                                  > > part of the picture.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I have a friend by the way in the field. She has been a lecturer
                                  > > for many years on the subject. She is also convinced that some of
                                  the
                                  > > grays are not physical but from another dimension entirely. The
                                  > > problem again is: there is ample antidotal evidence that some are
                                  > > physical and we know it. Some have  been examined and probed by
                                  the
                                  > > military and may actually be "working" with the government in deep
                                  > > secret. As hard as this is to swallow, there are available video
                                  > > interviews of people who are no longer involved in secret projects
                                  > > who have actually seen these beings walking around and interacting
                                  > > with military personnel in research facilities. (see: Bob Lazar,
                                  > > Jesse Marcel, and Lt.Col. Corso).
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Jeff
                                  > > > -----
                                  > > >
                                  > > >  Original Message -----
                                  > > >   From: lightsearcher1
                                  > > >   To: anthroposophy@y...
                                  > > >   Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:10 PM
                                  > > >   Subject: [anthroposophy] re: Phenomenon source: aliens &
                                  U.F.O's
                                  > > and Andreev
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Jeff:
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   In your post reply you offered
                                  > > >   some "on-target" pondering about...
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   > " ....where the beings mentioned (do) actually "live" -
                                  > > >   certainly
                                  > > >   not in the subways of New York....
                                  > > >   >
                                  > > >   >  In addition, the proposition that they may indeed be the
                                  ones
                                  > > >   mentioned as the "grays" in UFO literature is enticing but
                                  they
                                  > > >   could not be same. In all reports both public and
                                  governmental,
                                  > > >   these short gray beings do not talk!.
                                  > > >   >
                                  > > >   > In fact they barely have slits for mouths from drawings and
                                  > > >   descriptions.
                                  > > >   >
                                  > > >   > All communications are done telepathically and in the earth
                                  > > >   language appropriate to the listener. They also do not walk
                                  > > >   normally but have some energetic method of moving or hovering
                                  > > >   off the ground at times.
                                  > > >   >
                                  > > >   > In addition, one of the issues in their visitations is
                                  > > procreation.
                                  > > >   They cannot procreate any longer and have mastered genetic
                                  > > >   and artificial womb technologies according to most reports.
                                  > > >   >
                                  > > >   > One of the reasons that they are here is to solve this
                                  dilemma
                                  > > >   through the use of human fertility...
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   = = = = = = = = = =
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Jeff:
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   My informal perspective - fully in accord
                                  > > >   with prior discussions here -  is that these
                                  > > >   creatures are not "physical" beings (despite
                                  > > >   Andreev's physically precise descriptions).
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Instead, they would be SPIRIT beings
                                  > > >   residing in a lower level of "physical"
                                  > > >   - a spiritual, nay, sub-spiritual physical -
                                  > > >   than even where we ourselves physically
                                  > > >   reside.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   I think this would comport with RS'
                                  > > >   implicit/explicit statements about the
                                  > > >   existence of "lower-than-physical" realms.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Residing in a spiritual mode "more physical
                                  > > >   than physical," they would be Ahrimanic
                                  > > >   types with the "tentative" capacity to do all
                                  > > >   the "physical sounding" stuff Andreev
                                  > > >   described...including having some
                                  > > >   physical effects in our domain.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   When I read "Rose of the World,"
                                  > > >   I was truly impressed to see how
                                  > > >   Andreev addressed - decades in
                                  > > >   advance - the characteristics and
                                  > > >   intentions ("inter-mating" issue, etc.)
                                  > > >   as LATER came to the fore in the
                                  > > >   personal accounts of the "honest"
                                  > > >   but misguided "I was abducted" folks.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   = = = = = = = = = = = =
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Regards (and thanks),
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Lightsearcher1
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                  > > >               ADVERTISEMENT
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                  > > >   Unsubscribe:
                                  > > >   anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                  > > >   List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                  > > Service.
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                  > > Unsubscribe:
                                  > > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                  > > List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >



                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                  Unsubscribe:
                                  anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                  List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                  Unsubscribe:
                                  anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                  List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                  Do You Yahoo!?
                                  Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                  Unsubscribe:
                                  anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                  List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                  Do You Yahoo!?
                                  Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes

                                • Paul Newton
                                  Marc, thanks for your reply to my questions. I referred to remarks that I believe Dr Steiner made to the workmen at the Goetheanum. I believe he was asked
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Jul 30, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Marc, thanks for your reply to my questions.
                                     
                                    I referred to remarks that I believe Dr Steiner made to the workmen at the Goetheanum. I believe he was asked about the danger of a collision between Mars and the Earth. He said not to worry, that it wasn't about to happen and that Mars is not densely physical anyway. I read about this years ago in the then journal of the AS in GB (thought I had it, but can't find it). There was a discussion there as to whether this meant that Steiner was just plain wrong or whether changes might have occurred to the physical substance of the planet, perhaps due to the materialistic thoughts of the human race. That's my recollection, at least. Perhaps someone out there has the relevant lecture to the workmen?
                                     
                                    I found what you had to say about the unsettled nature of modern dating of fossils and the limitations of carbon dating extremely interesting. (I had felt that carbon-dating could be allowing us to make false assumptions about geological age, but I had assumed that its validity was not contested within the scientific community).  Can you give us references for the scientific debate about these things? Also, for what you said about the atomic clock.
                                     
                                    Paul,
                                    on a sunny day in Wisconsin, USA
                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: utopia_planetia_2000
                                    Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 8:55 PM
                                    To: anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev
                                     
                                    > 1/ Isn't it the case that Dr Steiner said (to the Workmen at the
                                    Goetheanum, I believe) that Mars too is non-mineral, and hasn't that
                                    been proved to be false? (I have seen it suggested that Mars became
                                    mineralized since the 1920's: what do you think?).

                                    Maybe I don't have enough background to understand what you mean
                                    by "became mineralized". What became mineralized? The inhabitants on
                                    the etheric or astral level?
                                    >
                                    > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of world
                                    evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly of
                                    geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?

                                    The only way I reconciled both is by knowing as much as I could of
                                    both and seeing where they agree. Fossil records do not disagree with
                                    Steiner's akashic investigations. Animals and lower life forms came
                                    to mineral density much earlier than humans. The datation of fossils
                                    is still an ongoing debate in the scientific community. Only a few
                                    weeks ago, sedimental strata are being reassessed in term of age, in
                                    the range or million of years. Carbon fourteen datation can only be
                                    precise for determining the age of things not older than the middle-
                                    age.

                                    A more problematic aspect for the mind to grasp is that I do not
                                    think that time was always constant. Over the pasts years, the atomic
                                    clock was reccuringly adjusted to compensate the loss of seconds. Now
                                    it amounts to several minutes only since the 70s or so.

                                    There are electromagnetic and frequency variable to take into
                                    consideration in measuring the passage of time. The brain functions
                                    as so. Perception of time is not the same in alpha state (brain wave
                                    activity measured in term of hertz) than in other states. And this a
                                    organic/biological effect. The Earth is a body regulated no
                                    differently than our own.

                                    I would be glad to further this discussion.

                                    Marc


                                    >
                                    > Paul Newton,
                                    > Wisconsin, USA
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > From: DRStarman2001@a...
                                    > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:52 PM
                                    > To: anthroposophy@y...
                                    > Subject: Re: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens &
                                    U.F.O's and Andreev
                                    >
                                    > utopia_planetia@h... writes:
                                    > > A question comes to my mind, would we "see" the inhabitants of
                                    Lemuria with the current spectrum of our eyes? If I understand what
                                    Steiner said so far, the further we go back in time, the
                                    less "mineralized" humans were.
                                    > > 
                                    > > It makes sense to think that human beings have existed at
                                    different levels of densification of the physical body. We could call
                                    it an "ahrimanizing" process according to anthroposophical concepts :-
                                    )
                                    >
                                    > *******Only after the Moon split off from the earth did the bodies
                                    of 'Lemurian' men become mineral and solid. Before that time the
                                    physical body of man is warm air-currents in a Fire-Mist, and then
                                    circulation of fluids like present-day cytoplasmic streaming. We
                                    experience Lemurian man through inward experience, not externally
                                    seeing our bodies then through eyes. Seeing the Akasha is not like
                                    watching a movie, but more like recalling a series of dream-pictures.
                                    >
                                    > Dr. Starman
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                    > Unsubscribe:
                                    > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...  
                                    > List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@y...  
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN
                                    Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


                                    ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                                    Will You Find True Love?
                                    Will You Meet the One?
                                    Free Love Reading by phone!
                                    http://us.click.yahoo.com/7dY7FD/R_ZEAA/Ey.GAA/wpWolB/TM
                                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                    Unsubscribe:
                                    anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                    List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                                    Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
                                  • utopia_planetia_2000
                                    Hi Paul, I d have to trace which Science et Vie magazine, newspaper and PBS program. Concerning carbon fourteen dating, there are many assumptions in the
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Jul 31, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Hi Paul,

                                      I'd have to trace which Science et Vie magazine, newspaper and PBS
                                      program. Concerning carbon fourteen dating, there are many
                                      assumptions in the scientific community which makes it not a
                                      foolproff tool: the rate of C-14 decay consistency throughout time.
                                      There are too many climactic variables to consider. The older the
                                      subject tested, the less reliable and imprecise the measure is.

                                      I'd like to share something that I find interesting. About
                                      experiments of time and height, and time and speed.

                                      Scientists place two clocks. One on the rooftop of a sckyscraper and
                                      the other on the first floor. After a time, the two clocks, priorly
                                      synchroneous, were off by very little, but still off. The clock on
                                      top slowed down.

                                      The second experiement involved two clocks again, this time one
                                      within a flying plane and the other one immobile on the ground. The
                                      experiment concluded that the clock within the plane was off too --
                                      earlier.

                                      I don't really know what to conclude, but the geophysical force of
                                      the earth regulates time in some way and speed and distance from the
                                      planet extracts the subject from its influence. It has been
                                      documented as well that time within a space-capsule during orbit is
                                      asynchroneous with Earth-time. Slower, again.

                                      Steiner stated that the Earth did not always have the same round
                                      shape, and presumably therefore not the same rotation-pattern. And to
                                      this rotation I think are linked the resonance and electromagnetic
                                      levels. Steiner had to go back on previous statements he had made
                                      about how old are certain epochs. I beleive it is due to the lack of
                                      a universally constant measurement unit. Modern science backtracked
                                      more than once on assessments they had made about the age of
                                      sedimentation. I suppose life at an organic level adapts to
                                      the "frequency" proposed by the Earth and consciousness is biased by
                                      that filter. How can we measure linearly time if it does contract and
                                      expand -- according to space and speed? I remember Steiner saying
                                      that only speed is an objective reality; space and time being mere
                                      equations.

                                      An analogy would be trying to weigh something heavy on the moon, say,
                                      something of 200 kg. However, the notion of heavy looses its reality
                                      there, along with the measuring unit which was created for the
                                      perception of "heavy" in the first place. Maybe time, like gravity,
                                      is a relative notion. There's no way of measuring how old something
                                      is because of the variable of when (or rather "how fast") and where
                                      the experimenter is in relation to the tested subject.

                                      Marc


                                      --- In anthroposophy@y..., "Paul Newton" <paulknewton@m...> wrote:
                                      > Marc, thanks for your reply to my questions.
                                      >
                                      > I referred to remarks that I believe Dr Steiner made to the workmen
                                      at the Goetheanum. I believe he was asked about the danger of a
                                      collision between Mars and the Earth. He said not to worry, that it
                                      wasn't about to happen and that Mars is not densely physical anyway.
                                      I read about this years ago in the then journal of the AS in GB
                                      (thought I had it, but can't find it). There was a discussion there
                                      as to whether this meant that Steiner was just plain wrong or whether
                                      changes might have occurred to the physical substance of the planet,
                                      perhaps due to the materialistic thoughts of the human race. That's
                                      my recollection, at least. Perhaps someone out there has the relevant
                                      lecture to the workmen?
                                      >
                                      > I found what you had to say about the unsettled nature of modern
                                      dating of fossils and the limitations of carbon dating extremely
                                      interesting. (I had felt that carbon-dating could be allowing us to
                                      make false assumptions about geological age, but I had assumed that
                                      its validity was not contested within the scientific community). Can
                                      you give us references for the scientific debate about these things?
                                      Also, for what you said about the atomic clock.
                                      >
                                      > Paul,
                                      > on a sunny day in Wisconsin, USA
                                      > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > From: utopia_planetia_2000
                                      > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 8:55 PM
                                      > To: anthroposophy@y...
                                      > Subject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's
                                      and Andreev
                                      >
                                      > > 1/ Isn't it the case that Dr Steiner said (to the Workmen at the
                                      > Goetheanum, I believe) that Mars too is non-mineral, and hasn't
                                      that
                                      > been proved to be false? (I have seen it suggested that Mars
                                      became
                                      > mineralized since the 1920's: what do you think?).
                                      >
                                      > Maybe I don't have enough background to understand what you mean
                                      > by "became mineralized". What became mineralized? The inhabitants
                                      on
                                      > the etheric or astral level?
                                      > >
                                      > > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of world
                                      > evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly
                                      of
                                      > geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?
                                      >
                                      > The only way I reconciled both is by knowing as much as I could of
                                      > both and seeing where they agree. Fossil records do not disagree
                                      with
                                      > Steiner's akashic investigations. Animals and lower life forms
                                      came
                                      > to mineral density much earlier than humans. The datation of
                                      fossils
                                      > is still an ongoing debate in the scientific community. Only a few
                                      > weeks ago, sedimental strata are being reassessed in term of age,
                                      in
                                      > the range or million of years. Carbon fourteen datation can only
                                      be
                                      > precise for determining the age of things not older than the middle-
                                      > age.
                                      >
                                      > A more problematic aspect for the mind to grasp is that I do not
                                      > think that time was always constant. Over the pasts years, the
                                      atomic
                                      > clock was reccuringly adjusted to compensate the loss of seconds.
                                      Now
                                      > it amounts to several minutes only since the 70s or so.
                                      >
                                      > There are electromagnetic and frequency variable to take into
                                      > consideration in measuring the passage of time. The brain
                                      functions
                                      > as so. Perception of time is not the same in alpha state (brain
                                      wave
                                      > activity measured in term of hertz) than in other states. And this
                                      a
                                      > organic/biological effect. The Earth is a body regulated no
                                      > differently than our own.
                                      >
                                      > I would be glad to further this discussion.
                                      >
                                      > Marc
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > >
                                      > > Paul Newton,
                                      > > Wisconsin, USA
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > > From: DRStarman2001@a...
                                      > > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:52 PM
                                      > > To: anthroposophy@y...
                                      > > Subject: Re: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens &
                                      > U.F.O's and Andreev
                                      > >
                                      > > utopia_planetia@h... writes:
                                      > > > A question comes to my mind, would we "see" the inhabitants of
                                      > Lemuria with the current spectrum of our eyes? If I understand
                                      what
                                      > Steiner said so far, the further we go back in time, the
                                      > less "mineralized" humans were.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > It makes sense to think that human beings have existed at
                                      > different levels of densification of the physical body. We could
                                      call
                                      > it an "ahrimanizing" process according to anthroposophical
                                      concepts :-
                                      > )
                                      > >
                                      > > *******Only after the Moon split off from the earth did the
                                      bodies
                                      > of 'Lemurian' men become mineral and solid. Before that time the
                                      > physical body of man is warm air-currents in a Fire-Mist, and then
                                      > circulation of fluids like present-day cytoplasmic streaming. We
                                      > experience Lemurian man through inward experience, not externally
                                      > seeing our bodies then through eyes. Seeing the Akasha is not like
                                      > watching a movie, but more like recalling a series of dream-
                                      pictures.
                                      > >
                                      > > Dr. Starman
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                      > > Unsubscribe:
                                      > > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                      > > List owner: anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN
                                      > Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                      > Unsubscribe:
                                      > anthroposophy-unsubscribe@y...
                                      > List owner: anthroposophy-owner@y...
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN
                                      Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
                                    • DRStarman2001@aol.com
                                      ... *******Now that I have time to answer this I ll try. It s a big subject. The facts that science has discovered, we can reconcile with spiritual science;
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Aug 21, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        > utopia_planetia@... writes:
                                        > > > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of world evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly of geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?

                                        *******Now that I have time to answer this I'll try. It's a big subject. The facts that science has discovered, we can reconcile with spiritual science; not so the Religion of Scientism with its dogmas. Unfortunately the so-called scientists of today demand their theories be equated with facts.
                                        To separate the wheat from the chaff a bit, what we know of the world goes back only a few thousand years. All ancient calendars, like the Chinese or Hebrew, go back less than seven or eight thousand years. The oldest scriptures speak of a previous 'world' or civilization destroyed in a great world-catastrophe. Now, that was the mindframe in which modern science developed. Until 1700 or so (the "Enlightenment"), no one knew of or believed in anything being more than 10,000 years old. Then, in the course of digging canals in England, the first skeletons of giant unknown animals were unearthed, and around the same time the first theories of anything like modern geology began. First, formations were examined and it was realized that they must have taken thousands of years to take their present shape; and the destruction of these
                                        'dinosaur' creatures was interpreted as supporting evidence for those legendary world-catastrophes.
                                        In the nineteenth century, however, the 'uniformitarian' point of view of Lyell came about in geology, that everything in the past was caused by the same processees as are going on around us now, and at the same rate. It fit in with the conservative Victorian outlook, and Darwin took it as his basis for a theory where all change is slow and gradual. This very slow change of living things required incredibly long periods of time, however, with one organ changing and then another, slowly building up to a whole new organism. Only then did 'millions' and then 'hundreds of millions' and then finally 'billions' of years come to be in the picture.
                                        Unfortunately emotions immediately come into it when Darwinism is discussed, because so many people have an emotional investment in it as a sort of Religion produced by the Enlightenment. Actually, its basis of slow, gradual change has since been thrown out in favor of sudden mutations, but oddly the ideas which were accepted ON that basis remain.
                                        It's also unfortunate that only child-like fundamentalists usually look at the abundant evidence that the earth may be far younger than these theories built up from Lyell & Darwin demand, and that, in the rush to put together a completely worked-out theory to compete with the religions that science believed were irrational superstitions holding Man back, many errors were made of interpretation of the geological facts.
                                        But the facts supplied by the Akashic Records are not in conflict with the evidence, only the interpretations of it. And principal among these is the interpretation that, as human fossils are found only recently, Man evolved from the animal. We know that Man was there spiritually as the animals became material, and that he only entered physical form last. And, in fact, far from the apes creating Man, the first imperfect physical forms intended for human souls DEVOLVED into the apes.

                                        More in the future if interested.

                                        -Starman
                                      • elf
                                        8-22-2002 Kin 76: Yellow Spectral WarriorI dissolve in order to questionReleasing fearlessnessI seal the output of intelligenceWith the spectral tone of
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Aug 21, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment

                                          8-22-2002

                                          Kin 76: Yellow Spectral Warrior

                                          I dissolve in order to question
                                          Releasing fearlessness
                                          I seal the output of intelligence
                                          With the spectral tone of liberation
                                          I am guided by my own power doubled
                                           
                                           
                                          Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge
                                          in the field of truth and knowledge
                                          is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."
                                          Albert Einstein

                                           DRStarman2001@... wrote:


                                          >  utopia_planetia@... writes:
                                          > > > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of world evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly of geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?

                                          *******Now that I have time to answer this I'll try. It's a big subject. The facts that science has discovered, we can reconcile with spiritual science; not so the Religion of Scientism with its dogmas. Unfortunately the so-called scientists of today demand their theories be equated with facts.
                                             To separate the wheat from the chaff a bit, what we know of the world goes back only a few thousand years. All ancient calendars, like the Chinese or Hebrew, go back less than seven or eight thousand years. The oldest scriptures speak of a previous 'world' or civilization destroyed in a great world-catastrophe. Now, that was the mindframe in which modern science developed. Until 1700 or so (the "Enlightenment"), no one knew of or believed in anything being more than 10,000 years old. Then, in the course of digging canals in England, the first skeletons of giant unknown animals were unearthed, and around the same time the first theories of anything like modern geology began. First, formations were examined and it was realized that they must have taken thousands of years to take their present shape; and the destruction of these
                                          'dinosaur' creatures was interpreted as supporting evidence for those legendary world-catastrophes.
                                             In the nineteenth century, however, the 'uniformitarian' point of view of Lyell came about in geology, that everything in the past was caused by the same processees as are going on around us now, and at the same rate. It fit in with the conservative Victorian outlook, and Darwin took it as his basis for a theory where all change is slow and gradual. This very slow change of living things required incredibly long periods of time, however, with one organ changing and then another, slowly building up to a whole new organism. Only then did 'millions' and then 'hundreds of millions' and then finally 'billions' of years come to be in the picture.
                                             Unfortunately emotions immediately come into it when Darwinism is discussed, because so many people have an emotional investment in it as a sort of Religion produced by the Enlightenment. Actually, its basis of slow, gradual change has since been thrown out in favor of sudden mutations, but oddly the ideas which were accepted ON that basis remain.
                                             It's also unfortunate that only child-like fundamentalists usually look at the abundant evidence that the earth may be far younger than these theories built up from Lyell & Darwin demand, and that, in the rush to put together a completely worked-out theory to compete with the religions that science believed were irrational superstitions holding Man back, many errors were made of interpretation of the geological facts.
                                             But the facts supplied by the Akashic Records are not in conflict with the evidence, only the interpretations of it. And principal among these is the interpretation that, as human fossils are found only recently, Man evolved from the animal. We know that Man was there spiritually as the animals became material, and that he only entered physical form last. And, in fact, far from the apes creating Man, the first imperfect physical forms intended for human souls DEVOLVED into the apes.

                                            More in the future if interested.

                                          -Starman



                                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                          Unsubscribe:
                                          anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                          List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                          Do You Yahoo!?
                                          Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes

                                        • Ashley Case
                                          I am interested... ... From: anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 04:24:44 PM To: anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com Subject:
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Aug 21, 2002
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            >
                                            I am interested...
                                             
                                            -------Original Message-------
                                             
                                            Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 04:24:44 PM
                                            Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev
                                             

                                            >  utopia_planetia@... writes:
                                            > > > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of
                                            world evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly of geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?

                                            *******Now that I have time to answer this I'll try. It's a big subject. The facts that science has discovered, we can reconcile with spiritual science; not so the Religion of Scientism with its dogmas. Unfortunately the so-called scientists of today demand their theories be equated with facts.
                                               To separate the wheat from the chaff a bit, what we know of the world goes back only a few thousand years. All ancient calendars, like the Chinese or Hebrew, go back less than seven or eight thousand years. The oldest scriptures speak of a previous 'world' or civilization destroyed in a great world-catastrophe. Now, that was the mindframe in which modern science developed. Until 1700 or so (the "Enlightenment"), no one knew of or believed in anything being more than 10,000 years old. Then, in the course of digging canals in England, the first skeletons of giant unknown animals were unearthed, and around the same time the first theories of anything like modern geology began. First, formations were examined and it was realized that they must have taken thousands of years to take their present shape; and the destruction of these
                                            'dinosaur' creatures was interpreted as supporting evidence for those legendary world-catastrophes.
                                               In the nineteenth century, however, the 'uniformitarian' point of view of Lyell came about in geology, that everything in the past was caused by the same processees as are going on around us now, and at the same rate. It fit in with the conservative Victorian outlook, and Darwin took it as his basis for a theory where all change is slow and gradual. This very slow change of living things required incredibly long periods of time, however, with one organ changing and then another, slowly building up to a whole new organism. Only then did 'millions' and then 'hundreds of millions' and then finally 'billions' of years come to be in the picture.
                                               Unfortunately emotions immediately come into it when Darwinism is discussed, because so many people have an emotional investment in it as a sort of Religion produced by the Enlightenment. Actually, its basis of slow, gradual change has since been thrown out in favor of sudden mutations, but oddly the ideas which were accepted ON that basis remain.
                                               It's also unfortunate that only child-like fundamentalists usually look at the abundant evidence that the earth may be far younger than these theories built up from Lyell & Darwin demand, and that, in the rush to put together a completely worked-out theory to compete with the religions that science believed were irrational superstitions holding Man back, many errors were made of interpretation of the geological facts.
                                               But the facts supplied by the Akashic Records are not in conflict with the evidence, only the interpretations of it. And principal among these is the interpretation that, as human fossils are found only recently, Man evolved from the animal. We know that Man was there spiritually as the animals became material, and that he only entered physical form last. And, in fact, far from the apes creating Man, the first imperfect physical forms intended for human souls DEVOLVED into the apes.

                                              More in the future if interested.

                                            -Starman



                                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                            Unsubscribe:
                                            anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                            List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                             
                                          • LilOleMiss
                                            You can bet I m interested, too, Dr. Starman! Sheila I am interested... ... From: anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 04:24:44 PM
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Aug 21, 2002
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                               
                                              You can bet I'm interested, too, Dr. Starman!
                                              Sheila
                                              I am interested...
                                               
                                              -------Original Message-------
                                               
                                              Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 04:24:44 PM
                                              Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Phenomenon source: aliens & U.F.O's and Andreev
                                               

                                              utopia_planetia@... writes:
                                              > > > 2/ How are we to reconcile the anthroposophical view of world evolution with that of modern science? I'm thinking particularly of geology and the fossil record? What of the dinosaurs?

                                              *******Now that I have time to answer this I'll try. It's a big subject. The facts that science has discovered, we can reconcile with spiritual science; not so the Religion of Scientism with its dogmas. Unfortunately the so-called scientists of today demand their theories be equated with facts.
                                                 To separate the wheat from the chaff a bit, what we know of the world goes back only a few thousand years. All ancient calendars, like the Chinese or Hebrew, go back less than seven or eight thousand years. The oldest scriptures speak of a previous 'world' or civilization destroyed in a great world-catastrophe. Now, that was the mindframe in which modern science developed. Until 1700 or so (the "Enlightenment"), no one knew of or believed in anything being more than 10,000 years old. Then, in the course of digging canals in England, the first skeletons of giant unknown animals were unearthed, and around the same time the first theories of anything like modern geology began. First, formations were examined and it was realized that they must have taken thousands of years to take their present shape; and the destruction of these
                                              'dinosaur' creatures was interpreted as supporting evidence for those legendary world-catastrophes.
                                                 In the nineteenth century, however, the 'uniformitarian' point of view of Lyell came about in geology, that everything in the past was caused by the same processees as are going on around us now, and at the same rate. It fit in with the conservative Victorian outlook, and Darwin took it as his basis for a theory where all change is slow and gradual. This very slow change of living things required incredibly long periods of time, however, with one organ changing and then another, slowly building up to a whole new organism. Only then did 'millions' and then 'hundreds of millions' and then finally 'billions' of years come to be in the picture.
                                                 Unfortunately emotions immediately come into it when Darwinism is discussed, because so many people have an emotional investment in it as a sort of Religion produced by the Enlightenment. Actually, its basis of slow, gradual change has since been thrown out in favor of sudden mutations, but oddly the ideas which were accepted ON that basis remain.
                                                 It's also unfortunate that only child-like fundamentalists usually look at the abundant evidence that the earth may be far younger than these theories built up from Lyell & Darwin demand, and that, in the rush to put together a completely worked-out theory to compete with the religions that science believed were irrational superstitions holding Man back, many errors were made of interpretation of the geological facts.
                                                 But the facts supplied by the Akashic Records are not in conflict with the evidence, only the interpretations of it. And principal among these is the interpretation that, as human fossils are found only recently, Man evolved from the animal. We know that Man was there spiritually as the animals became material, and that he only entered physical form last. And, in fact, far from the apes creating Man, the first imperfect physical forms intended for human souls DEVOLVED into the apes.

                                                More in the future if interested.

                                              -Starman



                                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                              Unsubscribe:
                                              anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                              List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                               


                                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy
                                              Unsubscribe:
                                              anthroposophy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
                                              List owner:  anthroposophy-owner@yahoogroups.com 


                                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.