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

13161Re: [ufodiscussion] Cross Talk

Expand Messages
  • Dex
    Aug 11, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Boy! you're hitting the nail on the head with the same incurring problems I
      have with all of it.

      I just posted my opinion on top of all the other opinions and I'll try to
      find more about the Null Zone for us.
      I didn't know that about Ted, I'm sorry to read this and em impressed he's
      keeping up with it all. Good going Ted. You have a nice vibe about you. I'm
      glad you're a part of us.

      Dex wrote:
      The below excerpt:
      I believe this is the so called "Null Zone" (a vacuum area in space where
      elctromagnetic fields cease to exist) that's being used for transitioning
      our world through and entering into a Higher Vibratory 5th Dimensional
      Octave (Plane) re-seeding our solar star system nearer the center of the
      Milky Way. No longer positioned on the outer edges of the galactic disc
      where we've resided in space isolation from other higher life galactic
      civilizations already circumnavigating space.

      Welcome to the Plan fulfilling revelations...this generation will
      experience the prophesied New Heavens and a New Earth.

      Warring in lower densities will be a thing of the past.

      Greater Creative endeavors will be a choice for those ongoing with the
      plan.
      This change is a designed inevitable destiny, for all physical worlds when
      they reach the rung of their space age evolutionary ladder, matured in
      their spiritual understanding and receptive to the teachings of Cosmic life
      values of the infinite way for the infinite species.

      Dex
      _________________

      > Dex wrote:
      >
      > "That's funny, when I see an opportuniy...Ted really admires the way you
      > think and your writing skills."
      >
      > I believe that Ted and I have very similar points of view and
      think
      > in similar ways. I feel honoured to be able say sometimes the things that
      > he is thinking but is unable to post to the forum because of his visual
      > disability. I am also untellably grateful to him for his unqualified and
      > unfailing support and encouragement of my own humble attempts at
      > truth-seeing and truth-telling. Ted's service to our common cause may be
      > invisible in many people's eyes but it is very real and substantial in
      mine,
      > have no doubt.
      >
      > "Apparently, because of the concern..The GT keeps finding more information
      > coming through more about Niburu. I for one think it's a null zone that
      > Hurtak convinced me of our world would be transitioning through to a
      higher
      > vibratory wavelenght. Dan Sherman's experience and commentary about
      loosing
      > electromagnetic to the earth read like it too.
      > Niburu is another entirely different scenario I'm not sure if I should
      > believe.
      > It may mean a different thing altogether than the feared doomsday aspect.
      > Hmm
      > I'll let you know if I'm communicated anything about it."
      >
      > This is very interesting Dex. And thanks for promising to keep us
      > posted. But I think it is important for us to keep the distinctions
      between
      > all these different concepts clear if we want to avoid their getting all
      > mixed up together in our minds and becoming meaningless as a result.
      > Already the confusion has reached dizzying proportions and a great deal of
      > clearing-up work needs to be done. For example, "Nibiru" is the name of a
      > physical planet that was conceived and defined by Sumerian scholar
      > Zecchariah Sitchin. According to Sitchin, Nibiru is not due to return to
      > the inner solar system for at least another thousand years. So why are
      some
      > people proposing the imminent return of Nibiru? And why are they
      > identifying it with "Planet X"? How can Nibiru be Planet X if Nibiru is
      not
      > due to return for at least another thousand years but Planet X is supposed
      > to be making a close fly-by of the earth and producing a pole-shift in
      less
      > than four? Evidently "Nibiru" and "Planet X" are two different planets.
      > But they have become conflated together in popular parlance, as
      demonstrated
      > daily at the GT forum where members use them routinely as interchangeable
      > names for the same planet.
      >
      > And then there is the question of what Planet X is actually
      supposed
      > to be. First it is a "planet"; then it is a "brown dwarf", and then it is
      > "red dwarf" that somehow shines with the same brilliance as the sun in
      > photographs that are purported to show it! Where is the consistency
      among
      > these perpetually shape-shifting concepts?
      >
      > Now you are introducing Hurtak's concept of a "null zone" to us,
      > Dex. What is that meant to be exactly? And how is it different to the
      > "dead zone" which some clairvoyants of the late 20th century were
      reporting
      > existed in earth's timeline beyond the year 2017? Or how is it different
      > to the "Proton Belt" and the "Photon Belt" of later fame? I ask these
      > questions because I have noticed how popular names for exotic-sounding
      > concepts keep morphing and mutating into one another without any clear
      cause
      > or reason and the danger is that Hurtak's "null zone" may soon warp into
      > something else in the popular mindset and take on a completely different
      > meaning to the one that Hurtak intended for it, as has happened to
      Sitchin's
      > concept of the planet Nibiru.
      >
      > "That second sun (son) came through like a bell, but, I only felt that is
      > was meant as an oberservable announcement, really nothing more attached.
      Not
      > yet that is."
      >
      > When the Higher Intelligence speaks to us in our dreams, it does
      so
      > through the medium of symbols. These can often prove impossible for our
      > ordinary minds to interpret properly after waking because our ordinary
      minds
      > do not necessarily possess the key to the correct interpretation of the
      > symbols. The symbol of the "second sun (son)" could mean many different
      > things. How can we possibly know which one is the correct interpretation?
      >
      > Regan
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Dex
      > To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 6:27 PM
      > Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] Cross Talk
      >
      >
      >
      > That's funny, when I see an opportuniy...Ted really admires the way you
      > think and your writing skills.
      >
      > Apparently, because of the concern..The GT keeps finding more information
      > coming through more about Niburu. I for one think it's a null zone that
      > Hurtak convinced me of our world would be transitioning through to a
      higher
      > vibratory wavelenght. Dan Sherman's experience and commentary about
      loosing
      > electromagnetic to the earth read like it too.
      > Niburu is another entirely different scenario I'm not sure if I should
      > believe.
      > It may mean a different thing altogether than the feared doomsday aspect.
      > Hmm
      > I'll let you know if I'm communicated anything about it. That second sun
      > (son)
      > came through like a bell, but, I only felt that is was meant as an
      > oberservable announcement, really nothing more attached. Not yet that is.
      >
      > Dex
      >
      > >
      > > Why Dex, I never thought you cared about such things as sentence
      > >structure and punctuation! But thanks for the feedback. I see that I'll
      > >have to polish up my literary skills and smarten up my presentation
      > >considerably to meet the high standards that you are setting for me.
      > >
      > > Regan
      > >
      > >
      >
      > >
      > > Ted wrote:
      > >
      > >Said , so perfectly
      > >_________________
      > >
      > >Oh Yeah, but what about the sentence structuring?..a mess, and look at
      the
      > >grammar..egads, and lets not forget his punctuation's..an atrocity....but
      > >yeah, he said it nicely.
      > >
      > >haha
      > >Dex
      > >
      > >Although I have not met DonDep in person as Bill has, I have read
      > >> > enough of his postings at the Golden Thread forum to have formed the
      > >same
      > >> > impression of him as Bill has done, i.e. that he believes only what
      he
      > >> > wants
      > >> > to believe. I think Dex is probably correct in pointing out that we
      > >all
      > >> > do
      > >> > this, but for me the point is that some of us want to believe only
      what
      > >is
      > >> > true regardless of what we might like to believe instead.......
      > >(Snipped)
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >------------------------------------
      > >
      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Why Dex, I never thought you cared about such things as sentence
      > > structure and punctuation! But thanks for the feedback. I see that I'll
      > > have to polish up my literary skills and smarten up my presentation
      > > considerably to meet the high standards that you are setting for me.
      > >
      > > Regan
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Dex
      > > To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 10:44 AM
      > > Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] Cross Talk
      > >
      > >
      > > Ted wrote:
      > >
      > > Said , so perfectly
      > > _________________
      > >
      > > Oh Yeah, but what about the sentence structuring?..a mess, and look at
      the
      > > grammar..egads, and lets not forget his punctuation's..an
      atrocity....but
      > > yeah, he said it nicely.
      > >
      > > haha
      > > Dex
      > >
      > > Although I have not met DonDep in person as Bill has, I have read
      > > > > enough of his postings at the Golden Thread forum to have formed the
      > > same
      > > > > impression of him as Bill has done, i.e. that he believes only what
      he
      > > > > wants
      > > > > to believe. I think Dex is probably correct in pointing out that we
      > > all
      > > > > do
      > > > > this, but for me the point is that some of us want to believe only
      > what
      > > is
      > > > > true regardless of what we might like to believe instead.......
      > > (Snipped)
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic