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

Re: [UFOnet] #9 Counting coup in the final conflict

Expand Messages
  • Roger Anderton
    Dear Krsanna When you have earlier talked about this Thoth going West, was this before or after the Pole shift? Can you prove Jung s Collective
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 31, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Krsanna

      When you have earlier talked about this Thoth going West, was this before or
      after the Pole shift?

      Can you prove "Jung's Collective Unconsciousness" exists as per your
      definition, as opposed to some modified definition?

      Let us suppose that some field exists, and let us define it as being
      unmeasurable by any scientific method. (We wouldn't want to define
      characteristics to the field, in case scientists were actually able to test
      the idea and then disprove it exists.) Let's call it the N -field. N to mean
      "No Sense" indicating that it is not detectable by any of our senses or the
      senses of any scientific instrument.

      Now in the N- field theory let the memories of people dying be implanted
      upon it, but not their souls (whatever souls may be). This gets transmitted
      to some new born babies, which then remember past lives.

      The R -theory (R for Reincarnation) is exactly the same, but has an R -field
      which transmits both soul as well as memories from the dying to the new
      born.
      How would you prove the R- theory over the N- theory?

      1. Having nothing for science to measure. How can science determine which
      theory is best?
      2. Having nothing to measure makes the theories religious instead of
      scientific. And the difference between the two theories is over the question
      of 'soul' something equally unmeasurable.
      3. Let us call the N-field a modification (or improvement ) to Jung's
      concepts.
      4. what happened to the Dalai Lama, why didn't he say that he knew
      reincarnation existed?
      5. Religion works from 'faith before fact'. If we have a religion based on
      Reincarnation and see evidence that seems to confirm that belief are we
      interpreting facts within that Faith, and hence not doing science?

      Cheers Roger
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "TimeStar" <timestar@...>
      To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:54 AM
      Subject: [UFOnet] #9 Counting coup in the final conflict


      > Hey, Roger:
      >
      > 1. Pole shift is not the topic we are addressing, which was how you were
      > defining "westernized European mind". Western European is a clear
      > indication of origin but Westernised European is not the same. We sort of
      > agreed on a definition for Western European / Westernised European,
      although
      > you indicated some confusion about identifying directions. You can seek
      > more clarity on how to find your directions from other sources. A Boy
      Scout
      > manual might help?
      >
      > 2. It's not clear why you introduced "primitive religion", and if you
      don't
      > want to deal with religion then we can strike the entire topic of
      religion.
      > Again, the question was raised after you interjected the issue of
      primitive
      > religion. You apparently are no longer interested in religion, and that's
      > fine with me.
      >
      > 3. You also introduced the topic of "Jung's Collective Unconscious", and
      I
      > have Jung's own definition next to my computer now and will get it posted.
      > To refresh your memory, this subject came up when you suggested that
      > past-life memories might be attributable to "Jung's Collective
      Unconscious",
      > so the next task is to find Jung's definition for the collective
      > unconscious.
      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > Krsanna
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > > Krsanna wrote: ...........A compass pointing to magnetic north is the
      > > ultimate direction finder ......
      > > Even after Pole shift?
      > > Krsanna wrote:........"Primitive religion" is another outstanding issue
      > that
      > > needs to be addressd, by the way. What is a primitive religion in
      contrast
      > > to a sophisticated
      > > religion? Again, you introduced the "primitive religion" as part of your
      > > theories; therefore, I am most interested in getting a definition for
      > > "primitive religion" with an example of an advanced religion.
      > > I used definition from encyclopaedia. You appear to wish to redefine
      this
      > > concept. This particular question does not interest me, as much as it
      > does
      > > you. What is defined as primitive religions is more advanced than what
      is
      > > called modern religions. So, what? Who cares. Religion bores me. I much
      > > prefer (proper) science.
      > >
      > > Krsanna: ......I pointed out that Jung never said anything close to
      what
      > > you suggested and offered to post Jung's own definition of the
      collective
      > > unconscious. You have
      > > introduced several wild ideas as theories to explain data that you
      cannot
      > > explain with other theories that you find acceptable.
      > >
      > > I look forward to information on Jung. But I am not a follower of Jung.
      > His
      > > idea of Collective Unconscious can probably be applied in other ways
      than
      > he
      > > envisaged, but I give credit that the initial idea of Collective
      > Unconscious
      > > is his.
      > > Is Reincarnation not itself a wild idea from what passes for modern
      > > mainstream science. So, if a person introduces one wild theory, why can
      > > another person not be allowed to introduce a second wild theory?
      > > The point I was trying to make was how do you test one wild theory
      against
      > > another, not that I believe in any of the two wild theories.
      > >
      > > Krsanna: ... The facts are not important to you if they do not support
      > > your
      > > preconceived conclusions?
      > > Well, partly right. Facts are unimportant to me, if I do not know how to
      > > interpret them. I have no 'preconceived ideas'.
      > > Krsanna :...This is getting better and better.
      > >
      > > Why? You have avoided answering my question of how do you prove
      > > Reincarnation is real. You have cited data, but not said why it should
      be
      > > interpreted in one way and not in another way.
      > > You cite the meeting between Sagan and Dalai Lama and miss the important
      > > part, namely what the Dalai Lama did not say.
      > > The Dalai Lama is in his 14th incarnation on earth, and he did not say
      > that
      > > HE KNEW REINCARNATION WAS REAL. Does this not strike you as odd? Instead
      > he
      > > said something else.
      > > Does that mean anything to you?
      > > When an Enlightened Person is asked about Reincarnation does he say
      > > something different from an Unenlightened person.
      > > Compare what you say with an Enlightened response and an Unenlightened
      > > response. Which category would you fit in?
      > > If you do not answer this last question, then I am too bored to contiune
      > > this conversation.
      > > Cheers Roger
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "TimeStar" <timestar@...>
      > > To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:20 AM
      > > Subject: [UFOnet] #8 Counting coup in the final conflict
      > >
      > >
      > > > Roger wrote:
      > > >
      > > > You cite Weiss as backing your belief in reincarnation, thus his
      > > > conclusions of his study must be in agreement with your point of view.
      I
      > > > have read similar studies, and doubt their interpretation. Thus infer
      > this
      > > > must also apply to him.
      > > >
      > > > Krsanna wrote:
      > > >
      > > > You are more concerned about who has read and accepted his Dr. Weiss'
      > data
      > > > than the data and/or proofs per se? Does this mean that the data
      > > developed
      > > > by Dr. Weiss is secondary to what you infer about those who have read
      > his
      > > > books?
      > > >
      > > > In summary:
      > > >
      > > > 1) You do not know anything about Dr. Brian Weiss' work;
      > > >
      > > > 2) You formed an opinion without any knowledge of Dr. Weiss' work
      based
      > on
      > > > what you infer because I have read his books; therefore
      > > >
      > > > 3) The facts are not important to you if they do not support your
      > > > preconceived conclusions?
      > > >
      > > > This is getting better and better.
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list
      dedicated
      > to:
      > > UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
      > > Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
      > > To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
      > > ufonet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > > To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
      > > ufonet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Website (Dutch only): http://www.ufonet.nl/
      > > Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
      > >
      > > Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de
      echte
      > brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
      > aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list dedicated
      to:
      > UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
      > Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
      > To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
      > ufonet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
      > ufonet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Website (Dutch only): http://www.ufonet.nl/
      > Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
      >
      > Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de echte
      brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
      aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.