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

#11 Counting coup in the final conflict

Expand Messages
  • TimeStar
    Roger wrote: When you have earlier talked about this Thoth going West, was this before or after the Pole shift? Krsanna wrote: The last few locations of
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 31 4:56 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Roger wrote:

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

      Krsanna wrote:

      The last few locations of magnetic north have been in the North Atlantic,
      Hudson Bay, the Yukon and north of the Great Lakes. The Middle East that
      the Nefilim
      claimed as their domain has been east of magnetic north for thousands and
      thousands and thousands of years.

      I would have thought you would be familiar with the locations of magnetic
      north with your interest in pole shifts. You're full of surprises, Roger.

      Roger wrote:

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

      Krsanna wrote:

      Carl Jung presented a set of proofs for his model of the collective
      conscious that earned worldwide respect for him. I find Jung's proofs
      convincing.

      It looks like you might not have read Jung's proofs and explanation of his
      proofs before asking this question.





      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...>
      To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 2:24 PM
      Subject: Re: [UFOnet] #9 Counting coup in the final conflict


      > Dear Krsanna
      >
      >
      >
      > 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/
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > 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/
      >
      >
    • Roger Anderton
      Hi Krsanna Krsanna wrote: Carl Jung presented a set of proofs for his model of the collective conscious that earned worldwide respect for him. I find Jung s
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Krsanna

        Krsanna wrote: Carl Jung presented a set of proofs for his model of the
        collective
        conscious that earned worldwide respect for him. I find Jung's proofs
        convincing.

        You read Jung from Faith, and so read into him your existing beliefs. Hence
        you are convinced, because what you 'read and believe' is what you already
        believe. While what you 'read and do not believe,' is what you already do
        not believe.

        You have still avoided about the Dalai Lama, why didn't he say that he knew
        reincarnation existed?

        Cheers Roger

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "TimeStar" <timestar@...>
        To: <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 12:56 AM
        Subject: [UFOnet] #11 Counting coup in the final conflict


        > Roger wrote:
        >
        > When you have earlier talked about this Thoth going West, was this before
        or
        > after the Pole shift?
        >
        > Krsanna wrote:
        >
        > The last few locations of magnetic north have been in the North Atlantic,
        > Hudson Bay, the Yukon and north of the Great Lakes. The Middle East that
        > the Nefilim
        > claimed as their domain has been east of magnetic north for thousands and
        > thousands and thousands of years.
        >
        > I would have thought you would be familiar with the locations of magnetic
        > north with your interest in pole shifts. You're full of surprises, Roger.
        >
        > Roger wrote:
        >
        > Can you prove "Jung's Collective Unconsciousness" exists as per your
        > definition, as opposed to some modified definition?
        >
        > Krsanna wrote:
        >
        > Carl Jung presented a set of proofs for his model of the collective
        > conscious that earned worldwide respect for him. I find Jung's proofs
        > convincing.
        >
        > It looks like you might not have read Jung's proofs and explanation of his
        > proofs before asking this question.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...>
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.