malai5

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi
So, in other words and once again, another pointless evasion tactic.

What a shock.

May I ask you a simple question? Why do you think that "putting it out there" is sufficient justification for not having to answer any questions about your methodology?

Dear Koyaanisqatsi.

What we put out, the universal material, and our ability to answer questions on said material is what we are here to do.
Our methodology, we have explained, our working group we have detailed.
To ask us to prove our ''methodology'' is like asking Beethoven to prove where and how he received the inspiration for his music.
It is a bit like asking Einstein to prove how he received his inspired thoughts. Even Einstein believed in the intuitive thought and he himself related it to a ''gift'' from god.
It is a bit like asking Plato, to prove how he came up with his unique, at that time, philosophy. Which by the way has become the basis for a great deal of the society we know today.

The fact that there is no 3D ''rational'' proof available for those mentioned above and for what we receive, does not lessen the message and the information nor does your requirement for proof.

We are not seeking a justification, for there is not one to be had, nor are we using the above as a justification, for what we have said is fact.

What you are seeking is not available within the limits of this 3D worlds thinking. It is available however, via the individual and their search for their proofs. Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened up to you.
The intent to find the truth will lead you to the truth, but it is not to be had with 3D thinking in tow.

Cheers.

Malai5.

Keith Russell

Malai, you are confusing 'fact' with 'claim'.

Just because you claim that your views are fact, does not make them so.

To be believed as facts, your claims need independently verifiable, non-contradictory supporting evidence--the very type which you have stated you will not supply.

Yet, you maintain that you state facts.

Until you provide the evidence, though, you state nothing of the kind.

Keith.

malai5

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Keith Russell
[B]Malai, you are confusing 'fact' with 'claim'.

Dear Keith Russell.
quote
Just because you claim that your views are fact, does not make them so.
end of quote.
What we were claiming as ''fact'', was not our material, although we believe it is, but rather that the methodology cannot be varified by the 3D process and our examples were to support this.
quote.
To be believed as facts, your claims need independently verifiable, non-contradictory supporting evidence--the very type which you have stated you will not supply.
end of quote.
If we could supply the unsuppliable, we would.
quote.
Yet, you maintain that you state facts.

Until you provide the evidence, though, you state nothing of the kind.
end of quote.
What we receive is a fact, it exists, it is universal conceptual material, not of any 3D source and, again cannot be fit into the ''box'' of 3D proof frameworks.

Cheers.

Malai5.

Nowhere357

Hi Malai. Just wondering, how are your recruiting efforts going?

malai5

Dear Nowhere357.

Well, if by ''recruiting'', you mean ''interest'', then the answer is, not bad.
Hey, we just throw it out there, sit back, then come in to answer questions on the material. It's as simple as that.

Cheers.

Malai5.

Koyaanisqatsi

As always, pardon my dyslexia. Problems of 3D thinking.

No, you have not. The methodology I refer to is the process you went through to test the veracity of your claims; the "information" you gathered over three years that you determined somehow to be "100% correct." How did you determine it to be correct? What were the methods of study that you employed? That, as you should know is what is meant by "methodology."

Your "working group" has been stated to be a confusing jumble of three separate human beings (yourself included) and three separate "selves" all unified in one human being (yourself included). Who these people are and what their credentials might be has likewise remained a mystery on the flimsiest and most contradictory claim of all, that you would be in some sort of "danger" if it were revealed. Yet, you should know that the simple act of logging into a computer as you are doing here is traceable and therefore anyone "sinister" enough to be out to get you would be able to track you down rather effortlessly if need be.

In short, just about everything you've posted betrays psychological dysfunction more than anything else, which is why we've all asked you repeatedly to dispell this notion to your best ability by simply doing what any other scientist (or non-scientist) would do; which is to provide your raw data for us to analyze independently of your input or "spin."

That's the normal process claims such as yours necessarily carry with them.

Enough of this childish evasion. You have been provided with pages upon pages of opportunities to simply act like an adult and provide us with the raw "information" you claim you possess and continue to avoid doing so. There is therefore no other conclusion than some form of mental delusion on your part for anyone here to come to.

I don't say that as an attack; I say that as a reasoned conclusion based upon the lack of supporting evidence for your extraordinary claims. In other words, you are not providing us with anything at all to process except for the baselessness of your claims, just as I provided my counter regarding the supperiority of the "3D" world and how it is you and your "5D" thinking that is 180 degrees out of sync with the 3D world.

So what does it come down to absent your ability to simply provide your raw data for us to review? You say it is "so" and it's up to us to believe you or not. Inevitable conclusion based on this? You are not to be believed and your claims are to be summarily dismissed as the ravings of--at least--a paritally delusional mind, and that's still giving you the unwarranted benefit of the doubt.

If that was your purpose, then you have succeeded.

No, it is not in the slightest. No one has asked you to "prove" your methodology! We have asked you to provide your methodology; the steps you took to vigorously scrutinize and test your claims; the "information" you gathered over three years and how you determined it to be "100% correct."

In other words, the most basic requirements of anyone making a claim.

No, it is not in the slightest. Nobody is questioning, necessarily, that you did receive these messages. The question is to how you were able to determine the veracity of the messages.

We know how Einstein "received his inspired thoughts" and how he went on to test the veracity of those thoughts. He called them gedanken experimenten or "thought experiments," where he put into practice already known maxims of Newtonian physics and applied them to questions of time and space that Newtonian physics couldn't adequately account for; questions well known to the phyics community long before Einstein was even born.

In other words, his inspiration came from standing on the shoulders of past physicists and applying his method of rational, logical analysis to questions that had arisen within that community for some time.

Yes, and then he went on to prove his theories to the best of his abilities by providing the world with his formulas and the mathematics involved that would eventually lead scientists to prove his theories with experimentation.

As we've stated several times, we don't deny that you claim you received this information. What we have been repeatedly asking you is how you then went on to establish its validity as being "100% correct" over a three year period?

These are your claims. What is your methodology--your Einsteinian equations, at the very least--that you employed to establish the veracity of your claims?

As it stands, you effectively have none since you have provided no pertinent information for anyone else to independently confirm your claims.

In other words, you are simply saying, "Trust me, it's true."

That is unacceptable and renders your claims void.

No, it is not, since Plato [b]detailed every single element of his philosophy and what it was based upon for the world to independently assent or dissent to.

You have provided comparatively nothing of the kinds of information all of those people you listed provided. Beethoven left behind the actual music; Einstein the formulas and the thought process that allowed him to arrive at them; Plato, reams of material explicitly detailing his philosophy.

And what have you provided in kind? Only a claim that three of you gathered three years of information that you somehow determined to be "100% correct," based on "messages" from the fifth dimension that only you heard as some sort of necessary condition.

A whole bunch of claims and no supporting documentation or methodology that would allow anyone to independently verify your claims.

Bullshit! There is more than enough "3D" rational proof available for those mentioned above! Beethoven's music; Einstein's equations; Plato's writings.

None of those people, however, made the kinds of claims you are making. Neither Beethoven, nor Plato, nor Einstein claimed that God "spoke" to them in meditative trances where an actual intercommunicatory process was established for the receiving of their "messages."

And since you aren't writing music or philosophy or a physics textbook, but are instead claiming that you have received "special" information from alleged fifth dimensional "higher selves" informing us that we are all 180 degrees out of sync with our "contract" with the universe (not an entity, by the way), due to our "false 3D world" thinking, then comparing any of this to those three people is utterly erroneous on your part and serves as nothing more than further evasion from supporting your claims in any way.

Does Beethoven have to proove that his music came from the Judeo/Christian God? NO! Because the source of his musical inspiration is not at issue; there is no need, to use your own term, for any of us to accept that his music was divinely inspired and no consequence for anyone to listen to his music without accepting that it was divinely inspired.

YOU ARE CLAIMING BOTH CONSEQUENCE AND NEED AND PROVIDING NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT.

You don't seem to understand something. Absent supporting evidence, you have no relevant message to impart; just your claim that it is relevant.

Since you refuse to provide anything to independently verify your claims, we are only left with you and an assessment of you through your writings, which, if you've been paying attention, is one of borderline (if not actual) psychosis; multiple personality disorder would be the technical term for it, if not some form of schizophrenia.

This is not ad hominen nor is it thrown about lightly as an attack against you. It is the only conclusion you are forcing any of us to come to based on your posts and refusal to provide even the most basic evidence in support of your claims.

You then dismiss this with a, "You can believe whatever you want to believe, but what I say is true."

Do you see what I'm getting at. You are sinking your own case by continueing to behave in a manner that is more consistent with psychological disorder than reasoned, rational discussion about your experiences and what you have done to verify those experiences.

You have to provide us with the means with which you verified your experinces. It is unacceptable for you to merely claim that you have verified them sufficiently enough for you. You don't matter; only your evidence and your methodology for verifying that evidence matters.

Got it?

Unless you would like to retract your claims of consequence and need on anyone's behalf to simply believe what you say is "the truth" and instead wish to present your philosophy as you see it.

It is the eschatological implications and contingencies that you claimed are present and the "need" for us to act on your claims that results in this scrutiny.

As I said before, if this is nothing more than a theory of yours regarding possible higher selves, then present it honestly as such. Claim it is "the truth" and you have special knowledge that it is somehow imperative that any of us act on your claims and subject yourself to this level of scrutiny.

It's that simple.

We know. You have provided no justification for what you claim is "fact." None. And that of course renders your claims effectively void of both substance and impact.

Wouldn't you agree that such a state (that you have caused) is counter-productive to your claims?

Remember, you are the one who claimed you had actually gathered "information" over three years that you (or you and your colleagues, if indeed, they exist outside of your own mind) somehow determined to be "100% correct." You further claimed that this information is necessary to impart, implying eschatological consequences for our non-compliance (only to the capitulate on this by claiming it's only necessary that the message gets "out there;" a convenient and childish evasion, IMO).

In other words, the reaction you are getting is entirely your own fault, so kindly stop making it sound as if we're just out to discredit you. Up until your fourth or fifth evasion from your responsibilities, we have treated you better than most making such claims; given repeated benefits of the doubt for you to qualifiy and quantify your claims, to which you keep responding in this evasive manner.

You have no one but yourself to blame.

More cult-oriented jibberish that only further establishes the baselessness to your claims.

We live in a "3D" world and our "thinking" (like yours) is necessarily "3D" in kind. YOU are claiming something else, yet providing no compelling reason or evidence in support of your claims.

Once again, the variable here is you and your repeated evasions. Did you think your claims would go unchallenged? That we would all simply accept what you are claiming is "fact" when you provide us with no reasons at all to support your claims?

Worse, that we are necessarily incapable of understanding what you are posting due to your claims that we are living in a "false reality?"

Accordingly, I will simply, once again, counter by claiming it is you who are evidently living in a false sense of reality.

Now where are we? Stalemate, with nothing accomplished.

I put it to you that if you indeed have some sort of mission; some sort of "need" to impart to all of us, then the manner in which you have gone about it has failed completely.

If that doesn't concern you, then I would only offer that as further evidence in support of my claim that you are either delusional or a charlatan. So, please, by all means, continue to evade your most basic responsibility to further demonstrate the baselessness of your claims.

The intent to find the truth will lead you to the truth, but it is not to be had with 5D thinking in tow.

You are the victim of 5D thinking; the false reality that is 180 degrees out of sync with the truth.

Stalemate, where I am correct and you are incorrect, whether you believe it or not. Q.E.D.

There. Now do you see how pointless it is to make such conflicting and contradictory declarations from the mountaintop that cannot be verified in any meaningful way?

lunachick

I've just had an epiphany!!

3D, or not 3D - that is the question!
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind
to buffer the spins and pamphlets
of outrageous claimants....

or to oppose them!

And by opposing,
take charms against some 3D software...

And build! - A brand new anime show
with merchandising spinoffs
to worship my prophets!

Nay! Profits!

Aye. 3D indeed.

*rubs hands lustfully together, with glint in my eye, and with calm and universal understanding, and my old Maori greenstone heirloom - sent down through my family since Oenuku, brother of Maui!

Yep. I got ya, Malai5. Right on, brother!

malai5

Dear Koyaanisqatsi.

Firstly, the contacts we have had to prove themselves to us.
Firstly, we had to have some faith that what we were receiving was not a phantasy, a construction of our own imagination, but we were prepared to persue and see what transpired.
Our contacts proof of themselves and their abilities came in the form of showing us what they could do ''through'' us. What they could make us ''see''. Have you ever sat and seen the pattern on a sofa, ''through'' your friend who is sitting in front of you? The visable became invisable.
Have you ever seen someone, lifted out of a seat, against their will and forced to write a phrase on a piece of paper.?
Have you ever been told of events that you could not possibly know, of your near future, down to the date, and have them transpire as told? Not just once, but over and over again, even to the present day.

Quite quickly we became convinced that what we were working with was REAL, was of great intelligence and was connected with a universal understanding we could not comprehend.

We now know that the involuntary movement was a demonstration of the power of the higher self over the ''little'' physical self. We know who really drives the bus. As we had agreed to persue this line of inquiry, we had given tacit approval to suspend our ''free will'', for the sake of demonstrations.

Now, we cannot prove this to you, but it sure as hell proved it to us. We realised how fragile the human is and how insignificent in this one life, in comparrison not just to the universe, but to one's true self.

Our own proofs, are not varifiable for you, for we do not control what will occur. We just let it pan out, as what we do, is our contracted ''life'', the contract drawn up long before we arrived on this earth.
The events that have transpired were meant to connect us with the next phase of our contracted run here and the methodology employed was needed to ''shock'' us out of our 3D taupor and show us something far greater.

The trust we have developed with our contacts and they with us over the years we have worked together has never been put in jeopody. We, of course at times have slipped into ''little' self doubts, but are quickly brought back to the ''truth'' by the reality that is constantly playing out around us, our justifications and validations that what we are in contact with and what we do and are is very real. We do see, now, the 3D world from a completely different perspective, a universal perspective. This perspective, shows us that the 3D world, the way it is, is 180 degrees out, opposite to the way of the universe.
Which one do you think will last?

Cheers.

Malai5.

malai5

[QUOTE]Originally posted by lunachick
[B]I've just had an epiphany!!

Dear lunachick.

Epiphanies are so few and far between. We are soo happy for you. Now don't just realise it in the one place, enjoy it generally.

Cheers.

Malai5.

lunachick

Cheers, Malai5.