Corey Goode's claim of "time-regression"

[PHennessey]

Here's my basic, boiled down question:

Why would Corey need to be time-regressed? Wouldn't that negate the time he spent in the SSP, undoing the 20 years of experience and resetting everything as if it never happened?

I can't seem to find an answer to this very simple question. It's kind of important for people to understand this but it just never comes up. I don't see a clear answer on his site and I've never heard of anything in his interviews. The mechanics of his regression need to be aired out and put in front of the story.

Edit: What I mean is: why would they send him back through time? That seems to defeat the purpose of his tour in the first place.

[grannyfranny100]

I have read this sort of thing from other people. They erase the twenty years of off planet experience so you won't spill the beans to the public and reset you to the age before you entered the program. Sometimes you recover the off world memories anyway. Aha, imagine being 71 years old with a fused back and knee replacement, wrinkled skin. Bye bye plastic surgeons, you can be a hot body star again.

[Bill Ryan]

I can't seem to find an answer to this very simple question.

Answer: he's copying the testimony of Michael Relfe.

http://themarsrecords.com

The very interesting books can be downloaded from this page:

http://themarsrecords.com/wp/mars-records-download-books

[PHennessey]

Copy the testimony? Or recounting the same implanted memory?

Still, I'd like to know why reverting back time makes any sense. That negates the job that was done.

[Bill Ryan]

Copy the testimony? Or recounting the same implanted memory?

Still, I'd like to know why reverting back time makes any sense. That negates the job that was done.

Not really... it's like flying someone to the other side of the world for a contract assignment, and then flying them home when it's over. They're not there any more, but the job was still done.

In the case of a time regression, it just adds an extra dimension (of time) to the 'travel'. The job is still done... in the future. Aside from the very advanced tech necessary to do such a thing, logically there may not be any impossible paradoxes.

My point above was that the 20 year time regression — an extremely wild idea — was first presented by Michael Relfe 15 years back (in 2000), who was regressed using a mixture of techniques by his wife Stephanie. (Interestingly, and just as an aside, I actually knew Allen Wright personally, the expert practitioner who trained her.)

Whether Corey would himself ever agree to participate in a regression of any kind, is unknown. He's not been regressed by anyone at all, as best I know. Michael Relfe's story is as weird as they come, but he was willing to submit to a whole lengthy series of sessions, all of which are transcribed in full detail in the books.

That calls on the reader to pay quite some attention, as Michael is absolutely NOT just making unsubstantiated claims. The sessions record his own shock, disbelief and confusion at what was emerging and what he was recalling, page by page. It's pretty real, and is well worth reading for any student of the current Corey fiasco. It shows, for one, how things really could (or maybe should) be properly investigated.

[PHennessey]

Wait a minute -- so if I spend 20 years in the SSP, and then I'm sent back in time, when I return to my normal life, there's another version of me running around in parallel at the exact same moment?

[Bill Ryan]

Wait a minute -- so if I spend 20 years in the SSP, and then I'm sent back in time, when I return to my normal life, there's another version of me running around in parallel at the exact same moment?

Not exactly (if I understand your question! :) ). If I recall Michael Relfe's story correctly, after his 20 year tour of duty on Mars, he was returned to pretty much the very moment he was 'taken' from... so in this life and timestream, and with his memory wiped, and with his body exactly the same again, his experience seemed subjectively to him to be continuous.

It's like you woke up this morning thinking that you went to bed last night, and slept for 8 hours. All 100% normal. But in Michael Relfe's case, he didn't sleep for 8 hours after he went to bed the previous night: instead, he spent 20 years on Mars.

(If we were having coffee in Starbucks right now, this is where I'd be drawing a diagram on a napkin. :bigsmile: )

[PHennessey]

But if we've now entered into a timeline where you DON'T join the SSP, then that completely negates the whole point of joining in the first place.

What I can't wrap my head around is, if I want someone to work for me for 20 years, why would I send them back through time? Wouldn't they disappear from that timeline? Is this about different timelines? I just don't see the purpose, from the boss's point of view.

[Bill Ryan]

But if we've now entered into a timeline where you DON'T join the SSP, then that completely negates the whole point of joining in the first place.

What I can't wrap my head around is, if I want someone to work for me for 20 years, why would I send them back through time? Wouldn't they disappear from that timeline? Is this about different timelines? I just don't see the purpose, from the boss's point of view.

Yes, as I understand it they'd disappear from that [future] timeline. Presumably, they place the person in a time-and-space transporter device of some kind, and press a button. Or something like that! :)

They are then not there any more... they're returned exactly to where (and WHEN) they came from.

Of course, this is not useful experience for the person involved! If they're mind-wiped back on Planet Earth, they can't use anything they've learned. They can't remember anything about it... not even that any of it happened. But in the future, they may have been extremely useful personnel for a substantial period of time.

From the future boss's point of view, why would they return someone to the past after their contract was finished? That's a good question.

Maybe they needed personnel, who were in short supply, but didn't want to cause a situation on Planet Earth by having people just disappear. Maybe some hand-picked people HAVE disappeared in that way (and stay on Mars and elsewhere)... but the ones that are returned are just those with friends and families. At this point, of course, I'm guessing.

[Jayren]

But if we've now entered into a timeline where you DON'T join the SSP, then that completely negates the whole point of joining in the first place.

What I can't wrap my head around is, if I want someone to work for me for 20 years, why would I send them back through time? Wouldn't they disappear from that timeline? Is this about different timelines? I just don't see the purpose, from the boss's point of view.

If you don't want them to remember, they complete the job on sight and are returned back to there normal lives before anything ever happened, but it did happen the person just can't remember he only remembers what happened that day right before he was taken and that's where he starts his life again without being taken this time. He doesn't exist in the past timeline as anyone but himself when he first entered it doing his job except for the self that existed to when he wasn't aware about his future self.

[Bill Ryan]

(If we were having coffee in Starbucks right now, this is where I'd be drawing a diagram on a napkin. :bigsmile: )

In fact, here it is. I had it in my archives... This is from the book.

http://projectavalon.net/Mars_timeline.gif

[Callista]

Interesting thread - thanks for the diagram Bill - as soon as I saw it I was reminded that Randy Cramer said he had a similar experience - 20 years on Mars then back in his bed the same night he had left.

[Ultima Thule]

To me time regression seems intelligent (never mind whether it is a genuine claim or not) - no people missing, up to unlimited personnel still available as nobody is missing and as nobody is really missing from other peoples pov, there is objectively nothing going on. Ten points for plausible deniability!

UT

[t2016]

Such kind of discussion is good and constructive. I like that.

[PHennessey]

But that would mean that the timeline Corey was sent back to does not include the version where he served the SSP. Aren't they missing his contributions in that timeline? Does this mean that the current SSP has zero record of Corey ever having served with them?

As you can all see, I am struggling with the ramifications of time travel. :confused:

[Bill Ryan]

But that would mean that the timeline Corey was sent back to does not include the version where he served the SSP. Aren't they missing his contributions in that timeline? Does this mean that the current SSP has zero record of Corey ever having served with them?

As you can all see, I am struggling with the ramifications of time travel. :confused:

In this model (despite Stephanie's labeling in her diagram), there aren't two different timelines. There's only one — with the subject moving back in time only at the end of their tour of duty.


The SSP in present time on Planet Earth sends a recruit to the SSP on Mars, at the same time. This is only travel in space, not time.
20 years later, the SSP on Mars (the same one, but 20 years from now) sends the recruit back to WHERE AND WHEN he came from. It's like he was 'borrowed'. That's the only time travel part of the entire zig-zag... the bit when he returns.
If there are any administrative records, we can presume that the present and future SSPs would somehow have the means to communicate with each other. If they can send people back, they can surely send paperwork (or information!) back as well.

[ThePythonicCow]

My guess is that, in cases such as this, the notion of time regression is being (ab)used, to make a story involving, say, 60 years worth of life experiences seem to fit in the lifetime of someone perhaps 40 years old.

No doubt, our conventional school book and scientific understanding of time as a universal and linear "ticking of the clock" is no more than another in a long line of simplified, though still useful for many purposes, models of reality, at its many levels. So, quite likely (though I don't personally understand the matter), there are quite strange paradoxes and anomalies, where reality refuses to conform to whatever present day model we try to impose on it. Reality can be stubborn like that.

However I doubt that the simple time jump drawn on Bill's virtual "cocktail napkin" above is what really happens, and I especially doubt that Corey Goode experienced such.

[Callista]

In my experience and to my way of thinking, we make these time jumps every time we enter the dream state and go elsewhere - we always end up back in our beds (well, mostly!). The concept of time in our paradigm is hard to get one's head around and there is always the concept of different timelines both in present time and also future time and past time. :confused:

[PHennessey]

I cannot fathom how a single timeline can account for the needs of both parties. A single timeline cannot contain two eventualities. The version of reality where Corey serves his time at the SSP cannot coexist with the version where he lives a "normal" life. Surely they must be separate?

Anyway, I don't presume to understand the time paradoxes, or the purpose of time regression. I just wish Corey would answer this question himself, to be honest. I have asked him twice on his FAQ and received no response. I realize that he is a popular guy right about now, so I've left it at that.

Bill, you made a special point of helping to get Corey's story out. I can appreciate that. What I am left with, though, is a nagging suspicion that his story may not be true or, at the very least, it may be someone else's memories and although he is genuinely retelling his story as he sees it, he may be a victim of manipulation.

It would seem that what is needed is to get every "player" in the same room together for a few weeks and debate with each other (on camera) as they try to work out their various points of view. Seems like we need a Who's Who of alien contactees so we can get all the facts on the table and start to really build a more irrefutable picture. Such an event would require the utmost respect for logic and reason, and would require neutral arbiters. It would be a kind of "Truth Crucible" where irrelevancies are burned away and we are left with a pure source of information that people can actually do something with. Because if there's one thing I dislike, it's noise. Noise is the best weapon against the truth. And the only way to fight it is to focus all the energy and knowledge into one place and keep burning the crucible until all the noise boils away.

[Bill Ryan]

My guess is that, in cases such as this, the notion of time regression is being (ab)used

Yes, understood. (Totally. :) )

While I do think there really is some good evidence to show that Michael Relfe's story shouldn't be dismissed (do read it! The books (http://themarsrecords.com/wp/mars-records-download-books) are free) — I have far more of an intellectual problem with the idea of body age regression (so that the person was totally identical to their own eyes when they looked in the mirror the 'next morning', with not even an extra scar). The time travel part seems easy in comparison!

Time travel can be seen as movement/transition in another dimension, like a kind of shortcut. (We often talk of hyperspace, but I was told by one insider that it's actually called subspace... like a kind of 'nothingness' space which all the other dimensions exist in.) That can be conceptualized. Age regression CAN'T be explained like this (as best I can see)... and I can't imagine a mechanism to explain how it could operate.

[araucaria]

If you take the time element out of reincarnation, you are left with a number of parallel lives with any number of possible interferences or interconnections c>a’ e<y etc.

Life n : …b_____c_____d_____e…
Life n + x : …m_____n_____o_____p…
Life n + x + a: …y_____z_____a’_____b’…

In this case, say z may be a throwback to d where the primitive instinct threatens to take over again, or on the contrary d may be a moment of insight through its timeless connection with z. Or b, m, and y might all be recurrences of the same thing, indicating some constant feature, whether good or not so good. The same would hold with one soul having ‘simultaneous’ lives on different planets, (if the word simultaneous has any meaning here), whereby downtime sleeping on earth is a moment for operating elsewhere. 8 hours sleep here might correspond to a thousand years somewhere else. Since time has been removed from the equation, this is no longer an issue. This would be normal operation and not necessarily interference by some controlling group.

This dream time is all familiar ground in literary theory where it is analyzed as narrative time applied to a fiction, which is an imaginary 3D reality. The following diagrams are taken from Jean Ricardou, Problèmes du nouveau roman, Paris, Seuil, 1967). They have two axes: N (narration), and F (fiction). In diagram 1, the narrative speed is shown to vary: with dialogue, the two are in equilibrium: the reading time is proportionate to the speaking time. Otherwise, reported speech can speed things up by being selective or brief, while analysis slows things down: more words than deeds. In figure 2, the narrative comes to a total stop when an object is described. The object is only there in the instant with nothing happening to it: you can write a whole chapter about that object while nothing actually occurs to take your story forward. You won’t catch Dan Brown doing that :) . Lastly diagram 3 shows gaps in either the narrative or the fiction. If you write, ‘The following year’, you story has just skipped a whole 12-month period. Alternatively you can mark the gap with a gap in the writing. Or you can even have a gap in the writing with no gap in the fictional reality: the story wanders off or leaves a blank before taking up again where it left off.


30862

30863

30864


So far, this is all fairly straightforward. Modern fiction however tends to weave all kinds of time loops and other distortions. One simple example of the labyrinth of circular time is given in The Erasers, by Alain Robbe-Grillet, in which a detective, called in exactly 24 hours earlier to investigate a murder, is about to report that no murder took place, when he himself commits that murder.
http://www.postmodernmystery.com/the_erasers.html

We may see the likes of Corey Goode as simply spinning a good yarn, or the likes of Michael Relfe recovering from something very nasty. Either way, what seems to be happening is that our supposedly hardened 3D reality is now appearing to be as malleable as a story-teller’s fiction. The question then becomes: who is telling the story? Answer, all of us, to the extent that we are willing to get involved. If you don’t like the ‘plot’ as it currently stands (the word ‘plot’ here belonging not to conspiracy theory but to literary theory), then feel free to change it.

[Callista]

Personal experiences of this kind are so very subjective it is almost impossible to validate them. The experiences are valid for the experiencer but unless an outside party has had the same sort of experiences, then the outside party has no point of reference. I read of other people’s experiences outside of the norm and some are just too foreign for me accept, but I am aware that my own experiences can be very challenging for others too. To ask for proof is very difficult because some things resonate with some and not with others.

At the end of the day, I appreciate the courage it takes to ‘come out’ and tell the world about your personal experiences. If people make them up for whatever reason, it will come back to bite them on the derriere at some point.

Perhaps ‘disclosure’ has to be a personal event before it can be an acceptable collective event?

[Callista]

I am hearing you PHennessey and I know what you mean. But you will never get the validation you crave from outside of yourself. When you believe in yourself it will all come clearer.

[PHennessey]

Callista, there are two stories: your/my story, and The story. For now I will assume that they are indeed separate things. I can only be me right now, so forgive my limited awareness.

One thing I crave more than anything else in the universe is validation. Validation that I am a good person, validation that I am on the right path, and validation that my version of the facts are close to the truth. Today, I'm not getting what I want. I crave evidence. I crave photographs. I crave something to sink my teeth into and taste. All I am getting is the normal hustle and bustle of daily life, but with an injection of a virulent awareness that something isn't right. But when I look closer, the picture becomes fuzzier -- not clearer. Is this an accident? Or are we being purposely misled? My gut tells me it is the latter. If that is true, I see nothing more important than to discover who is doing the misleading and why.

[Bill Ryan]

Bill, you made a special point of helping to get Corey's story out. I can appreciate that. What I am left with, though, is a nagging suspicion that his story may not be true or, at the very least, it may be someone else's memories and although he is genuinely retelling his story as he sees it, he may be a victim of manipulation.



I agree, and so do very many others who are now much better informed than they were when Christine first went to visit Corey at his house in Dallas last September.

The discussion here is about the idea of the zig-zag time thing. It's really very interesting. I've been fascinated by Michael Relfe's very detailed story, and the evidence that supports it, since I first encountered it 12 years ago.

But nothing I've said in any of my posts here supports Corey's broad claims, some of which (with overwhelming probability in my view) are borrowed from others, and the rest of which he has invented.

There's some truth in his material, of course. But basically (and you read it here first!), in my strong, informed opinion and that of many others, Corey is either a pathological liar (paid or otherwise, though he has seemed to admit he is on a payroll (http://projectavalon.net/Corey_Goode_payroll_screenshot.jpg)), or is so damaged that he sincerely believes his delusions.

Whether they are consciously invented or not, what is VERY clear is that the controllers are letting him run with this ball and are doing absolutely nothing to stop it. Go figure.

As I reported here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?83133-The-Corey-Goode-affair-various-updates-from-David-Wilcock&p=990277&viewfull=1#post990277) and earlier, here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?83133-The-Corey-Goode-affair-various-updates-from-David-Wilcock&p=983917&highlight=danner#post983917) (please do read), my personal friend Jon Danner was assassinated because he had stated he was intending to speak out in conferences about some things that were very sensitive and real, but far less wild and dramatic than Corey's MANY diverse claims (52 Gaiam TV episodes worth).

That's the real risk that real whistleblowers always face: they are regarded as problems, and the problems have to be made to go away. Real whistleblowers are leaned on, threatened, bribed, punished, or in some cases, killed.


They are NOT rewarded and left alone.
They do NOT go on TV with their own co-hosted show.
They do NOT receive the proceeds from online stores selling trinkets, souvenirs, and promotional memorabilia.

Here's the thought experiment to compare.

Can you imagine Ed Snowden peacefully living with his partner in the US, appearing on a weekly TV show, and receiving income from a gift store selling key rings and coffee cups with "You no longer have any privacy" written on them?

No... neither can I. :)

[PHennessey]

That's the real risk that real whistleblowers always face: they are regarded as problems, and the problems have to be made to go away.

Then, it would seem that we need to outsmart these problem-erasers. The only way to outsmart someone is to give tools to their enemies that cannot be used against them.

One thing that David Wilcock spoke about was his vetting process of not divulging information until several sources came forward with the same information. There is also the idea of anonymity. If a source has critical information, they should A. feel safe to divulge it B. be taken seriously. This at first appears to be a social challenge. I think it could be re-imagined as an information technology challenge that could be solved with the right tools and the right information format.

[Callista]

WOW! there's a time loop here - I posted my reply to PHennessey after I saw it at 15:12 but my reply appeared at 15:11. How did that happen?? :)

[PHennessey]

My comment is showing as "Last edited by Bill Ryan." Bill, what did you do to my post? :bigsmile:

http://i.imgur.com/zRIJJmt.png





Hi there — this is Bill. My apologies! I never altered anything, for sure. It was pretty late at night, and I think I went to reply to your post and instead hit the 'Edit' button which (for the mods) is right next to the 'Reply with Quote' button for every member's post. I should have reversed out of it, but instead I think I must have saved the [unchanged] post. My bad. I do appreciate this very interesting discussion, and all your posts. Certainly, no mods action here was intended by me. :)
:focus:

[Sierra]

It is the physical regression, AND the memory tied to physical regression that baffles me...

It has to be tied to an altered state or an alter in some way.

[PHennessey]

Bill, I read your links about Jon Danner. What a remarkable and tragic story of loss.

[Sierra]

Callista, there are two stories: your/my story, and The story. For now I will assume that they are indeed separate things. I can only be me right now, so forgive my limited awareness.

One thing I crave more than anything else in the universe is validation. Validation that I am a good person, validation that I am on the right path, and validation that my version of the facts are close to the truth. Today, I'm not getting what I want. I crave evidence. I crave photographs. I crave something to sink my teeth into and taste. All I am getting is the normal hustle and bustle of daily life, but with an injection of a virulent awareness that something isn't right. But when I look closer, the picture becomes fuzzier -- not clearer. Is this an accident? Or are we being purposely misled? My gut tells me it is the latter. If that is true, I see nothing more important than to discover who is doing the misleading and why.

I hear you. There is an insane amount of disinfo around the subjects we discuss. I joined Avalon in 2011, and the way my mind is working it out, is to read everything, eliminate as much as I can, and review. Some nuggets start to stick out of the ground.

I have decided: We are immortal spirit, temporarily enclosed in meat sacks, real. Virtually, all military, governmental, religious, educational, medical, and justice systems are psychopathic entities in cahoots, real. UFOs, real. Men on Mars, real. Time travel, real. Monarch12/MKUltra, real.

One of my key tenets in determining truthiness, is integrity. Does what the speaker say, have integrity? Does the speaker have integrity? Does what the speaker say, match in some respect, what other speakers who have integrity, also say on the same subject?

Another key tenet is staying power. Time usually tells on the fakers.

And sometimes... Truth is presented as a story, but it still has integrity, and somehow still lodges in the memory as a truth.

For what it is worth, though I do not know you, and only by your words in this single post, you are focused on being "a good person", you are focused on finding truth, tells me two things. One, you understand and accept that "goodness" is your path, and you respect truth. Therefore I have every confidence your wanderings will take you where you wish to go.

You will probably hate me for saying this lol, but be more patient with yourself. You are young, and when you get old, somehow experience seems to help with seeing the fuzziness, as you say. Consider this search of yours a long haul, and where the pieces click will surprise you over and over.

Welcome to the rabbit hole. :) :facepalm: :)

[araucaria]

The point of my earlier post was to suggest that we are not operating on the plane of physical ‘reality’ at all, but on another, parallel, non-physical narrative plane – some kind of limbo, or purgatory. On this plane, the distinction between truth and lies is presented as one between creativity and plagiarism, and it is the subject of a post I made last year:



http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=898478&viewfull=1#post898478

[WhiteLove]

When I entered into a different density reality I noticed a much different more slow "time tick rate" there, the time progressed in a different way over there and this was synced to the level of peace. So what I realized from this experience was that different realities have their own clock rate, hence travelling through time is automatic when you learn to shift into a different density reality, simply by taking a certain path through densities you would either travel back or forward in time relative to your original location. Now, this is all a theoretical idea. In practice I also experienced a dimensional shift from that density into some other one that I never entered fully, what I noticed about that was that density where I was actually froze in space and time, my consciousness had escaped that reality's time and it might be that had I returned there, that reality would have resumed precisely from the point of time when I left. This would mean that there could be multiple timelines all at once, but only one of them is in play mode while the other ones are in pause/sleep mode.

[Andre]

Although I have listened to an extended radio interview of Corey, I can't say I know anything about the circumstances of his time regression. From reading this thread, I assume that his account implies that his memory of the 20 years was wiped rather than being taken back in time for the purpose of altering something specific with minimal impact on the current timeline?

[Pam]

My guess is that, in cases such as this, the notion of time regression is being (ab)used, to make a story involving, say, 60 years worth of life experiences seem to fit in the lifetime of someone perhaps 40 years old.

No doubt, our conventional school book and scientific understanding of time as a universal and linear "ticking of the clock" is no more than another in a long line of simplified, though still useful for many purposes, models of reality, at its many levels. So, quite likely (though I don't personally understand the matter), there are quite strange paradoxes and anomalies, where reality refuses to conform to whatever present day model we try to impose on it. Reality can be stubborn like that.

However I doubt that the simple time jump drawn on Bill's virtual "cocktail napkin" above is what really happens, and I especially doubt that Corey Goode experienced such.


Paul, you took the words right out of my mouth, however you stated them much more eloquently then I would have. The other concern that I have is, what kind of experience would someone have to have to make it worth the trouble to do this time regression. It only seems logical that if this was to occur, only those with a lot to contribute would be involved. What skill does Corey have that would warrant this experience?

I do totally concur that although this time regression may well occur, it is a perfect excuse for adding years of experience that will never be verifiable.

[PHennessey]

Thank you for the kind words, Sierra.


You are young

Is 31 young? I don't know. I like to think I age faster on the outside than the inside. I do get carded a lot. :cocktail:


Welcome to the rabbit hole.

Oh believe me, I've been here for some time. :peep:

[WhiteLove]

Maybe I have missed something, but my understanding about the Corey Goode story is that all of this stuff is presented without any kinds of hard evidence. And that is exactly what I find is the key issue with the Corey Goode story, episodes with enormous claims and nothing to back it up. It surprises me a little that a hard working truth seeker like David all of a sudden decides to go all in without having any hard evidence presented to the audience. He might have done his cross correlations successfully on his own, but this is really the kind of content that requires at least "some" hard evidence and to my awareness there's none. Why David, it makes no sense.

[OMG]

We ALL want irrefutable evidence. But without direct first hand conscious experience we have to settle for stories and a lack of personal power while we feed the hypothetical unconscious machine.

Direct conscious power in any given paradigm is the only game in town... ("Power" is not to be confused with "force", the latter being a form of power imposed onto or over others against their conscious volition, etc).

BTW: In Corey's defense it seems feasible that based on the so-called power of his alien friends that he could easily be protected. Also, why can't there be rational reasons for withholding certain things for now?

:)

[PHennessey]

If I had regular contact with an alien, I would require that they allow themselves to be photographed, videotaped, and documented in explicit detail so that the images/video can be put into a digital cloud vault and released remotely at a time of my choosing. It confuses me as to why anyone with such incredible experiences would not do everything in their power to prove it is happening to the outside world.

[Agape]

If I had regular contact with an alien, I would require that they allow themselves to be photographed, videotaped, and documented in explicit detail so that the images/video can be put into a digital cloud vault and released remotely at a time of my choosing. It confuses me as to why anyone with such incredible experiences would not do everything in their power to prove it is happening to the outside world.

1/Encounters are real . There have been perhaps good few instances of direct ET-Human encounters but they're still rare .
People who claim to have 'contact experiences' every other day are re-experieriencing themselves in elaborate manner on level of their archetypal understanding of things, themselves and the Universe ..

2/The time-space field where ET abide can wrap human 4D space like a pancake in my opinion,
and when they leave there are very little traces left behind

3/vis point one : number of people who actually experienced ET contact is limited but we will never know of all of them

4/most current human technologies experience malfunction or are otherwise rendered useless in presence of their time-space fields

5/they are able to create phenomenal synchronicity of events where a level of communication between them and human beings can manifest

6/therefor , we have to leave it upon them .. or ...come up with more sophisticated scientific method ..



:angel:

[lightseeker]

Thank you Bill for the down loads regarding Michael Relfe, I glanced at some of his material and will take my time to read the downloads.
I have been following David Wilcock's interviews with Corey Goode through all eight episodes. I have found it very interesting to listen to Goodes testimony on his experiences. I believe that he believes he is telling the truth.

However I wonder why David Wilcock has not raised the issue of Michael Relfe's information. David claims that he is always very thorough in researching the backgrounds of his new whistleblowers thoroughly with his many sources. I would expect David to be aware of Michael Relfe books. I find this puzzling.

Perhaps this subject should be brought up regarding his interviews with Goode.

[PHennessey]

4/most current human technologies experience malfunction or are otherwise rendered useless in presence of their time-space fields



You're probably right, but I am still feeling empty. Surely ETs know of our desire for confirmation of their presence and documentation of their words and actions, and if they desired, they could attenuate or eliminate this effect on our recording devices. I have a feeling that they don't want to be recorded and that this is the real reason.

Which brings us to Corey Goode. He has stated, with David Wilcock to back him up, that there would be "no point" in recording his interactions with the floating orb that transports him to elsewhere because people would accuse him of faking it. As if computer graphics are so powerful that there is no reason to attempt to record these events? This is piss-poor reasoning. If you are experiencing a phenomenon like this, and if you are not making every effort to record it or document it, you appear to me to be a fraud, or at the very least you are seriously deluded.

[araucaria]

I mentioned the novelist Robbe-Grillet above. Here is a lecture he gave in the US explaining the interweaving of fiction and autobiography from the perspective of one who is explicitly not pretending to proclaim ‘the truth’. His awareness of how this works is worth pondering by anyone claiming otherwise and/or their readers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYhfREWj-hg

One particular point I would pick out is his reference to structure, as defined by the philosopher Gilles Deleuze. He describes it as the interaction of two parallel axes, one of which has something missing, the other something in excess. Structure is the dynamic interplay of the two, process rather than fixed outcome. This can be applied to the simple diagrams I posted above, which can be much more complex than that. A simple analogy would be a game of musical chairs: n people running around n-1 chairs; no chair assigned to any particular individual, and one yet-to-be-designated individual with no chair at all. I am going to give an example of this on the other thread.

My own analogy for structure is as something organic such as a tree rather than architectural whereby a pre-established plan is followed to the letter. See: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=767799&viewfull=1#post767799
Robbe-Grillet very clearly states the difference between the two. If you take a Borges story as the skeleton of a novel and try to flesh it out, the novel in progress will begin to work against, and transform, the original project or skeleton. Applying this lesson to the ‘real world’, one begins to understand how the best-laid plans of the cabal will always come a cropper. You can build a cathedral out of stone and it may stay up (we don’t hear about the ones that collapsed), but projects to engineer life will not work. Applying this lesson to the narrative of whistleblowers and the likes of Corey G., listen to Robbe-Grillet’s comments on his novel Le Voyeur, which is the narrator’s attempt at giving an innocent account of a sexual murder committed by himself. Not by chance, he is a door-to-door salesman selling wristwatches. In other words, he is selling, in the present tense, a version of time that does not actualize the past as the true present is bound to do, as explained below. For another example of this type of narrative, see http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=833954&viewfull=1#post833954


If classical thought obtains structure by insulating a set of elements against change, a multiplicity is the paradoxical notion of the structure of pure change. Which is not a night where all the cows are grey, deleuzians ensure us: being is highly and intricately structured, only it cannot be accessed if one fits it within the premises–conclusion structure of logic, the subject–predicate structure of language, the terms–relations structure of mathematics or marxian dialectics. “Being, or Time, is a multiplicity” [6, p. 85]: actuality is classical ontology (the actual is logically consistent and spatial), the past is virtuality, i.e., structures of pure difference or multiplicities, and the future is the return of difference. “There is no present that does not actualize the past. It is all of the past that is actualized at every moment. The past that is actualized exists” [7, p. 52].
Time is not determined by space (in the sense of being represented by a time line), nor does it accord to the consistency requirement of logic; it has neither identity nor logical consistency — “a chronic non-chronological time” [8, p. 129]. The past can never be recomposed with instants or intervals since this would be to negate its specific mode of being. “We might as well look for darkness beneath the light.” [9, p. 181]. The future can never be the same as the past, because the past is not even identical with itself. http://www.academia.edu/1101127/The_Deleuzian_concept_of_structure_and_quantum_mechanics

[Constance]

Phennessy, I always used to have the same thoughts as you regarding solid evidence. Here is my perspective.
I always wondered why there was not a plethora of photographic/material evidence detailing everything regarding time travel, aliens, parallel universes etc until I had my own personal unexpected mind blowing experience.
During that sole experience (It was spontaneous and never happened again) it never even crossed my mind to take a photo or to bring back evidence. The reason? I could not find any reference points for what was happening. Imagine something happening that is completely outside of your frame of reference because it is so unexpected? I was so absorbed in the whole experience that it never even occurred to me that I would need to prove to someone else that it had happened.
Maybe I will share my own story one day here on Avalon but at this point in time, I feel extremely reluctant to do so due to all the reasons that people have outlined in this thread

[PHennessey]

I'm a little surprised to hear you say that. I think this is one of the few places where I feel safe to tell such a story.

[ThePythonicCow]

Maybe I will share my own story one day here on Avalon but at this point in time, I feel extremely reluctant to do so due to all the reasons that people have outlined in this thread
It is one thing to have doubts, to disbelieve ... for example, I personally doubt and dismiss much of what is written here on Avalon (and what I doubt seems to keep shifting, over time.)

But unless we have a substantial basis for disagreeing, I recommend that dissent or doubt be expressed with a gentle and tolerant attitude, with good humor, perhaps as a genuine question or two, appreciating that we all have delightful and diverse and changing experiences and awareness.

The negativity that is sometimes labeled as trolling, and indeed that label seems to fit well sometimes, is likely often not intentional disruption, but rather a common human response to protect self and others in one's "group" from what may seem like dangerous external deceptions or delusions. It seems to be a tendency that is part of being human, part of our strength and part of our weakness, part of what helps keep us divided and controlled, oh these many millennia.

[Constance]

Maybe I will share my own story one day here on Avalon but at this point in time, I feel extremely reluctant to do so due to all the reasons that people have outlined in this thread
It is one thing to have doubts, to disbelieve ... for example, I personally doubt and dismiss much of what is written here on Avalon (and what I doubt seems to keep shifting, over time.)

But unless we have a substantial basis for disagreeing, I recommend that dissent or doubt be expressed with a gentle and tolerant attitude, with good humor, perhaps as a genuine question or two, appreciating that we all have delightful and diverse and changing experiences and awareness.

The negativity that is sometimes labeled as trolling, and indeed that label seems to fit well sometimes, is likely often not intentional disruption, but rather a common human response to protect self and others in one's "group" from what may seem like dangerous external deceptions or delusions. It seems to be a tendency that is part of being human, part of our strength and part of our weakness, part of what helps keep us divided and controlled, oh these many millennia.

Yes. I would dearly like to get beyond all that separates and divides us Paul.

I realise that people here on Avalon have the highest of intentions when it comes to getting to the truth however what I also feel after looking at another thread I explained here.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?85125-Shane-The-Ruiner-s-interview-with-Kerry-Cassidy-8-Sept-2015&p=1002436&viewfull=1#post1002436

[Constance]

I'm a little surprised to hear you say that. I think this is one of the few places where I feel safe to tell such a story.

Okay. Well, I will think about what you have said. :heart:

[Bill Ryan]

I'm a little surprised to hear you say that. I think this is one of the few places where I feel safe to tell such a story.

Okay. Well, I will think about what you have said. :heart:

I, too, have a story, intricately connected with the subject of time in general, which is so out-of-the-box-crazy (even by my own standards) that I've never told it publicly. This is a very safe place, but in my own case, as a sort of minor-semi-public figure, I have to go a little carefully. I'm kind of creeping up on it slowly. :)

[araucaria]

I'm a little surprised to hear you say that. I think this is one of the few places where I feel safe to tell such a story.

Okay. Well, I will think about what you have said. :heart:

I, too, have a story, intricately connected with the subject of time in general, which is so out-of-the-box-crazy (even by my own standards) that I've never told it publicly. This is a very safe place, but in my own case, as a sort of minor-semi-public figure, I have to go a little carefully. I'm kind of creeping up on it slowly. :)
All in your own... good time, Bill - looking forward to that.
Maybe it happened to a good friend of yours or something? ;)