Courtney Brown Announcement for February (now March) 2014

[Conehead]

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Strange, that craft has the head, the eye and the beak, and maybe everything else, of a bird...

What is interesting to me on this piece is the tail. Why would one configure the tail of a bird like this? Birds tails are horizontal.

[Operator]

I see some comments about the timing of the announcement and that Courtney should
not wait with it etc. To make it clear ... It will NOT be HIS announcement.

He only has knowledge about it and the announcement needs to be made on the right moment.

We apparently have the weird situation that he expects that after the impact of the
announcement it will be difficult to discuss the new perception and suggests it should
be done in advance. But we don't know what it is about ...

[Hervé]

Posted by Conehead (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Strange, that craft has the head, the eye and the beak, and maybe everything else, of a bird...

What is interesting to me on this piece is the tail. Why would one configure the tail of a bird like this? Birds tails are horizontal.

Indeed!

See discussion starting at this post (<---)

[Operator]

This comic strip was in his last email:



Was that posted yet? Last text balloon is interesting ...

[johnf]

Posted by Operator (here)
I see some comments about the timing of the announcement and that Courtney should
not wait with it etc. To make it clear ... It will NOT be HIS announcement.

He only has knowledge about it and the announcement needs to be made on the right moment.

We apparently have the weird situation that he expects that after the impact of the
announcement it will be difficult to discuss the new perception and suggests it should
be done in advance. But we don't know what it is about ...

If the announcement contains information that has the potential to change peoples perceptions in a big way
the media will go into convulsions like we have never seen before.
That is just one angle, if it is archeological there will be loud debates, and threats of evaporating funding.

If it is scientific, focusing on any number of overlapping and interdependent fields there will be the same far reaching confusions, and battles.

If it affects all such areas at once, well, nobody will be able to ignore it, no matter how hard they try.
Also if it is as big as a lot of us would like it to be, there will be rapid changes on all sorts of levels, that will consume our attention for a while, and the majority will still be grasping for an officially sanctioned idea to trust, and look for people in high places to blame if things don't go well.
That last , in light of the most recent implication posting seems highly likely.

JohnF

[Roisin]

Well lets just hope that it's something more than some equivocal ephemeral thing and is at least a stepping stone that sheds new insights on "something" of monumental importance. Time will tell....

[araucaria]

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Posted by Conehead (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Strange, that craft has the head, the eye and the beak, and maybe everything else, of a bird...

What is interesting to me on this piece is the tail. Why would one configure the tail of a bird like this? Birds tails are horizontal.

Indeed!

See discussion starting at this post (<---)

And of course here:

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Erratum edit: Sorry folks... this is an Onion-like satire (see post # 540)

[Operator]

Posted by Operator (here)


Last text balloon is interesting ...

Connecting dots here ... what has Farsight / Courtney to do with a "Comet trick"

2 things come to mind:

First is of course the Hale Bopp saga for which they could have gotten "the heat" while in reality something
else happened or perhaps what happened early 2013 in Russia (although that was called a 'meteorite').
Remember that Courtney was one of the first to say that that meteor was related and indicated that the
original predicted coastal events were now off? This was also ridiculed then ...

Could that also be the reference to 'they did it twice' ? ... just thinking out loud.

[Hervé]

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Posted by Conehead (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Strange, that craft has the head, the eye and the beak, and maybe everything else, of a bird...

What is interesting to me on this piece is the tail. Why would one configure the tail of a bird like this? Birds tails are horizontal.

Indeed!

See discussion starting at this post (<---)

And of course here:

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Erratum edit: Sorry folks... this is an Onion-like satire (see post # 540)

Unfounded (whatever) insinuations were implied:

If the article itself came from someone running with the ball after an original satire, the illustrations are however authentic artifacts:


The Saqqara artifact discovered by Dr. Khalil Messiha.



The Saqqara artifact.

According to Messiha's son, Dawoud Khalil Messiha, an architect who continued the work of his father, Gregorie's suggestion that the Saqqara Bird could be a weather vane is impossible due to the lack of markings or holes on the model that would serve as a means of hanging it. Dawoud Khalil Messiha noted that the only hole that exists on the bottom of the Saqqara Bird is a recent one and was made by museum officials to fix the model on a stick with reference to a model description in Cairo museum records.[11]

Aerodynamics expert Simon Sanderson tested a replica model in a wind tunnel without a tailplane and found that it produced “four times the glider’s own weight in lift.” In Liverpool University, Sanderson then subjected it with the data from wind tunnel and added a stabilizing tailplane to a flight simulator meant to replicate “the same trials as a modern fighter jet.” In virtual air streams and conditions in Egypt, the Saqqara Bird actually flew quite well. “Over 2,000 years after the ancient Egyptians carved this mysterious bird, modern technology has proved beyond doubt that it could have flown.” [12]

Hence the discussion in this post is still as valid for this artifact as it is for the artifacts commented on in that discussion!



One of the Quimbaya "airplanes"

The Quimbaya artifacts are several dozen golden objects, found in Colombia, made by the Quimbaya civilization culture, dated around 1000 CE, a few of which (the so-called Quimbaya airplanes) are supposed by ancient astronauts theorists to represent modern airplanes, and therefore to be out-of-place artifacts. The whole of the figurines, measuring 2 to 3 inches (5 to 7.5 cm) each, are described in mainstream archaeology as depicting birds, lizards, amphibians and insects common in that region and period, some of them highly stylized, as in the Gold Museum, Bogotá.

In 1994, Germans Peter Belting and Conrad Lubbers created simplified radio-controlled scale models of these objects and showed that their models, which lack some convoluted features present in the real figurines, could fly.[1]

[conk]

I'm getting solicitations from financial newsletters (damn the ones I subscribed to for selling my name) that claim the Fed and Government will soon require everyone to turn in their cash as the country, and perhaps world, goes 100% digital and cashless. Not too far fetched. Predicted to occur within months. Heck, we're almost there now. Isn't cash only about 5 to 10% printed, the rest digital?

[araucaria]

Posted by Conehead (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Strange, that craft has the head, the eye and the beak, and maybe everything else, of a bird...

What is interesting to me on this piece is the tail. Why would one configure the tail of a bird like this? Birds tails are horizontal.

Amzer Zo says the artefact is genuine. OK.
The accompanying plan shows a horizontal tail not too visible in the above picture:

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Also, one could turn your question round. Why dress up an aircraft to look like a bird? Plausible deniability??!

[Hervé]

Posted by araucaria (here)
[...]

Amzer Zo says the artefact is genuine. OK.
The accompanying plan shows a horizontal tail not too visible in the above picture:

[...]

Also, one could turn your question round. Why dress up an aircraft to look like a bird? Plausible deniability??!

If you'd bother check the Wiki entry or even read what I quoted of it, you might have run into this:

... added a stabilizing tailplane to a flight simulator meant to replicate “the same trials as a modern fighter jet."

... or:

Messiha built a model of the Saqqara Bird to test for its aerodynamic efficiency. His model was six times larger than the dimensions of the original in an attempt to maintain its proportional aerodynamic efficiency,[8] and was given a horizontal tailplane to act as a stabilizer, which Messiha believed is a missing part of the original model. Messiha insisted that he was able to make his model fly.[9]

Now, why the insistence on hair-splitting?

[Johnny]

I have seen only nine minutes of this video, but it has really caught my attention and it relates to this thread.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LFSRTsLOiv0

(I cannot find that search button, to see if the video has been shown before, here on Avalon )

Greetings Johnny

[araucaria]

Posted by Amzer Zo (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)
[...]

Amzer Zo says the artefact is genuine. OK.
The accompanying plan shows a horizontal tail not too visible in the above picture:

[...]

Also, one could turn your question round. Why dress up an aircraft to look like a bird? Plausible deniability??!

If you'd bother check the Wiki entry or even read what I quoted of it, you might have run into this:

... added a stabilizing tailplane to a flight simulator meant to replicate “the same trials as a modern fighter jet."

... or:

Messiha built a model of the Saqqara Bird to test for its aerodynamic efficiency. His model was six times larger than the dimensions of the original in an attempt to maintain its proportional aerodynamic efficiency,[8] and was given a horizontal tailplane to act as a stabilizer, which Messiha believed is a missing part of the original model. Messiha insisted that he was able to make his model fly.[9]

Now, why the insistence on hair-splitting?

I detect a hint of aggressiveness, but no answer to my question. A couple of pages back, someone suggested that instead of learning remote view, people need to see what is under their nose. What I have under my nose is an object that flies. I have no worry either way that it may be a technological rather than an animate object. However, unlike the hieroglyphic of a helicopter we have all seen, it also looks very like a bird, being endowed with features that I do not understand in the context of a plane. I wanted to know if someone has an explanation, that’s all. Apparently not. No big deal.

[Hervé]

Posted by araucaria (here)
[...]
I detect a hint of aggressiveness, but no answer to my question.

[...]

I am curious as to what you detect of the individual who stated this:

Posted by araucaria (here)
[...]
Amzer Zo says the artefact is genuine. OK.

[...]

... when said artifact was discovered in 1898 and dated to ~ 200 BCE (see Saqqara Bird).

[T Smith]

I’ve read this thread, followed all the implication postings, and have connected my own dots. At this juncture, it’s pretty clear to me what’s going on here.

Whatever the announcement is (it could be anything, really—I’m leaning toward something regarding the true history of humanity in connection with the true nature of reality) and whenever it comes, it will be nothing new, and certainly nothing earth shattering. We may even see renewed cynicism from those who have followed Farsight’s announcements with heightened interest; some will feel duped by investing so much energy into this little social experiment.

The announcement, billed as an earth-shattering revelation, may impart a new perspective on something already known, but no new knowledge. I guarantee there are entire threads already published here on Avalon, as we speak, discussing whatever “announcement” we shall all bear witness to in the middle of March. I guarantee there are already scores of books already published about the implications of this announcement, some cornerstones of alternative thought, some out of print, some never to have achieved a second run, some collecting dust in the back rooms of little-know book publishers.

In other words, this information is already out there in the public lexicon, and therefore commonly known, understood, and contemplated to those of a certain mind set. Courtney Brown doesn’t make that point clear enough, in my opinion. But I think he dare not go there because it would lose our interest (we who have been tasked to help him make viral the forthcoming announcement to the sleeping herd). So in a very real sense this stick-and-carrot game is somewhat deceptive.

But isn’t that exactly the human condition right now? Are we not amid a paradigm shift in awareness? Some of us understand the world in a much different way from others. Some of us have already spotted the man behind the curtain, studied him, and even tried to describe him to onlookers. Now, apparently, The Farsight Institute has discovered him scientifically. What Courtney Brown is trying to do here is to “popularize” the man behind the curtain, in the name of science. That’s the crux of it.

This is a lengthy thread and many others have already pointed out the same observation. It is my impression that he believes this is possible (to popularize) because science has quantified the truth. CB is a scientist and embraces science as the pious embrace religion. He assumes if only the world were privy to the scientific information there could be no doubt, it would propel the masses, by default, right into a paradigm shift of awareness. The evidence is irrefutable and shall lead the way.

I have to disagree with this assessment. The masses do not worship science, per se; they worship propaganda. The scientific method doesn’t instruct them how to think and what to believe; this is a common misnomer. Propaganda instructs them how to think and what to believe. If scientific evidence, alone, were a catalyst to convince people about the nature of reality, they need only visit 911truth.org to discover the reality behind 911. There are mountains of irrefutable scientific evidence readily evident for all to see, yet most people refuse to accept the reality (based on the scientific evidence) and instead embrace the propaganda. Scientific evidence isn’t the almighty elixir to truth for the masses (unless the channels of propaganda, controlled by the PTB, endorse it and say it’s the truth) any more than channeling is or ancient prophecy is.

At the end of the day this evidence might not be as powerful or effectual as Courtney Brown thinks it is.

[Etherios]

Well atm we have so many things happening that can effect humanity that ... almost anything they "announce" is irrelevant.

Fukushima, Syria, Ukraine, Dictatorships, Economy , Food etc etc i can go on and on ...

As they said already ... this wont be anything mindblowing. So they can just say remote viewing is a reality and somehow scientific proven or something. And ofc they need us to accept and boost it to the rest.

We shall see

[Arak]

The masses do not worship science, per se; they worship propaganda. The scientific method doesn’t instruct them how to think and what to believe; this is a common misnomer. Propaganda instructs them how to think and what to believe.

THIS is something I hope everyone would read and just maybe understand how they are just plain puppets. And don't think that I would think I am anything else. I just am aware of the fact.

[Johnny]

Posted by Arak (here)

The masses do not worship science, per se; they worship propaganda. The scientific method doesn’t instruct them how to think and what to believe; this is a common misnomer. Propaganda instructs them how to think and what to believe.

THIS is something I hope everyone would read and just maybe understand how they are just plain puppets. And don't think that I would think I am anything else. I just am aware of the fact.

Have you never heard the phrase: Once the science believed ??? I have heard it many many many times and at that time they didn't say: 'We believe' no no this is not scientific.

There are many areas of science, and scientists are like most others: follow the leader and/or the money, very few are really conscious about what what they do.

And BTW where there not scientists involved in the 9/11 Commission ??

Kindly regard Johnny

[Robin]

For those on this thread seriously concerned about being dissapointed with this announcement, which Courtney is only a small part of, do keep in mind that there are other "announcements" currently at work which will happen sooner rather than later.

The Vatican will soon be exposed for its child trafficking, with Kevin Annett and ITCCS taking Pope Francis to trial on March 31. In reality, there is no stopping this public exposure, and the Vatican will soon be revealed for what it really is. This is the announcement that is going to be the pebble that starts an avalanche.

Courtney's announcement will be a supplement to the Vatican exposure. When people are starting to question themselves and their beliefs when the Vatican is exposed, they are going to need something to turn to. Surely a public announcement about "humanity's true history" will provide some satisfaction for certain people. And as Courtney states, it will take some time for the rest to accept.

But there is not better time for this announcement (whatever it may be) to come than soon, because the Vatican as on a fast-track to being exposed.

The "Great Domino Effect of 2014"...so it begins. Strap on your helmet.