Quote:17.3 Questioner: In meditation I got the question about the crater in Russia in the, I believe, Tunguska region. Can you tell me what caused the crater?

Ra: I am Ra. The destruction of a fission reactor caused this crater.

17.4 Questioner: Whose reactor?

Ra: I am Ra. This was what you may call a “drone” sent by Confederation which malfunctioned. It was moved to an area where its destruction would not cause infringement upon the will of mind/body/spirit complexes. It was then detonated.

17.5 Questioner: What was its purpose in coming here?

Ra: It was a drone designed to listen to the various signals of your peoples. You were, at that time, beginning work in a more technical sphere. We were interested in determining the extent and the rapidity of your advances. This drone was powered by a simple fission motor or engine as you would call it. It was not that type which you now know, but was very small. However, it has the same destructive effect upon third-density molecular structures. Thus as it malfunctioned we felt it was best to pick a place for its destruction rather than attempt to retrieve it, for the possibility/probability modes for this maneuver looked very, very minute.

17.6 Questioner: Was its danger both blast and radiation?

Ra: I am Ra. There is very little radiation, as you know of it, in this particular type of device. There is radiation which is localized, but the localization is such that it does not drift with the winds as does the emission of your somewhat primitive weapons.

17.7 Questioner: I believe that analysis has detected very little radiation in the trees in this area. Is this low level of radiation a result of what you are speaking of?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. The amount of radiation is very localized. However, the energy which is released is powerful enough to cause difficulties.

Quote:Having at our disposal all this data, we are led towards accepting
Kazantsev’s “Alien Spacecraft” hypothesis as probably
worthy of further consideration, even if in a modified form.
It seems conceivable that in the morning of June 30, 1908,
two artificial objects flew over Central Siberia and one of them
exploded at Tunguska due to its internal energy. Whether this
event should have been interpreted as an “aerospace combat”
or as a “failed rescue operation” is a matter of conjecture. All
experienced Tunguska specialists agree that this problem will

Quote:...the TSB’s explosion must have been produced by its internal energy (chemical, nuclear, or other).

(10-26-2010, 12:03 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: Wow, fascinating, and thanks for posting. It's starting to seem like Tunguska could quite legitimately be moved to the "Ra's claims verified by science" thread.

(10-27-2010, 12:43 AM)Questioner Wrote: Intriguing, Lavazza, thank you. The magazine you provided had a lot of interesting information.

(10-27-2010, 12:43 AM)Questioner Wrote: I think this is more what one science show calls "plausible," rather than "confirmed." Or, "Ra's claims that human science has to concede are mysteries it hasn't yet solved."

(10-27-2010, 01:49 AM)Lavazza Wrote: I rather wished that that thread had a subject line as you wrote it

(10-25-2010, 09:52 AM)Eric Wrote: - The lack of human deaths might imply that it was a pre-determined location for the explosion

Quote:http://www.tunguskaevent.net/
The massive explosion, blast, or shock wave was so powerful that is leveled or flattened over 100 million plus trees in an area covering over 850 sure miles. Here is a picture of the flattened trees from the Tunguska blast.

(01-19-2012, 01:46 PM)Diana Wrote: It is distressing to me that the Confederation would cause this kind of damage: trees, and all the other life forms that were affected. So what if no human life was affected; human life is not the only life.

(01-19-2012, 06:48 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: I believe perfection would imply a standstill, as nothing would need to evolve or change.

(01-19-2012, 06:16 PM)Oceania Wrote: why do these advanced beings make such bloopers? doesn't give me hope for eventual perfectness of things.

(01-19-2012, 06:46 PM)DuncanIdahoTPF Wrote: I think that the fallacy of these "ETs" is one of the most comforting things I have run across reading/consuming Q'uo and other material. If they are infallible... then I couldn't possibly be "one" with them as they would be truly "alien" to me. If everyone made the exact correct / most efficient decision every single time (even for more advanced beings than us), things would get very boring very fast. And to me, "perfection" and "idealism" go hand in hand. We have all seen what idolatry has done to this world (*coughorganizedreligionscough*).

Personally, I don't think I could accomplish anything that I could describe as "perfection" in this density and even in 4 - 7th density I could imagine myself still considering that a quite lofty goal.

(01-19-2012, 07:35 PM)Oldern Wrote: Because some trees and some animals died?
I do not want to sound rude, but the alternative (3rd density death) is worse than 1st/2nd density "damage", especially when this reality is such that you can always come back again, and again, and again. I am pretty sure that the Tree social memory complex lovingly accepted that tiny sacrifice it had to make in order to not make a fuss over a fusion reactor blowing up o_o

(01-19-2012, 06:56 PM)Diana Wrote: For me, it has less to do with perfection at some point, and more to do with this event sounding like a 3D human blunder. Humans disregard life, especially life other than human. Why would the Confederation allow so much destruction? Wouldn't they have a way to avoid loss of life? Or are they just as inept technologically as humans? Why couldn't they use sound, or create a tiny black hole or something to prevent all that loss of life? It doesn't make sense, unless the Confederation is not advanced or evolved at all.

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: You are throwing me a lot of questions, Diana. The majority of those questions are usually thrown when someone behaves in a way that seems to support animal killings (which I do not support at all), animals being treated poorly while trying new medicines on them (which I do not support at all), or places one life above the other (which I did not).

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: What differentiates 3rd density from the densities before it is the presence of Free Will. This has been stated many times in the Law of One and in other places. That obviously means that the FOCUS is in this reality on the 3rd density beings. That does not mean that we get to not love the animals and the plants. It means that we get to choose whether we love them or not.

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: You sound like you are trying to blame them for doing what they did.

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: In this density, our society's maintained free will was so important that they have placed a force field around this planetary sphere to keep the interference to a minimum. Judging by that, it is obvious that the main goal in this planet is to move into 4th density, not to preserve life of 2nd and 1st density beings. If you preserve something, you freeze it, you freeze change itself. That is not healthy to a learning experience, but that is not my point here.

(01-19-2012, 09:07 PM)Oldern Wrote: Again: just think about how 7,000,000,000 people are eating every day. Majority of those eat meat. Which means that in order to maintain their 3rd density incarnations, they terminate 2d incarnations all the time. Is that considered bad by you? You are free to stop doing it. But every individual has its own free will, as that is the POINT for being here. You cannot decide for others what to do, but you can love them and allow them to do whatever they do. Even if you perceive it as something bad.

(01-19-2012, 09:07 PM)Oldern Wrote: I do not want to turn this into a net argument when there is nothing to lose or gain by "winning" it, so sorry if it felt like I was attacking you or animals/plants right to live. I was not. I was just shocked for a moment because I was not used to this kind of questioning when it comes to higher density being's actions, especially at a case which was quite harmless to our Earth as a whole.

(01-19-2012, 08:58 PM)Diana Wrote:

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: You are throwing me a lot of questions, Diana. The majority of those questions are usually thrown when someone behaves in a way that seems to support animal killings (which I do not support at all), animals being treated poorly while trying new medicines on them (which I do not support at all), or places one life above the other (which I did not).

Okay. It just seemed cavalier to say:

"Because some trees and some animals died?"

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: What differentiates 3rd density from the densities before it is the presence of Free Will. This has been stated many times in the Law of One and in other places. That obviously means that the FOCUS is in this reality on the 3rd density beings. That does not mean that we get to not love the animals and the plants. It means that we get to choose whether we love them or not.

This sounds like you are saying that 3rd density is only for 3rd density beings, and whoever else is here--2nd and 1st density beings--they don't count. Aren't 2D animals trying to attain 3D here in this density as we are trying to attain 4D?

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: You sound like you are trying to blame them for doing what they did.

Not at all. I am not blaming. I don't "believe" everything I read. I question the Ra material when it doesn't make sense. I am questioning that "advanced beings" of the "Condeferation" would make such a blunder with no better way to handle it.

(01-19-2012, 08:16 PM)Oldern Wrote: In this density, our society's maintained free will was so important that they have placed a force field around this planetary sphere to keep the interference to a minimum. Judging by that, it is obvious that the main goal in this planet is to move into 4th density, not to preserve life of 2nd and 1st density beings. If you preserve something, you freeze it, you freeze change itself. That is not healthy to a learning experience, but that is not my point here.

No one is talking about preserving, I am talking about having respect for all life. How about to have compassion? Isn't that the prerequisite of 4th density? Is compassion only for humans? Aren't animals and plants other-selves?

(01-19-2012, 11:55 PM)Eric Wrote: Hey Diana!

I like the spirit of your questioning. I too attempt to try and rationally evaluate things I read, be them in the Ra material or elsewhere.

Anyways, I think that it might be helpful to let go of the idea that these beings are quite as advanced as you are describing them to be. It's easy to fall in to that mode of thinking, but they are not gods. Just further down the road than we are. Perhaps if they were wiser (no insult to the Confederation implied) the scenario of a malfunctioning nuclear drone wouldn't have come up at all because they would have some more sophisticated means.

Such as it was, I still believe they most likely went ahead with the solution in which they felt minimized destruction of any kind.

(01-20-2012, 01:48 AM)Cyan Wrote: Just to chime in here. My belief is that 2nd density creatures are by and large far more compassionate than 3rd density. Compassion seems to vanish the higher up you go in the system then merging to a entire new platou on the 6th.

My experience is that compassion vanishes as intelligence increases. Only to merge back into the process once intelligence reaches a certain point of "we are all one".

(01-20-2012, 01:48 AM)Cyan Wrote: So yes, I believe that the 2D entities more than gladly participated in the experience. But, that being said. What the confederation does to the 2D entities is the confederations choices and their karmic responsibility. What we do to 2D entities is our karmic responsibility.

(01-20-2012, 01:48 AM)Cyan Wrote: Personally, I'd suggest we rush the dev of those bio genetic developements that would allow the growth of pure meat in laboratory conditions. If for nothing else than the fact that it would finally free us from the "requirement" of killing animals for food.