12-14-2010, 09:47 PM
Historically, "Disclosure" was to be a function of the govt. It is not unreasonable to assume that govt also understands the can-of-worms chaos that would ensure if they "admitted" something on the subject. So anything the govt knows on the subject would be difficult, if not impossible to relate to the masses without huge problems. Logically, due to the presuppositions, it will prob not happen from any govt. that wants a peaceful citizenry.
There does seem to be a strong need to create some objective framework (nuts&bolts) from which to rationally interpret phenomena. However, I think once the phenomena is qualitatively reduced to a "generally accepted view", it has been stripped of most of its meaning. That is, UFOlogy is a mere shell or "shadows on the wall" of literal/historical context. This qualitatively reduced context accounts for most of the conspiracy theories on the subject, because a reduced view tends to be convenient for analysis, moral dispensation and accountability.
Coincidentally, it is only the (typically promoted) reduced view of the subject that supports a cover-up or conspiracy. And it is only the reduced view that is amenable to a authoritative disclosure scenario (that many are explicitly demanding).
That being said, do we really want "disclosure"?
There does seem to be a strong need to create some objective framework (nuts&bolts) from which to rationally interpret phenomena. However, I think once the phenomena is qualitatively reduced to a "generally accepted view", it has been stripped of most of its meaning. That is, UFOlogy is a mere shell or "shadows on the wall" of literal/historical context. This qualitatively reduced context accounts for most of the conspiracy theories on the subject, because a reduced view tends to be convenient for analysis, moral dispensation and accountability.
Coincidentally, it is only the (typically promoted) reduced view of the subject that supports a cover-up or conspiracy. And it is only the reduced view that is amenable to a authoritative disclosure scenario (that many are explicitly demanding).
That being said, do we really want "disclosure"?
Quote:This is not the Density of understanding. We have been told this by Ra repeatedly.I would sincerely like to hear what you think "understanding" means, in the context that Ra intended. Maybe we could start another thread.
Quote:If one creates from the heart the Creator will 'move Heaven and Earth' to ensure that the intent is made manifest.Probably true. The universe does tend to follow intention.