Why do Don and Ra talk about a lenticular galaxy when our galaxy is spiral?

[Namaste]

Two notions to share. Firstly...

This makes no sense. We aren't in a lenticular galaxy. No one ever looks at a picture of the milky way from the side and says "Hey, that looks like a lens! Downright lenticular I'd say!"

No one has ever looked at our galaxy form the side (talking in terms of open education and accomplishment). That would entail inter-galactic travel using an advanced propulsion system. Our furthest known satellites are still within our own solar system (Voyager 1).

Maps of the Milky Way's spiral structure are notoriously uncertain and exhibit striking differences.[41][42][40][43][44][45][46][47] Some 150 years after Alexander (1852)[48] first suggested that the Milky Way was a spiral, there is currently no consensus on the number or nature of the Galaxy's spiral arms.

Maybe Don knew something we don't? He spent decades researching UFO's/ET's, his personal beliefs could have included an ET report that our galaxy was indeed lenticular.

Secondly, and more importantly, Ra was the first to use/define the term lenticular.

This light of love was made to have in its occurrences of being certain characteristics, among them the infinite whole paradoxically described by the straight line, as you would call it. This paradox is responsible for the shape of the various physical illusion entities you call solar systems, galaxies, and planets of revolving and tending towards the lenticular.

28.9 Questioner: Then what you are saying is that the lenticular star system which we call a galaxy that we find ourselves in with approximately 250 billion other suns like our own was created by a single Logos. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

Don clarified that Ra calls a lenticular galaxy what we call a galaxy.

Also, remember how Ra also used the term galaxy to define what we call a solar system.

Purely terminology.