06-25-2013, 10:38 AM
Too bad it had to end so soon..
[/quote]
That's a great lucid dream. Could it be that you were accessing
a subconscious download from the future?
Since the mid-nineties, more than 50% of my subconscious content represents future awareness sent backwards during sleep and dreaming.
Also, this board consists primarily of wanderers/humanoids. Soul memory of 4D is accessible during dreaming, and probably filtered upon waking.
One thing that's unclear: for non-wanderers who've made it to 45% positive orientation, are they still candidates for harvest, even though
we've moved into the new cycle?
Also, I assume that the positive hierarchy could've prevented 9/11. That it was allowed, this indicated that trauma such as this and all the recent wars has the net effect of increasing harvest ratios, probably for both negative and positive sides. I get the impression that intelligent infinity has some type of mandate or bogey for how much negative harvesting is needed to maintain balance and learning opportunities on higher densities. So many of the extremely negative people are psychopaths.
Then you have some masterful negatives such as Dr. Kissinger, who cannot be classified as psychopath. His ability to negotiate negates
that possibility. Whenever there's a reference to quickening everything with more extreme behaviours, I wonder how much of that has to do with
an agenda from on high, to improve the negative harvest.
Also, the whole consideration is confused by the possibility that people with a negative orientation will be sufficiently intelligent to realize that HD positive is more enjoyable than HD negative. So they might choose more positive behaviour out of the expectation that what goes around comes around. There are so many people who would love to be negative if only they could be certain that there would be no difficult consequence. And their prime motive for positive behaviour is their desire for positive feedback.
I wonder if it's possible to go all the way to 95% negative while maintaining the appearance of being more than 51% positive.
And then, if we've already cycled HD plus and minus, and primarily here to assist others, the entire consideration of self vs. others has a different feel.
Clearly, a huge amount of people would jump at the opportunity to be more service-to-others, given the means. Maybe that was part of the function of the financial tyranny: to prevent positive people from being more positive. Fortunately, we at least have inner work, and the opportunity to say no to mindless TV and other media bullshit.
[/quote]
That's a great lucid dream. Could it be that you were accessing
a subconscious download from the future?
Since the mid-nineties, more than 50% of my subconscious content represents future awareness sent backwards during sleep and dreaming.
Also, this board consists primarily of wanderers/humanoids. Soul memory of 4D is accessible during dreaming, and probably filtered upon waking.
One thing that's unclear: for non-wanderers who've made it to 45% positive orientation, are they still candidates for harvest, even though
we've moved into the new cycle?
Also, I assume that the positive hierarchy could've prevented 9/11. That it was allowed, this indicated that trauma such as this and all the recent wars has the net effect of increasing harvest ratios, probably for both negative and positive sides. I get the impression that intelligent infinity has some type of mandate or bogey for how much negative harvesting is needed to maintain balance and learning opportunities on higher densities. So many of the extremely negative people are psychopaths.
Then you have some masterful negatives such as Dr. Kissinger, who cannot be classified as psychopath. His ability to negotiate negates
that possibility. Whenever there's a reference to quickening everything with more extreme behaviours, I wonder how much of that has to do with
an agenda from on high, to improve the negative harvest.
Also, the whole consideration is confused by the possibility that people with a negative orientation will be sufficiently intelligent to realize that HD positive is more enjoyable than HD negative. So they might choose more positive behaviour out of the expectation that what goes around comes around. There are so many people who would love to be negative if only they could be certain that there would be no difficult consequence. And their prime motive for positive behaviour is their desire for positive feedback.
I wonder if it's possible to go all the way to 95% negative while maintaining the appearance of being more than 51% positive.
And then, if we've already cycled HD plus and minus, and primarily here to assist others, the entire consideration of self vs. others has a different feel.
Clearly, a huge amount of people would jump at the opportunity to be more service-to-others, given the means. Maybe that was part of the function of the financial tyranny: to prevent positive people from being more positive. Fortunately, we at least have inner work, and the opportunity to say no to mindless TV and other media bullshit.