The Detuning of Session 17 and Ra's True Intentions Regarding 2011 - Part II

[unity100]

when someone comes up with strong pointers to its imminent eventuality, suddenly people forget about it.

So just who has come up with strong pointers to its imminent eventuality?

there are 4 thread full of quotes and information as of this moment. has the above question been asked in naivete of the expectancy of prompting the other person to go about reiterating all of those again ?

anything than being in some distant, distant future in a hazy fashion enough to have no potential of disturbing the current setup of self, triggers a lot of stuff.

A lot of stuff within yourself, apparently. Your constant accusation of upsetting the applecart in regards to '3D-based plans being cancelled' is your projection. You do at least suspect that, don't you? It's almost laughable if you weren't so serious and adamant about that being the conscious/unconscious rationale or motivation for those that don't subscribe to your biased conclusions/desires. To actually resort to or attempt to appeal to that base, ego-centric mind set does say something about your own 'drama' with regards to how you view the situation.

if you have not attended those discussions, then dont come up talking in such strong fashion. and it seems, you havent.

this situation, and the eventual conclusion that the information dig by tenet nosce has actually pushed me to change my perspective from something 'gradual' to fast. there was no other logical way out of that in the wake of the information that was dug out. had there been 'issues' in me, i wouldnt have been actually arguing for the fast proposition, but instead trying to force myself to come up with some way to ensure that everything was 'gradual'.

i didnt do that. when presented with a more sound and logical information than what i had in hand, i changed my perspective.

what's laughable is someone coming up and accusing someone else with ego-centric this, issues that, projection this, bias that.

let me tell you what bias is

bias is going to the extent of unwittingly proposing invalidation of 90% of the information you actually do NOT want invalidated, and therefore getting into a dilemma - just to be able to go around some information you find undesirable.

if a person comes starts with reinterpreting, and moves on to attempt totally denying existence of, and then goes to calling to authority, than to totally abstracting and metaphorizing everything to the extent of making any kind of information totally ambiguous to oblivion and then moves on to trying to invalidate a piece of undesirable information, not realizing that the proposition that s/he proposes would invalidate ANYthing unwittingly, AND then, even after facing that eventuality, still does not let go of either the material which s/he mistakenly proposed invalidation of in all that haste, nor the attempt to find ways to invalidate a single quote or 1-2 quotes, and tries to introduce 'sufficient' level of invalidation just to invalidate the undesired elements without ANY kind of usable, generally applicable measure and footing ( long isnt it. but it doesnt stop here ) and when that also fails then proceeds to ignoring basic meanings of base, plain grammatical english sentences and makes them refer to something they dont refer and then ....

no really. it is long and tiring. and it is some sequence you apparently had not at all followed. for, this is what had happened. and it seems, its still continuing in OTHER threads that are not directly relevant to this specific subject, despite there are now 2 threads just for this.

this is what you call an 'issue' with a particular information, or, some strong bias which doesnt let go, or some fixation, or whatever you call it. one could easily come up and say 'ra is not infallible, they are wrong in this' and with that they could be even right. but, the person does not want to do that, because s/he trusts Ra and the material. but, s/he doesnt want to have that uncomfortable piece of information in the material either, so attempts to invalidate just that.

so, then dont come up ridiculously accusing me of bias or issues - despite i had promptly changed my perspective regarding this when presented with information i cant easily deny or invalidate - there being no difference on my side in regard to any kind of '3d plans' being cancelled or re-instituted for either of the cases. it actually doesnt differ much for me. but apparently, for others, it does.

sarcasm is something that can be worked out to a certain degree. but, not participating in threads, not knowing about progression of events and arguments, and then jumping in at the butt end of some subject and making grand assumptions and accusations is not. there can be no logical or rational interaction and exchange of any kind of thing, leave aside information or ideas can be done when people do that.