Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science

[Monica]

Gentlemen,

You're not intentionally excluding us ladies, are you? j/k

Try as I might, I am still unable to find the concept of various secret bases realistic in the face of everything else I know to be true about the world

The whole subject of govt. secrets is very volatile, emotionally inflammatory, and makes a lot of people uncomfortable, so you're not alone in that respect. The same is true in areas of politics, diet, religion, etc. As an example, the idea of secret Moon bases is in the same category as the 911 Truth Movement. Most of the people I've spoken to about this find the entire idea so unbelievable that they aren't even willing to review the tangible, forensic evidence. Once they get past that obstacle, though, and actually review the evidence, they marvel at how obvious it was all along. Their view of the world stretches and expands. Likewise, we've all had that happen when we read the Law of One. In my experience, it's an ongoing process.

Since we live in a holographic UniVerse, we each can find the evidence to support or refute whatever we choose to believe. We then think we 'know' what is 'true about the world' but is our version of 'truth' really 'true' or just another facet of an ever-changing kalaidescopic reality?

But I guess that's a topic for another thread...

I hope they are discovered some day, because it would tighten the shoe laces of the Ra material that much more for me were they found.

I understand how you feel! Although I have no issue with the moon bases topic, I have felt that way about other things. In my experience, whenever I had any sort of prerequisite, I usually didn't find it. It was only when I released all attachment to the prerequisite that I got my issue reconciled. That's been my experience, anyway! Paradoxical, eh? :-/

I did want to comment on one thing however,

I want to address the question of Don's incredulity. I think what he was truly amazed by was that such a program could have been kept secret for so long, and secret even from him. My guess is that he prided himself on being well-connected and well-informed (wasn't he in the military before becoming a commercial pilot?) and the idea that he would not have had a hint of such a mind-boggling secret struck him as literally incredible.

Now that makes a lot more sense to me: that his surprise was not that such things could exist, but that they could have "flown under the radar," so to speak, of his own investigations.

And it's really just an observation on my part. I am familiar with organized western religions to a degree, and more so with those who read their scripture as every word being (and needing to be) literally true. This causes a lot of trouble because many parts of the bible contradict each other. The solution to this problem often is reinterpreting the words and statements so that the paradoxes are resolved.

I agree that many people are able to resolve their paradoxes about the Bible by reinterpreting the contradictions so that they no longer contradict. However, is this not because they already have a presupposition that the Bible is 100% infallible and therefore must have resolution to the paradoxes?

As one who has no such foundation of respect for the Bible as a whole (though I do respect many portions of it), I have no presupposition and therefore tend to take the Bible at face value; hence, I find it full of contradictions which, for me, offer no such reconciliation. Since the Bible is not my chosen path, that's ok. My point might be the same as your point...? That whether we are able to reconcile the paradoxes has less to do with the paradoxes themselves and more to do with what our presuppositions are...how much respect we have for the source.

Hence, for me personally, I might be willing to suspend any concerns I may have about certain topics in the Law of One, because of my trust in the source.

Except...the very reason I do have such trust in the source is that I have found virtually NO contradictions! Not any that seemed significant to me, anyway!

I don't find the moon base issue a contradiction at all...and am still very puzzled as to why it might be considered so. We know of recent examples of govt. secrecy. If our govt. is capable of that, then why not moon bases too? I don't find one any more unbelievable than the other.

However at least from my perspective, the above two quotes, although subjective interpretations in their own right and for all we know perhaps correct, seems to me to be skewing the meaning of what was intended so that it better fits in to pre-existing beliefs. Was Don surprised about being 1-upped by Ra with new information, or just about the information? Is this not obvious...?

As we've discovered previously in other discussions, what may be obvious to me might be 'obviously' the opposite to you...and vice versa. Such beautiful diversity!

I respect your point of view! I see it as a valid possibility.

My point of view is different. When I read the following session, I interpret Don's incredulity as being 'obviously' about the govt. having kept the moon bases a secret, not about the info itself...for the following reasons:

1. The idea of bases on the moon aren't any more fantastic than communicating with ET's, asking huge boulders to dance themselves into pyramids, or any of the other myriad amazingly incredible topics offered by Ra....even the existence of Ra themselves!

2. As far as I can tell, the only aspect that makes the idea of moon bases incredible at all is that for this to be true, would mean our govt. has kept it a secret. Therefore, it seems obvious to me that this is what Don found incredible.

3. This is backed up by the sequence of his statements and questions:

8.7 Questioner: I’m puzzled by these craft which have undersea bases. Is this technology sufficient to overshadow all other armaments? Do we have the ability to just fly in these craft or are they just craft for transport? What is the basic mechanism of their power source? It’s really hard to believe is what I’m saying.

Ra: I am Ra. The craft are perhaps misnamed in some instances. It would be more appropriate to consider them as weaponry. The energy used is that of the field of electromagnetic energy which polarizes the Earth sphere. The weaponry is of two basic kinds: that which is called by your peoples psychotronic and that which is called by your peoples particle beam. The amount of destruction which is contained in this technology is considerable and the weapons have been used in many cases to alter weather patterns and to enhance the vibratory change which engulfs your planet at this time.

8.8 Questioner: How have they been able to keep this a secret? Why aren’t these craft in use for transport?

Ra: The governments of each of your societal division illusions desire to refrain from publicity so that the surprise may be retained in case of hostile action from what your peoples call enemies.

Note the bold. If you remove Ra's statements in the middle, Don went from saying he found it hard to believe, to his next utterance, asking how the govt. kept it a secret. I think that's an important clue as to what was on his mind.

That's just my interpretation, For what it's worth.

Where do these interpretations stem from, why are they needed? Is there a need (forgive me if I am dead wrong, it looks this way to me) for the Ra contact to be 100% absolutely correct in everything that was communicated, even for the extremely fringe material where 100% accuracy is not needed, i.e. government secrets? It would seem to indicate that if Ra were indeed proven wrong it would mean something detrimental regarding the remaining non-transient information to some? Perhaps instead of adhering to one source for spiritual information as the absolute truth it would be helpful to cast a larger net out in to the spiritual world to see what the rest of creation has to say on the topic?

I think it depends on the person and how much the info resonates with them. For me, I had already cast a wide net, in a lot of other studies, before I even read the Law of One (as I'm sure many of us did). Whether that's the reason for the high degree of resonance or not, I couldn't say. All I know is that I had a high degree of resonance with it...probably about 99%. So I never felt a need to seek out confirmation elsewhere, other than an isolated incident in which I prayed for guidance (when I first started reading the books and was in the process of letting go of my Biblical dogma), and I saw a perfect UFO shape in the clouds...this was just a nice added touch, though...I was already resonating so much with it that by that time I didn't really need the confirmation...It's sort of like the old cliche, "How do you know when you meet Mr or Ms Right?" and the answer, "When you no longer even ask the question."

Again, that was just my own personal experience, and I realize that not everyone here at B4 has the same exact level of trust or resonance as I do. That's ok! It has just added to the resonance factor that our Confederation friends are so respectful of our free wills and encourage us to discard that which doesn't resonate!

So, in light of that, my question is: If a certain element doesn't resonate, in this case the moon bases, why even mess with it? why not just discard it altogether? Why seek confirmation or refutation elsewhere by 'casting a wider net?'

It seems that the reason to cast a wider net would be because something about the controversial issue is found to be intriguing...could it be that there is an emotional charge about it?

Whenever I feel a strong emotional charge about something, I usually find that there is something about it that I fear. When I first started researching the 911 coverup, I felt a strong emotional charge...and I felt compelled to dig deeper and deeper. As they say, how deep does the rabbit hole go?

I dug deep enough to satisfy certain key questions...and then decided to quit digging.

In the case of the moon bases, there is also a deep hole. Just do a search on youtube and you'll find plenty to keep busy! Just Richard Hoagland's work alone is very compelling! Plausible at the very least! But there is so much more? Ex-NASA scientists blowing the whistle...many of whom appear reputable...

At the very least, I think there is enough out there to add credibility to Ra's account. Does it conclusively prove that Ra was correct? No. But neither does it refute it. As they say, you can't prove a negative!

What I'm suggesting is: Rather than trying to prove Ra's assertion one way or the other, perhaps it might be more fruitful to dig into the question of why the issue has an emotional charge at all...why is it intriguing? why is it an obstacle? why is it even an issue worth digging into?

Just some ideas to consider!

Having said all that, I admit I am still curious why you think the idea of moon bases contradicts what you 'know about the world.' Is it because you don't think NASA would have covered it up, or because you don't think NASA could have covered it up?