Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science

[Lavazza]

I wonder if I could ask you a little bit more about this. Does it seem difficult to believe because of the whole technology aspect, the idea that present humanity could have the kind of propulsion systems and energy weapons discussed in the excerpt? Or is it more that the whole area of government secrets is one that doesn't resonate with you? I am not trying to change your point of view, merely to understand it a bit more, if that's OK with you.

Well, to be fair I should say that as strongly as I have argued that such things as moon bases do not exist I ultimately do not know. And as I do think UFOs exist, certainly the technology in theory allows for it if humans have become privy. I may have mentioned this before but it bears repeating in light of our discussion.

The biggest block I have with the moon base idea is that if it were indeed true, many other things would not be true. I explored this a little bit in the Carla thread, which I'll dig up:

So, with all of those responses in mind, can we extend the same plausibility towards moon bases? The problem and (one of) the key differences is that I see is that it is not beyond our ability to disprove. We can't go back in time to examine Venus as it was during Ra's hayday, but we can look at the moon, and indeed even the dark side of the moon. Where are the bases? Subterranean moon bases then? Cloaking device hidden bases? Even those things might be possible, but what is the more likely explanation? That the government is hiding super futuristic, amazingly high-tech capabilities and has special bases on the moon or under the oceans, or that the comment made by Ra (for whatever reason, confusion, distortion, fill in the blank) was not correct? Or lets examine the logical errors, if we have what I would call such high technology as to have secret bases on the moon, why are we still pouring billions of dollars in to space shuttle technology at NASA? Or the ISS (international space station)? With a government that gets sooo caught up with money problems when it comes to balancing the budget or passing new bills, providing health care, etc. does it make any sense at all to continue funding obsolete space technology? The implications of the government having moon bases are so large and so far reaching... the only way they could possibly exist is a government cover-up so far reaching and widespread, and so fundamentally top secret as to be only possible in a work of fiction.

I mention a few things here but lets take what might be the biggest elephant in the thread, that is, money. Should we suppose a base to exist on the moon, it would mean that whoever or whatever part of the government built it did it unbeknownst to the rest of the government. Is this why NASA continues then to be funded with millions and billions of dollars, even while our national debt is rising, we're funding two unsustainable wars abroad, facing the largest economic meltdown since the great depression, not to mention trying to pass an almost 1-trillion dollar health care bill? So it must be a conspiracy of a large magnitude? How much do you suppose a moon base costs... surely it's at least in the tens of billions? How about hundreds of billions? And then we need to pay to keep it's existence a secret by whatever means... As we know there are many "watchdog" groups that monitor the governments activities, and especially so with money.

(now to be fair, I just remembered this: http://benfrank.net/patriots/news/nation..._trillions which may compromise my last argument, lol! (see, I <b>am</b> trying... ))

How about we should look at the fact that such a moon base would have been built and maintained without anyone's knowledge. NASA is not the only space organization in the world, most large nations have their own. I will have to find the article, but the Japanese did a satellite flyby of the moon last year or the year before, taking ultra-high res images of the surface ("dark side" included). Millions of telescopes around the world from amateur astronomers point at the moon everyday on top of this. I find the idea that it could be so easily concealed implausible to the extreme (much less a base in our skies).

These are two things we could mull over first.

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

Nay Welcome aboard!

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?

May be that you are correct, I can't say for sure, but there is such a thing as consensus reality that we all participate in to some degree. For example, we all agree that gravity pushes us down toward Earth, that the United States exists, and that dogs like chasing Frisbees. My point being, some things are, at least in our reality, true regardless of what someone else may think. I think?

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?

This is good solid advice if you ask me.

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.

I agree that the existence of UFOs, ETs, etc. at least permit the idea of moon bases. The thing is though, I'm not so certain the government is very good at concealing truths at all. Consider the UFO phenomenon, despite half a century of denial there is still a large and ever growing group of people who are hell bent on disclosure. Same goes for anything else that falls under conspiracy labels. If the government was so able to keep secrecy why are there conspiracies at all? They wouldn't be there... the government is a huge machine, but it's still run by people who make mistakes or decide to tell secrets, or whathaveyou. I haven't investigated this Hoagland person, but who else is speaking about this? Many people? Are as many people discussing moon bases as are people discussing UFOs or WTC conspiracies? (I will investigate youtube as you suggested)

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?'

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?

This is something that's an active catalyst for me at the moment. I do not know how others are able to make peace with something like this so easily, especially considering the highly esoteric nature of the Ra contact. To help with understanding my quagmire, imagine that you're reading the Ra material one day and all of a sudden your eyes fall upon a passage you never noticed before. It reads: "I am Ra. Hello LOO reader. We just wanted to let you know that if you open your left hand, you will find a shiny green M&M courtesy of your friendly local social memory complex. Adonai, Adonai." In many ways, this scenario with the M&M is about equal to the statement about moon, ocean, and sky(?) bases (and to perhaps a lesser extent, pyramids, maldak, and so on). At least, that's how I see it at the moment.

Put simply, I'm attempting to make sense of how to accept information from an un-seen source when said source has given information that I know is (or at least strongly, strongly suspect) not true.

May well be that I have not fully mastered the art of 'putting it aside'. I do not hold any being as superior to myself or anyone else, so I cannot give Ra any more superiority than old Fred who hangs out at the bar on Wednesdays. I equate a conversation with Fred as in some ways equal to a conversation with Ra, in the sense that if Fred starting talking about neon pink gnomes that live in his attic and heckle him in the night, I might question anything else he has to say as well. (this is why I seek explanations (i.e. distortion) for moon base comments)

Often of late I have mentally pulled back so to speak, and looked at the entire package of information offered by Ra in perspective. When I get right down to it, although helpful at times, there is nothing included there that I <b>need</b> for my spiritual evolution. In that sense, it may be wiser on my part to take the whole thing less seriously. Indeed it was certainly my wish to take the Ra material seriously that created the emotional charge / catalyst for me in the first place.