C's Misses?

[Voyageur]

Another thing to consider when it comes to the accuracy of the Cs, is that their answers were not always about the questions that were vocally asked. But, you'd have to read The Wave Series to understand what was really going on during some of those sessions.

Because of things going on at the time of any particular session, Laura may have asked, vocally, a question, but mentally she was asking something different and that was what was answered. She talks about this in The Wave series. Also, as has been mentioned, some answers were given in a symbolic fashion. And there is the questions being asked in 3D and the Cs having to interpret from 3D to 6D and then try to put it into a 3D frame of reference with their answers.

So things are not as cut and dried as many would like them to be. And, there are many who don't want to take the time to read the books that could give them so much more clarity on things.

Yes, well remembered.

There has also been some bearing on who was in attendance in sessions (influencing) - Laura discusses this in footnotes, when and if applicable, in later book publication transcripts. Noted, too, have also been those in attendance who harbour particular leanings and motives, of one kind or another, in their minds that are not congruent to where things might have naturally been heading. So, the C's seem to slip in word associations - ideas to buffer some individuals with what they want to hear and see, yet not in a way that is dismissing out of hand.

It is all learning, after all, and the C's have been wonderful at challenging assumptions.

Is it also not fascinating to later review, to then delve a little deeper and find oneself with a different understanding from when it was originally read (networking is a boon for this); often involving much nuance and cross referencing.

 

[Alejo]

Is it also not fascinating to later review, to then delve a little deeper and find oneself with a different understanding from when it was originally read (networking is a boon for this); often involving much nuance and cross referencing.

This is actually true, I have caught myself on a few occasions being so very sure that I understood the meaning behind an answer by the C's, only to later realize that I misread it or that I was missing a whole lot of context that informed the answer a lot better than what I initially remembered.

And absolutely, review the material years later, actually is a great exercise, I have also been very surprised at how much more I didn't see on the initial reading, and how much learning is required sometimes to actually grasp some of the concepts the C's inspired Laura to write about.

 

[lilies]

So things are not as cut and dried as many would like them to be. And, there are many who don't want to take the time to read the books that could give them so much more clarity on things.

Precisely! Plus free will of the questioners had to be preserved. Some details are said to arrive somewhat skewed through translations. If any party prophesies a very popular future outlook and masses of people take a liking of it very much, I think, it becomes Mass Faith.
Meaning that simply through the power of mass Faith, humanity has taken control of their Fate!
Bad news for the Lizzies as they hate losing control! So they will do anything to obliterate such prophesied outcome. So that everybody's favorite future-outcome is delayed indefinitely and safely prevented by the Lizzies. I think that's what has been going on in the past.

Also in previous years I remarked [had the idea] that any nation strictly paying attention to Ancestral Memory and Respecting National Past, holding many proud national past achievements in their mass-mind, that nation is hard / impossible to Time-Manipulate by the Lizzies: in this fashion of destroying favorite / believed-fixed future outcomes.

Turning the misses to hits in the future:
We have been speculating, so I summarized it on the Plandemic-thread. Anything the C's prophesied and it didn't come true, "missed" - or rather our humanity-cruise-ship - was I believe waylaid to not arrive to that [by C's] prophesied future, I think that 'miss' must not be thrown away at all, but must be pondered as a clue: that it was indeed a very possible future! Out of many, possible futures, all varying in degrees of probability: which future is highly likely [potential], which is less likely [less viable].

Empty restaurant example:
Think of it like this. You with your spouse have been invited to a glorious celebration and you arrive early to the designated restaurant. All the tables are empty and no names are on the reserved signs. So you can sit anywhere you want with your happy spouse!

All empty tables represent potential possible futures that may have been prophesied earlier!
So, where will you sit? Decide! But know this: if you take a seat - making a choice regards your destiny - that possible future will become your actual future!
..And after you make that crucial decision - at a crossroads drawing together many possible timelines - you may remember that many other possible futures were on choice / was prophesied / was offered as free future places to take - as you saw so many empty tables = so many possible futures to inhabit!
In an idealized world you freely and happily choose a specific table. Your choice is now made. So the other futures can now be declared as "missed" future outcomes in your memory.

What usually happens in our world:
Regards this above example - being in a 'Restaurant of Prophecy' - suddenly a great commotion ensues! The restaurant door is violently kicked in with a loud shattering noise. A rowdy crowd of drunken boisterous outlaws are streaming in (all Lizard-financed, bought & paid for bandits) and their fast-moving mob threaten you and your spouse to be kicked/carried/taken away from the best tables, which are representing the most beautiful future outcomes..
.. and against your liking you are swept away by this tide of dirty outlaws and now you are forced to take a 'bad table' where there is a cold draft and the worst view = representing an unpleasant future with a 'Deep State STS-oriented'-outcome.

So clearly when you are coerced to taking such forced-future position, as a result of a push toward a bad timeline, of course the earlier prophesied good future outcomes now will be declared as "missed prophecies".

Successfully avoiding to be thrown into prison in the US is a hit. France becoming a dictatorship is seen as a "miss" in light of Florida becoming a small patch of heaven. In a very dodgy and dangerously totalitarian country. So the original successful rescue is seen as a "miss", which in fact was is a life-saving decision. (There are few safe places left in the constantly changing violent seas of 'Hell on Earth'.)

"Missed" by the C's, I think, clearly shows that humanity has been sleeping On Guard Duty. We have been hijacked to become ignorant, negligent, uncaring of our future. By becoming aware of us having been asleep, we can always course-correct to become wide-awake on Guard Duty, so our focused awareness can always attract positive future outcomes, even if those are just a better-liveable places as we walk through The Valley of the Shadow of Death, I think.

 

[zak]

The idea is beyond laughable. Laura's unique ability to distill multiple strands of complex concepts and intricate nuanced detail into crystal clear, stimulating and easily fathomable prose whilst all the time keeping the reader joyfully in her presence as a real person with a beating heart and punchy humor, has given me incalculable hours of humbling pleasure and delight. Personally I would give her the Nobel Prize for literature - being out there alone as she is in her own domain of genius. Laura's idiosyncratic yet inclusive style is why we lesser mortals can actually grasp the otherwise impossible to comprehend.

How I despise the shallow literature snob! I've come across this approach to her work before and each time without fail it has said everything about the low grade ego of the reader (e.g. jealousy mixed with unwillingness to do any real work themselves) and nothing whatsoever of value about her writing.

So be it!

I'm coming back to this topic because I'm just appalled by this kind of behavior, especially since it's not the first time.
A lot of people don't feel responsible for what they say, or even what they do anymore (whatever the initial goals are).
After all this hubbub, when things get interesting for othree's personal work, just gone...
In relation to this "C's Misses" story, the first person concerned is very aware of it:

Q: (L) Well, I have to say that for 20 years I always held the C's suspect.

(Artemis) Poor C's!

(L) You think I didn't? I couldn't quite get over that gap where you question whether all we experience is matter-based and we are just a byproduct of the left half of the brain talking to the right half, or whether there truly is something beyond. I mean, I could have psychic experiences, but I could also explain them as something created by my mind. If I hear something or see something, did I not manifest that? Is that not some normal physical law of energy, action at a distance? But it could all be explained by physics...

(Joe) It's the old question of subjectivity vs. objectivity. IS there anything objective?

(Artemis) Well, it's good to be skeptical.

(L) The thing is, all of the research into genetics and cellular biology and all of that stuff...

A: How do you think we feel?!

Q: [laughter] (L) I'm SORRY! I'm sorry, but I'm just made that way.

A: It is actually good. Coming to knowledge that is sure by your own efforts locks it in at the belief center, and thus gives added power. All who seek to graduate to 4th density must seek knowledge. In 4D, eventually it will be your job to engineer lifeforms on new worlds.

Q: (L) Well, from what I've been reading about the engineering of the lifeforms on this world, that gives me the idea that 4th density intelligence and abilities are so...

A: Stupendous is the term.

Q: (L) Yeah, stupendous. Reading these books has just blown me away.

Ark has written down in black and white the steps that need to be taken, before coming to complain and howl at the moon.

Perhaps instead of complaining you better do some original research and contribute for making the world better. And come here to tell us what YOU did, and why do you think it is right. Are you for vegetarianism? Do research. You will find that the data are inconclusive. You must use your intuition to choose. But then work on developing your intuition. That is a very hard work, I assure you. Laura has developed it. But Laura is also doing a non-stop research. You can do it as well. But it requires work. Are you going to start working on yourself? To eradicate bad things in you?

 

[Alma.Innovadora]

I'm coming back to this topic because I'm just appalled by this kind of behavior, especially since it's not the first time.

That's how they work, it's just a "bug". It surprises me that they always have the same "spoiled software", when you corner them, they just insult. It is so wonderful this system of discovery and learning, no matter where you are, the "all" is inseparable and inherent wherever we look and act. And this reminder, expresses it so much better:

April 18, 1998

A: We wish to reiterate some more on this subject for A***, and for anyone else who needs the following message: we are not communicating with you to "prove" our existence. If one has faith and is willing to learn, to explore new realities and to discover what will one "day" be an ordinary profile of consciousness, then no "proof" is necessary. If, on the other hand, one is in the opposite psychic orientation, then no amount of proof is sufficient.

 

[Alejo]

I'm coming back to this topic because I'm just appalled by this kind of behavior, especially since it's not the first time.
A lot of people don't feel responsible for what they say, or even what they do anymore (whatever the initial goals are).
After all this hubbub, when things get interesting for othree's personal work, just gone...

Yes, in these types of events is when I am reminded of that saying, by their fruits you shall know them. And ultimately, I do not think there was any kind of honesty in Onthree's post, it was more than likely designed to get some extra attention. It is particularly interesting and contradictory to see someone call a group a cult... but wish to remain part of it.

It's like the patron who walks into a restaurant and complaints about how awful the food tastes, but remains seated, expecting to be served.

That's how they work, it's just a "bug". It surprises me that they always have the same "spoiled software", when you corner them, they just insult. It is so wonderful this system of discovery and learning, no matter where you are, the "all" is inseparable and inherent wherever we look and act. And this reminder, expresses it so much better:

That's a great quote Alma, thanks for finding it.

 

[Iain]

Yes, in these types of events is when I am reminded of that saying, by their fruits you shall know them. And ultimately, I do not think there was any kind of honesty in Onthree's post, it was more than likely designed to get some extra attention. It is particularly interesting and contradictory to see someone call a group a cult... but wish to remain part of it.

It's like the patron who walks into a restaurant and complaints about how awful the food tastes, but remains seated, expecting to be served.


That's a great quote Alma, thanks for finding it.

Not sure if there is a connection here, but this kind of behaviour is engaged in by a lot of people these days. It seems especially prevalent among the SJW types who regularly turn up in the to some activity or group and then immediately begin to criticise it and try to completely change it.

This has been seen in numerous universities, film, literature, comics, roleplaying games, music, sports, schools etc.

Again, I do not know if this is related but there is a trend toward individuals moving into an activity and then pointing out all its flaws (at least in their mind) before trying to tear it down from within while clearly having no real interest in the activity/art/hobby/class itself.

Generally, it seems that an individual well known among the SJW’s (for want of a better term) will be the first to ‘expose’ whatever they are attacking next and then their mindless drone followers move in to destroy. They begin to point out all the groups’ flaws, real or imagined, and then try to fundamentally change what the groups’ activities and aims are.

I wonder if some of this kind of thinking is reaching more people now, even here. Obviously this forum has been attacked many times in the past and I am not suggesting that this is an ‘attack’ at all. Rather, that the techniques used all over the internet these days to bring people down and criticise are spreading and being used, maybe unconsciously by more people?

The comments from Othree really suggest this sort of thinking. The simple fact that they acknowledge not having read Laura’s books immediately suggests they have no idea how the channel came about in the first place or how to interpret any of the C’s responses – even the reason for asking these questions in the first place. There is obviously no desire to learn – which is surely the whole point – thus there is no desire to be part of a group to learn and develop or even just enjoy the group for what it is. The aim is more to undermine and change the group into whatever vision they have for it. Obviously this rarely works as those within the group have no desire to change in such a way – they are there for what the group offers.

Just my thoughts – for what it is worth and from my own understanding of all I have read here, in the transcripts and Laura’s works, I have found the C’s to be a great source of inspiration to learn. Delving into any topic that comes up can be incredibly rewarding and even an answer considered a ‘miss’ often sends you down a rabbit hole to all sorts of new ideas – I love seeing where that can take you!

Oh, and Laura being a poor writer… Never heard that one before, but as others have said already, there are very few writers I know of that can make such incredibly complex and esoteric topics this easy to understand and give you half a chance to wrap your head around. So… No…

 

[Bluegazer]

Not sure if there is a connection here, but this kind of behaviour is engaged in by a lot of people these days. It seems especially prevalent among the SJW types who regularly turn up in the to some activity or group and then immediately begin to criticise it and try to completely change it.

This has been seen in numerous universities, film, literature, comics, roleplaying games, music, sports, schools etc.

Again, I do not know if this is related but there is a trend toward individuals moving into an activity and then pointing out all its flaws (at least in their mind) before trying to tear it down from within while clearly having no real interest in the activity/art/hobby/class itself.

Generally, it seems that an individual well known among the SJW’s (for want of a better term) will be the first to ‘expose’ whatever they are attacking next and then their mindless drone followers move in to destroy. They begin to point out all the groups’ flaws, real or imagined, and then try to fundamentally change what the groups’ activities and aims are.

True. One actual example: "Shut up Gringo", the trend that emerged to defend a Japanese for a witch's image - Kudasai

IMO I think this happens because of the old and well known envy. (yes, that thing the lizzies implanted in us). With all that is happening, if we add the emotional amplification that the wave is producing, connecting the dots I see that envy has multiplied by who knows how many factors...

 

[Iain]

True. One actual example: "Shut up Gringo", the trend that emerged to defend a Japanese for a witch's image - Kudasai

IMO I think this happens because of the old and well known envy. (yes, that thing the lizzies implanted in us). With all that is happening, if we add the emotional amplification that the wave is producing, connecting the dots I see that envy has multiplied by who knows how many factors...

Thank you, yes, envy – exactly that.

It is very often in the name of some ‘woke’ cause but usually reveals the complete lack of understanding these people have in the group they have joined and their desire to see it destroyed.

Envy does indeed seem to be the primary motivation, or at least the mechanism that is used to get these people to act.

Despite being removed from almost anything ‘pop culture’ related these days I still have what was my Dungeons and Dragons group (you know, the game where we used to sit about together making up heroic fantasy tales a la Lord of the Rings or Conan and rolling dice – not any more, now it’s trans characters running a coffee shop… apparently…D&D Coffee Shop).

The only other personal experience I have is with the Star Wars sequels over the past few years. I have always been a huge fan of the original trilogy and even quite enjoy the prequels (and Rogue One to be fair). But the sequels (I only saw the first two) felt like a real attempt to destroy everything that made the original films so great.

From friends that watch other shows it seems like Doctor Who and Star Trek have gone the same way.

The one connection all these seem to have is when people come in to take over, they have no understanding of the history and ideas that came before them. They use the ‘woke’ ideology as an excuse to tear down the old and make the new in their image. They never had a desire to understand the history of what they were dealing with or why others enjoyed it so much – I think you are correct, they cannot create something with lasting impact that means something to people, so they just seek to destroy instead, out of envy (though I doubt this is conscious).

Linking back to this thread, it feels like a similar approach here, though the ‘woke’ excuse is replaced with some need to quantify incorrect information; 'calling-out' if you will. A complete lack of understanding of the history of the work here, no willingness to learn and envy that without these things, you really can’t be a part of it! Sad, because if only the effort was put in you could be a part of a group and be able to contribute to building something.

 

[Alma.Innovadora]

Not sure if there is a connection here, but this kind of behaviour is engaged in by a lot of people these days. It seems especially prevalent among the SJW types who regularly turn up in the to some activity or group and then immediately begin to criticise it and try to completely change it.

This has been seen in numerous universities, film, literature, comics, roleplaying games, music, sports, schools etc.

Again, I do not know if this is related but there is a trend toward individuals moving into an activity and then pointing out all its flaws (at least in their mind) before trying to tear it down from within while clearly having no real interest in the activity/art/hobby/class itself.

Yes, it is on the rise due to the changes that are occurring, but its essence and way of exercising is the same: infiltration, labeling, stigmatizing, manipulating, confusing, defaming, ridiculing, pointing out liars, distorting the truth and the last option to silence the truth, resorting to physical violence to instill fear. Fear as reinforcement so that they do not think of acting for a truth that seems to take away from them what they have earned by hiding it. We see it very evident in politics. I think they are just trying to "mingle" as they have always tried to do so by "familiarizing" people could subtly become more involved in their agenda. That would be the program running, exercising its function and that today can be seen more and more because it is working in an enhanced way and those actions give a "recognizable fruit".

The narcissistic lives we see in social media, the cancellation culture, the crystal generation, the millennials... are like a kind of "social cointelpro" in which people do as much work as possible filtering the truth rather than just being targeted to a particular group as in years past. But at the same time by natural cause is increasing that function in people with a certain pattern of thought and frequency to the point of normalizing the most absurd and that helps to distract others "so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect." like the person who wants to lose weight but from time to time gives himself a "taste/reward" y eating the same poison a little at a time.

The truth is the destabilizing hammer that hits the illusory foundations on which we live. The "truth" for STS is the virus as "lies" are for STO. It is fun to see it both ways, one can understand why they do what they do.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

03's mindset reminded me of FB fact checkers. The same pedantic black/white thinking, poking what they perceive as holes but fully misunderstanding the content they're criticizing and therefore poking no real holes. It's actually kinda sad, you know this person is largely dysfunctional if this is the kind of thinking that drives them in their life, and thanks to dunning krueger they have no idea that they're a mess.

As for the C's "accuracy" - a lot of what they say isn't something that can be verified - how does one verify STO/STS for example? It seems simple but how do you prove it to yourself or to someone else? The only way (thus far) is to learn to observe yourself and others as objectively as possible, network about your observations, be sincere with yourself and your network, and in time you will start to develop an understanding of the nuances and complexities of STS/STO, and how they work, how they effect people who choose one or the other, and it will be a work in progress possibly forever as your understanding is refined. In other words, there are many things that require years of experience, networking, writing, reading, and thinking, and even then they're not even close to being complete! You can try to prove or verify or convey the best you can to those who haven't done the work, but it will just be words to them.

For example - the C's could say something like "black holes are physical reflection of final destination of STS" and until you have understood STS, entropy, nihilism, subjectivity/objectivity, wishful thinking, love, knowledge, yin-yang, and many other things, this and many other statements will be rather meaningless to you. And perhaps eventually you can say "aha I get it now, it makes perfect sense!" and 03 comes along and says "ok explain it to me in 30 words or less" (essentially), and if you can't, well put it into a "miss" bucket! How absurd is that?

This is why I think life experience and age can lead to wisdom that cannot always be fully conveyed or taught, or at least the understanding of that wisdom cannot be taught and must be earned through your own efforts and LOTS of "time". It's like a kid asking what a relationship is, or what love is, and you simply cannot take your 50 year relationship, all the trials and tribulations and lessons, the ups and downs, the fights and the mutual growth, the worries and struggles, warts and all, and convey it meaningfully to someone who has no reference experience to understand, no matter how cocky or self-assured they are (as any teenager is) that they get it, probably even more than you do. Even if you wrote a book for the kid it would just be a lot of words. You cannot take your mind's neural map and transfer it into his head. You cannot explain the impact of a memory that only you can feel and see or even understand.

Even movies, which is an artform which can convey a lot, are only useful to those who can relate to the characters. If I don't have the lived experience, or the soul experience, or the maturity to grasp what I'm seeing, I can't appreciate a love story, or V for Vandetta (arguably also a love story lol), or the Matrix, or anything else. In fact when I first saw the Matrix I didn't get it - I couldn't even explain it to my friends. The concept was SO foreign to my 13 year old eyes that I just had no idea what I just saw. Years later it all started to make sense. But nothing anyone said could possibly truly convey the meanings embedded in that work.

Anyway, all this just to say - a miss list would ironically "miss" all of the above, and that's a HUGE chunk of what the C's are - things that only makes sense through years of experience and effort on our part. Even a hit list is mostly just for fun, because while it's neat to get those nice simple clean "hits", it pales in comparison with the wisdom/philosophy on life and the universe that is imparted to us, which slowly reveals its value as we apply it with faith and as an experiment. As they once said, it is only helpful to those who recognize the application, and that already requires being at a certain point in the learning cycle, otherwise you're not ready to benefit from this work, which is where 03 currently resides.

 

[Alejo]

Not sure if there is a connection here, but this kind of behaviour is engaged in by a lot of people these days. It seems especially prevalent among the SJW types who regularly turn up in the to some activity or group and then immediately begin to criticise it and try to completely change it.

I thought about this as well, it's almost an unconscious drive to go in to a place and "fix it" for some reason or other, but with no real interest in understanding what you're trying to tear to the ground, or even any interest in its continued existence.

It's an interesting mindset to analyze, I mean it's insufferable sometimes, but from a merely analytical point of view it's actually quite interesting, it's as if the only way that such mindset has to relate to relate to others or to the world at large, is by having a grievance against it or them. Not what you can learn from it, it's how does your existence bothers mine, I could say that it's as self serving mindset as it gets, "everything is about me, and it all has to change to accommodate me".

 

[Bluegazer]

I thought about this as well, it's almost an unconscious drive to go in to a place and "fix it" for some reason or other

I could say that it's as self serving mindset as it gets, "everything is about me, and it all has to change to accommodate me".

When I read this I was immediately reminded of Michael Topper's reading:

At the higher levels, the absorptive framework of self-enhanced ego consciousness takes on a severe functional contraction and effective withdrawal from interest/involvement in the created fields of being, maintaining a minimalist interaction with only its closest contacts in the pyramid.

Thus, the negative being of higher densities takes on the configuration of a forebodingly lonely presence, lurking in caves and desolate grottos of the astrophysical realms. It becomes a fiercely mental entity of 5th density power-knowledge, possessing the proverbial basilisk gaze and only turning the stream of its attention "away" from that intensified/contractile self absorption toward the created worlds in token deference of the need to canalize the funneling food source - sucking vitality from the extravagances and pastimes comprising the follies of the created worlds, imbibing the "light units" to insure the uninterrupted power that it needs, the inconceivable "wattage" required, to maintain that monumental self-absorption and narcissistic self-luminance of the negative Ego-postulate - the Anti-Logos, the Selfness of Consciousness.

So it is that the Anti-Logos cannot simply withdraw from the worlds of creation - it must absorb them into itself - it feels the necessity of undoing creation - it NEEDS that energy to fuel its infinite self-contemplation.

That unconscious urge to fix it is the STS need to undoing the creation and absorb it (to change to accommodate).

 

[The Purple Grape]

Heh... I don't know how I found my way to this thread, but here I am so....

Let me ask a question: are they misses, or simply misunderstandings in the steam in which they are revealed?

I'm busy right now catching up on C sessions that I have missed since my attention was elsewhere on other knowledge. One thing that is clear, the sessions have been and continue to evolve over time. My view is they evolve for deliberate, though not always understood, reasons:

- Changes in methodology over time. I remember the early C transcripts there was a lot of feedback about how repetitive use of the process of communication would in fact improve coherency, accuracy, and ease of messaging, thus making the process of communication more and more efficient and effective.

- Different personalities participating with Laura in sessions. I recall very clearly when reading the 3 volumes of transcripts published that some sessions went better than others qualitatively and quantitatively. I also recall Laura troubleshooting "weird" (my paraphrase, not her words) sessions, she very often tracked it down, with the help of the Cs to particular personalities. One clear finding she came to was the team mattered, and personalities in the session team and their own little internal agendas/dramas could and did impact some sessions in terms of clarity and even content revealed.

- Timelines and events are somewhat fluid. In other words, sometimes something is changed deliberately by some entity to modify a timeline and that can easily have ripple effects. So in my view, re-correlation on a miss is a good practice, and it is my recollection that Laura often did exactly that.

Setting that aside, I am of the view that the core purpose of what the Cs share is to stimulate our gathering of knowledge and understanding from any and all sources that knock on the door of our intuition and resonate with our heart when we open the door, so to speak. I don't think keeping a score card on the Cs is really warranted anymore. They are beyond credible after almost 30 years of consistent and persistent work by Laura and team to continue to explore and discover with the Cs.

I generally approach any mystery from the stand point of an open mind and a desire to understand, and in particular understand context in which something is revealed. Consider this: perhaps some perceived misses are actually sign-post clues for us all to explore the particular line of thought more closely. In other words, in the mysterious methods of the Cs in preserving free will and yet gently poking at us to explore and learn on our own volition, sometimes a miss is actually an actual hit for many who read the C transcripts. Could also be sometimes they miss, just to be an event trigger for some future seeker of knowledge who comes across the Cs. Or it could just be sometimes random noise scrabbles the incoming message too.

I guess, at this point in time, they have proven themselves consistently, and they are communicating through some rather complex processes, that include teams of human personalities as part of the stream of sharing. So, does it really matter at this level of maturity in the Cs information sharing? 🤓

I have introduced many people over the years to Laura's books, and I have literally never lead the reader as to the credibility or validity of the messages, as I truly feel it is a unique exploration and outcome for each person who crosses paths with the documented C sessions. I simply give them a copy of one of her books, and encourage them to put it on a table at their home and when it draws them to curiosity, pick it up and explore it with an open mind. After all, it's their journey not mine, as I have my own journey and we perhaps share a common trail in said journey.

 

[Hla72]

Heh... I don't know how I found my way to this thread, but here I am so....

Let me ask a question: are they misses, or simply misunderstandings in the steam in which they are revealed?

I'm busy right now catching up on C sessions that I have missed since my attention was elsewhere on other knowledge. One thing that is clear, the sessions have been and continue to evolve over time. My view is they evolve for deliberate, though not always understood, reasons:

- Changes in methodology over time. I remember the early C transcripts there was a lot of feedback about how repetitive use of the process of communication would in fact improve coherency, accuracy, and ease of messaging, thus making the process of communication more and more efficient and effective.

- Different personalities participating with Laura in sessions. I recall very clearly when reading the 3 volumes of transcripts published that some sessions went better than others qualitatively and quantitatively. I also recall Laura troubleshooting "weird" (my paraphrase, not her words) sessions, she very often tracked it down, with the help of the Cs to particular personalities. One clear finding she came to was the team mattered, and personalities in the session team and their own little internal agendas/dramas could and did impact some sessions in terms of clarity and even content revealed.

- Timelines and events are somewhat fluid. In other words, sometimes something is changed deliberately by some entity to modify a timeline and that can easily have ripple effects. So in my view, re-correlation on a miss is a good practice, and it is my recollection that Laura often did exactly that.

Setting that aside, I am of the view that the core purpose of what the Cs share is to stimulate our gathering of knowledge and understanding from any and all sources that knock on the door of our intuition and resonate with our heart when we open the door, so to speak. I don't think keeping a score card on the Cs is really warranted anymore. They are beyond credible after almost 30 years of consistent and persistent work by Laura and team to continue to explore and discover with the Cs.

I generally approach any mystery from the stand point of an open mind and a desire to understand, and in particular understand context in which something is revealed. Consider this: perhaps some perceived misses are actually sign-post clues for us all to explore the particular line of thought more closely. In other words, in the mysterious methods of the Cs in preserving free will and yet gently poking at us to explore and learn on our own volition, sometimes a miss is actually an actual hit for many who read the C transcripts. Could also be sometimes they miss, just to be an event trigger for some future seeker of knowledge who comes across the Cs. Or it could just be sometimes random noise scrabbles the incoming message too.

I guess, at this point in time, they have proven themselves consistently, and they are communicating through some rather complex processes, that include teams of human personalities as part of the stream of sharing. So, does it really matter at this level of maturity in the Cs information sharing? 🤓

I have introduced many people over the years to Laura's books, and I have literally never lead the reader as to the credibility or validity of the messages, as I truly feel it is a unique exploration and outcome for each person who crosses paths with the documented C sessions. I simply give them a copy of one of her books, and encourage them to put it on a table at their home and when it draws them to curiosity, pick it up and explore it with an open mind. After all, it's their journey not mine, as I have my own journey and we perhaps share a common trail in said journey.

“After all, it's their journey not mine, as I have my own journey and we perhaps share a common trail in said journey.”


What an excellent reminder for everyone!! Thank you for sharing your perspective. I enjoyed reading and happen to agree. It truly comes back to free will and where people are in their journey.