That's okay..........there's no requirement that everybody has to believe something about anything, let alone about the C's.    And you certainly wouldn't be the first to not believe in their validity!   I don't think any of the C's believers are out there trying to convert people to be a believer;   I think most of us respect that everybody's going to have their own set of beliefs.

Some would argue that a ouija board IS pretty direct.     With the board, one is getting full sentences and entire paragraphs of information.   So I guess the definition of "direct communication" is kind of subjective in that regard...........

As far the hologram / video / audio, why would that neceessarily be better?   Also, keep in mind that malovant, deceitful STS beings HAVE employed the use of holograms and videos when communicating with gullible humans....although the humans didn't realize at the time this was happening.  When you research the history of Mormonism for instance, you will find that with regards to Joseph Smith, an "angelic being" appeared to him in his room three nights in a row repeating the same message / speech to him, word for word, like a recorded message, which in turn set off a chain of events that eventually led to the founding of the current Mormon Church as it exists today.   If I have my details correct.   But the description of this angelic being sounds exactly like holographic techonlogy.........reminded me of Princess Leia's holographic message transmitted through R2D2 at the beginning of "Star Wars."     For more on this check out "The Gods of Eden" by William Bramley.  He devotes an entire chapter to Mormonism and it's "suspicious" origins.

Point being, I believe this technology has been used, and the evidence is right under our noses, but it seems so implausible to most people who are highly programmed.   Holograms and audio seem so, I don't know, like STS-level technology.   STS beings are all about trying to convince people in their validity, and use flashy technology to achieve this.   A malovent STS being wants to try to lure their gullible victim in, and pulls out all the tricks to do so.  An STO being only comes when called, for starters, out of respect of freewill, and doesn't need, nor desire, the flashy technology to "convert" the victim.

Lot of "I don't knows" there!    Well, like I've said before many many times, "Seeing is believing."  And unless people have sat in on a session like we have, then there's going to be some major skepticism.  And that's TOTALLY understandable.   Before I had the privilege of witnessing a session I was neutral to it.   I didn't disbelieve it or believe it.   I took it with a grain of salt, found it interesting, but couldn't vouch for it in any way.   Now I kind of can.  A person can't fake what we saw during the session.  I won't rehash it here, as I've mentioned it quite a few times already and I don't want to bore people by repeeating it, but I do understand your skepticism on the matter. 

My personal research method is mostly like that, but with one slight revision..................Whatever I can't prove, or which I even disagree with, I just put on the backburner.   "When in doubt, don't throw it out."   Just sit on it.  Put it aside.  Move on to other things.   Because if it ends up being true after all, you'll eventually discover it through additional research which corraborates it.    But for me, to throw it out is putting the stamp of finality on it.  "REJECTED."  That's saying that I'm 100% absolutely positively certain that I'm right and know all the answers.  Which I don't.   So anything that I'm unfamiliar with or doubtful on just gets put aside and mentally filed away for later.   I've had many MANY topics that resurfaced long after being put on the backburner, often times, with corraboration.  So, you never know! 

Whywhywhy,

I notice that five times in two paragraphs you repeat the statement that you don't know the truth of the situation.      While I agree with your habit of taking what you're sure of, or what resonates with you, I question the wisdom of "throwing the rest in the garbage" until you can prove it.  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, or just being nitpicky here, but I'll use your post to make a point, even if I've misunderstood and it doesn't actually apply to you personally. 

I notice that in the mainstream there are a lot of "skeptics" who make a point of refusing to consider anything that cannot be proven to them.   I answer by asking the following question:  If I were to flip a coin behind your back, and you were unable to see the result, would you automatically assume that it was heads because you could not prove that it was tails?  Or vice-versa?  No, of course not, because it's obvious that it's just as likely to be the other way round.        When it comes to paranormal subjects, people often assume that since they have not personally seen or experienced something, they are safe in assuming that it is not real.  But this may not be the case.  In my example of a coin toss, we know the probablity of the alternative result is always 50%.    So, when it comes to a question such as "are the C's for real," before passing judgement on the question based on ignorance, we ought to at least try to figure out what is the probability of their being real, versus their being false, imagined, hoax, or otherwise.   Is it 50/50?  Or 80/20 that it's real?  Or maybe only 5% chance it's real and 95% that it's nonsense?  Can we even determine a number in any reasonably accurate manner?     Since there's no scientific way we can arrive at a certain answer to this question, we have to make a subjective judgement call based on the best information we have.  Whatever information is left over that we CAN'T reasonably classify as probable or improbable, we have to file as "I don't know" -- as you have done -- but the correct thing to then DO with the unknown material is to put in on the backburner ... don't "throw it in the garbage" and automatically assume it's bunk, unless you have good reason to do so.   As the coin might just as easily be tails, the information you discarded might have been true -- and if you've refused to consider that possibility, you've made certain that you will never have a correct understanding of reality.

I realized the last post on this thread was 3/1/05 but I found the discussion quite interesting and decided to add my two cents in it.

I have read as much as I can stand on the C material (some posted here by Montalk/others and the remaining in the internet) and cannot say that I am completely convinced of its validity. 

I will try to comment without being judgemental but sometimes they go together.  Sorry.  I am having problems believing that high level beings (6D type) are communicating with us via an ouija board.    If they are communicating then they have revealed themselves to us .................Why not being more direct?  Why not using a hollogram (including video/audio)?

I have read Arkadiusz reasoning about the use of the ouija board...........The use of the board in a way validates  that real Chanelling is happening.  I don't know about that!  Chanelling is a very subjective issue.  Perhaps Laura is actually communicating.......I do not know.  Perhaps she is letting her mind take over and say things she believes to be true or want to believe are true.  I do not know.  Perhaps Arkadiusz has influenced her thoughts.  A good amount of the C's material is of the technical flavor (Arkadiusz strength!).    I do not know.

Since I honestly do not know the answers to most of my questions I am approaching in a different way.  I read the material and take what I think is bullet proof or resonates with me.  The rest I throw in the garbage can until I can prove otherwise.  IT WORKS FOR ME!

Jen wrote:

On the other hand, it seems that Laura often edits the transcripts,  so they may end up being more from her consciousness than from the C's.

She only edits what she can understand, so most of the transcripts remain close to what originally came through. Anything truly important snuck under the radar, so to speak. If anything, there are occasional omissions. As wandering1 said, there's no substitute for reason and intuition.

Perhaps those who are still to this day preoccupied with the raffle event simply find it the most viable spot to leverage their personal vendettas. They stand at the center of a tar pit and it's easy for others with similar inclinations to walk right in. I prefer staying out of it since there's nothing constructive about dwelling on what, in the big scheme of things, is trivial despite its emotional charge for some people.

Good to hear that about her method of editing the channelings.

I agree that we can trust our reason and intuition to lead us to what resonates and is helpful to us.  I've appreciated much of the C's channelings, and some of Laura's own writings as well, although like many others, I wish she would be more concise.

And, you make a good point about the house raffle.  What's done is done, no point in dwelling on it forever and ever.  But I think it's probably inevitable that for many people, this will remain as a shadow over Laura/the C's work.

I myself have tried to inject some balance and a broader perspective into that thread at Godlike, I 've posted there a couple of times under the username Delphine and may post again.  Haven't checked it today!

On the other hand, it seems that Laura often edits the transcripts,  so they may end up being more from her consciousness than from the C's.

She only edits what she can understand, so most of the transcripts remain close to what originally came through. Anything truly important snuck under the radar, so to speak. If anything, there are occasional omissions. As wandering1 said, there's no substitute for reason and intuition.

Perhaps those who are still to this day preoccupied with the raffle event simply find it the most viable spot to leverage their personal vendettas. They stand at the center of a tar pit and it's easy for others with similar inclinations to walk right in. I prefer staying out of it since there's nothing constructive about dwelling on what, in the big scheme of things, is trivial despite its emotional charge for some people.

All public people have their dirtly laundry hung out to dry sooner or later.  Morale is: "If ya can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."  We'll never know if Laura was on the up and up, or not.  Only she knows that.  It's not our job to judge, but it is our responsibility to disscern.

I think the evidence about the "house raffle" shows quite conclusively
that she's not on the "up and up."  I'm not interested in judging, either,
but facts are facts.

And yes, Auendove, it's very sad, all around.

All public people have their dirtly laundry hung out to dry sooner or later.  Morale is: "If ya can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."  We'll never know if Laura was on the up and up, or not.  Only she knows that.  It's not our job to judge, but it is our responsibility to disscern.

Fascinating and intense thread about Laura/the C's at Godlike Productions forum:
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/m … ate=7/7/05

I took the time to look over all 10 pages of postings on godlikeproductions. There are many comments I could make, but in the end I'd just be back to where I was before I'd commented... myself incredibly sad to see what those first wonderous years of chanelling and fellowship have come to.

On the other hand, it seems that Laura often edits the transcripts,  so they may end up being more from her consciousness than from the C's.

Yes, the editing may have an effect.  Still, I find what she writes on her own to be dramatically different than the channeled material.

This is not to say that I think that all of the channeled material is accurate.  In so many ways, I find it to be a fantastic set of tales.  To imagine that it might accurately reflect reality is a huge thing to consider.

As with all material, channeled or not, I think that each of us needs to use reasoning and intuition and whatever other capacities we have to decide what may be correct.

And I think that it also helps to be ready to adapt to new information.

That's a long thread.  I had previously read negative things about Laura as a person, and there were quite a few mentions of that sort in there.

I can understand how the expectation would be that a person reflect the content of their channeling in the behavior of their own lives.

Here's something to consider from earlier in this thread. . .

Auendove wrote:

I have given so much thought to the Cassiopaean channelling sessions and their validity. I have looked the issue up one side and down the other, inside out and outside in, and I was doing as much as early as 1994. For 10 years I have practiced every bit of rational and objective reasoning I can muster to find a force negative interacting therein... and I cannot find one bit of evidence that would dictate that the C's channelled with intentions to harm. It's not that I just want to believe this, it's that I have no other recourse.... I simply cannot find any evidence of negative consequences. I was there to many times, I had my fingers on the planchette enough times before 1998 to know it was completely spontaneous. I've written it before here on NR, and I'll say it again--you'd have to be there to believe it.

Yes, I read that, and was impressed. In any case, I am not inclined to dismiss the C's channeling as being simply the detritus of an unbalanced mind, as some have said. 

On the other hand, it seems that Laura often edits the transcripts,  so they may end up being more from her consciousness than from the C's.

Agree with what you said re congruence of the message with the messenger...

I can understand how the expectation would be that a person reflect the content of their channeling in the behavior of their own lives.

Here's something to consider from earlier in this thread. . .

I'm not for or against them, but most of the posters are polarized  on the subject. It does seem that Laura has been involved in some very unsavory things. It's a little hard for me to reconcile the flashes of briliiance I've
seen in the C's transmissions, and in Laura's own writings, with all of that.

Jen

This reminds me of something else about the C's--

For all the serious nature of their transmissions, they seemed to love the laughs. They called our joyous, if sometimes nervous, laughter "mirth", and they joined in the mirth right along with us .

I think that we are able to experience much more than "words on a screen" by participating here, and part of that may be in perceiving other people's "frequency resonance vibration."

Oh yeah , I think so too.

BTW--DOH! I meant to write 12/04 instead of 12/03 in my question to you.

For sure, at least for me, 2003 was a mind blower, what with all the intergrating, and 2004 was just a trip, what with all the STS 3D/4D/5D forces crawling out of the woodwork, yet since the end of Dec., this past two months, it's been a whole new season of change... for me it's become blatantly obvious how different... no, different is too generic a term, it's become blatantly obvious the broad spectrum of potential available.

And to be fair,  in Jan. I wasn't all so "Wow, look at all this potential, isn't it simply marlvelous?", oh no, I was here feeling like I had been "stripped" naked, metaphorically speaking that is. Day after day, bare to the bone to no one but myself.... well, no one else except my mate, heeheehee, he got many a wild shot of my white and shiny hienie during that time. I'm glad I can laugh about it now.

It's all good though, because "All are lessons", and boy-howdy if I didn't learn a few things! Him too.

And, Snicker! Snort!... I've got some really cool new "clothes to wear" now!

Peace and Joy and Love to you too wandering1, thank you for your comments.

I have been feeling the change since December 2003 and since December 2004.  I think that I would have felt something if I had been passively going through life, but actually I've been quite active with regard to reading and researching and trying to better understand what may be happening here on this planet Earth.  Participating in this forum has been part of that.

The greatest change may have occurred in my worldview, but I do notice body changes and experiences such as time speeding up.  Plus, over the past several years, I've been able to grow out of stagnant situations and move into new ones that are more appropriate.

It's very nice to share this forum with you and the others here.  I think that we are able to experience much more than "words on a screen" by participating here, and part of that may be in perceiving other people's "frequency resonance vibration."

With love, joy, and peace.