Taking aside the commitment to affirming agendas or deep held views, there are so many different versions of the truth that sometimes fantasy has become too intermingled to construct a correct version of reality. If we take evidence selected to verify opinions as to the chronologies and circumstances of distant ages, no methods used as staple test controls are certainly authentic. Radiocarbon dating, for instance, was invented by Willard Libby after World War II, so assuming documented controls of different materials/circumstances have been constantly monitored for, say, 70 years, that is the extent of our science understanding providing circumstances are always precisely matched.
So when I see a website that boasts of a roughly 3,700 year old Minoan clay pot modelled in the design of a bull, I question the efficacy of the date. Do the Minoans actually reveal an archive of a much earlier, mythical, civilisation called the Hyperboreans? If true, Minoa is the closest view we have of the lost legacy of Atlantis!
There is a preconception that, should the ancients have reached modern levels of nuclear understanding (and beyond), there would be mountains of physical evidence verifying the fact. Very few findings interrupt this modern science philosophy, even though reputedly back engineered abandoned alien spacecraft have shown no moving parts and commonly fit together like Chinese puzzles. On the very rare occasion an unexplainable item pops up, it is explained away, shielded from the glare of the public eye or debunked. Take, for example, the Greek solar clock, the Antikythera Mechanism. A large number of scientists have made the exalted claim that this item dates back to, up to 150BC. Yet, it is not Greek and much more ancient. In fact this navigation device is over 200,000 years old; an anomaly that intrigued the ancient Greeks. They knew it was prehistoric.
It seems these primal peoples (once part of the great Atlantis culture), according to the Vedic-Aryan texts, were more concerned about harmonisation with nature (something beyond the mindset of modern man) than technology, so the choice of very few metals, wood, stone and other natural materials was dedicated and not accidental. The ingenuity applied to some of these basic resources, in some cases, is mind boggling. Nevertheless, occasionally a burnt out crystal bubbles to the surface, only to be frantically buried again in some undignified, unmarked archive. I have seen (a photograph) of Steve Strong’s anomaly which is set in a petrified wooden stock, suggesting it was fixed to the head of a sturdy rod. There is a whole litany of references to these, but Moses’ famous “staff” springs to mind. No, the Bible does not mention the crystal, but that is not to say it was not there. Atlantis was renowned for using giant gemstones of different properties for varied metaphysical purposes (including mind scans).
Known ancient history is far from resolved. Marco Polo talks of his experiences on the (presumed to be) Andaman and Nicobar Islands which populated the, then, trade route from India to China. Today there is no history prior to 1789, when the East India Company set up penal colonies. Theorists are not sure if Marco Polo’s Angamanian, a very large island, is Andaman. What is certain is no Cynocephaly (dog headed person) resides there today. The Greek explorer, Magasthenes, also claimed to have encountered these beasts with a penchant for human flesh somewhere in India. Other mystical clues await talented decryption agents. Can we not find the location referenced in the Vedic Bhagavad Gita; a tale of Indian King Bhunandana who ventured to inner Earth lands via a tunnel concealed in a mountain range located in modern day Kashmir? There is also the mystery of Thracian Zamolxis I discussed in an earlier post.
My reincarnated, fragmented, memory of Atlantis has surprising parallels with the ruins of Egypt. Whereas, I think the Sphinx is a rework of a much earlier monument destroyed after extraordinary planetary upheaval (perhaps over 750,000 years ago), it was constructed as a joint Atlantean/Lemurian engineering project in the 32nd millennium BC as a celebration of the exodus return from Mars. There were other reasons. As a spiritual cooperation between two species, it marked the southernmost point of the Atlantean range (by today’s maps). The Great Pyramid of Giza followed in the 29th Millennium BC and has all the hallmarks of Lemurian engineering prowess too. Incidentally, they were the advanced, long lived ancestors of today’s Mayan Indians and other related aborigines, whose genetics were downgraded to compliment the human condition. Arguably, their direct descendants have evolved out of our reality spectrum.
Back to the subject of legacy from antiquities, to his credit, Graham Hancock notes that the Great Pyramid and Sphinx were originally inscription/cartouche free which parries with the evidence of shoddy monuments allegedly put up by Israelite slaves. There is this annoying tendency of archaeologists and geologists alike to presume that all lithographs were created by the same basic intelligence over a continuous period. This simply is not so. Stone Henge has no connection to the great Norfolk Island Moai other than both creators’ leveraged natural Earth energy features. In fact, Stone Henge has a closer link to the mysteriously shaped so-called God’s tables liberally scattered about the globe. For my Australian readers, the largest of these is Uluru rock, but the two support struts are long buried. There is a myth that the table rock was transported from another planet and the Akashic record confirms this is indeed so. More bizarrely, it may have been moved by mind power alone.
There is a general problem with Egyptian dating, as Hancock well knows. It is all circumstantial and belies the presumption that records were both “chronological” and seamlessly organised; a mistake replicated by standard interpretations of Biblical and other ancient texts. For instance, the Tower of Babel story may date back 10,000’s years and is set wildly out of context in its place in Genesis as it relates to the Atlantis policy of banishment and how that created roaming “bandit” nations. From the perspective of scientific due diligence, we have no confirmed dates for any Egyptian Pharaoh’s reign; just relatively plausible opinions in some cases. The most interesting of all the great dynasts is Akhenaton, but we cannot be sure precisely when he existed as no sarcophagus has ever been found (even then, determining the age of mummies relies on untested carbon dating techniques). If he was human, he was a remarkably odd one.
The next problem is the integrity of data, such as “translation”, authenticity, purpose and so on. Taking the concept of the creation of man, this reference lays out the theological arguments very well, but, first man, “Adam” in Cuneiform means “dust” and used for the descriptive/metaphorical effect “biological culture” (certainly no correlation with “powdered clay”). In addition, Adam has always meant the potential to be man, rather than the product. Taking the Biblical Genesis account, the Hebrews’ clearly used Adam to represent “man” but aphar (translated as “Clay”) is the one for dust which can also mean discarded parts/materials (refuse or biological off cuts?). The Hebrew version actually seems to strengthen the case for sanity.
In the Sumerian account, the gods shed their blood and mixed it with dust to create man. Better terminology might be, “The gods gave their blood and mixed it with dust (biological culture) to create man”. It’s all in the way it’s said. Sure makes sense, with what we now know scientifically, right? Considering Eve, in the Biblical version, we find parallel imagery with Enki’s rib (Sumerian texts). However, how about if Eve was not a woman but, rather, another more feminine version of man? If Adam was (contrary to populism) “all weathers” hairy, gargantuan ape man, would not delicate Caucasians seem female in comparison? For all we know, there may have been 1000’s or 10,000’s of years between the transition of ape to modern man. The texts only make the clear distinction between the two types.
Translation errors are not limited to the Old Testament. Considering Matthew 3:4’s traditional (NIV) translation, “his [John the Baptist] food was locusts and wild honey” does not sound very appetising or appropriate. So, if we apply lateral vision to the original Greek script, the word “akrid” (locust) is mighty similar to “ekkrid” (flat cakes). Buttered Flat cakes and wild honey sounds delicious and is a much more sensible/plausible translation. Of course, give the job of reasoning to fundamentalists, extremists and accountants, well; you have predicable modern reality outcomes – insanity. Some of that madness has crossed over into extra-terrestrial and extra-dimensional realms with myth makers’ using superficial evidence as props teasing unadulterated fantasy. The bigger problem is, unlike the material plane, reality is open. Fortunately, even allowing for cordial censorship and deliberate propaganda over the ages, we are still blessed with much unfettered wisdom, in the sheer weight of records collected over the ages.
There is also commonality of independently circumstantial revelations to consider. For instance, if every account of Ciakar (the commonest reptilian manifestation) interaction (typically labelled abduction) from Vladivostok to Auckland City implied young children were molested as a consequence of violation, it would be safe to assume allegations were credible? Even if the mind was playing tricks with perception, without some scientific catalyst (i.e. consumption of hallucinogenic drugs by all witnesses), this, then, surely must be absolved as truth? The answer is no, not necessarily. Even using hallucinogens as the “answer” by no means remedies our quest for truth. If sub-conscious dream state is a whole new existence plane, cordially and practically speaking, hallucinogens might be the proverbial key to the territory gate. Given Simon Parkes and others lucid explanations of reptilian (notably, once again, Ciakar) culture, they have technologies that can both graft memories (of things that didn’t happen) and holographic sensory perceptions which may as well be real.
I have already discussed the problem of reliability of the information served up as Akashic records via the astral plane. Our perception is linear, meaning date order rationale takes precedence over everything else. The so-called anthropomorphic field prioritises relevance, which is essentially chronology free. Conceivably an event 75,975,351 years ago 8pm local time on what would be 3rd June (by our measurement) is directly related to outcomes on 18th October 2015 at 7:12am. Should a channelled linked reference have been made, details would be presented giving no necessary indication of chronological differences, unless specifically requested, And, even when specific requests are made, how the information relates to our reality space can vary so much that translation is as important as the information itself. Contextually, strange components, names and places can give a hint as to chronology, but this can also determine poor conclusions (motivated by predisposition).
Historically, in the hypothetical example, symbolically and creatively no better comparison could be found for the “question” tendered, so an ambivalent deep historic connection was presented. To the receiver of the information, would have enhanced preconceptions (i.e. suspicions). Without chronological dates (as it wasn’t asked for or deemed necessary), the Akashic record could be adapted to suit any desired predispositions as to what the truth “is” within the limits of the context of the information tendered. Agreed, this is only a hypothetical example and, as such, a hyperbole. They may be no conceivable burning comparisons of this sort. Even so, it more than adequately highlights the potential for gaping chasms between truth and rationalisation. Rather worryingly, the receiver of information might innocently, and in absolute belief, pass on a dud message due to ineffective interpretations.
My advice to those that dabble is: ask very specific questions or try many rapid supplementary conditional queries as a good dog would pen sheep. Also use “Google” for verification in case something crops up. Remember the astral regions contain everything that ever was or will be, so, without the right mind, you would not be able to completely process a given moment of any when. We must accept, as incarnate beings, our processing abilities are that limited essential truth is beyond our reach. I can, for instance, switch on my higher self and transfigure enlightened perception into the reality plane, but it still doesn’t make sense “in perspective”. There are gaps between my rationalisation of reality, sense of being and the knowledge of what “is”. These intervals (between absolute and fantasy) can seem like eternities.
Maybe a good analogy would be on the lines of, each world is one atom of a giant “God” and we, a tiny part of the manifest living systems, are atomic parasites. How would the great God being feel about us? From that perspective; what is purpose and how do we relate to it? Is our self-serving individuality always going to be in contest, conflict or at loggerheads with something far greater? Ah, I sense some of you are seeing those eternities I mentioned before. Even with Dawkins’ corruptions, Darwinism is an honourable plan for existence. Chronologically finite beings can rationalise it well. But is rationale alone enough to justify the truth or have we stumbled on the great effect that forges perpetual fantasy; an exo-political theatre of ages?