The Moon

[jbseth]

Hi All,

It was fifty years ago tonight, that I, as a teenager, and probably about 500 million others (I got that number from a news video I saw on the internet, today) watched Neal Armstrong step down off the Apollo Lunar Landing Module and make his now famous statement, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind".

I wonder how long it will be before another human officially steps down onto the moon once again?

-jbseth

[Deb]

Me too, I saw it on our old black and white tv. There are so many conspiracy people saying it was all faked. But then there are people who insist the Earth is flat too and the Holocaust never happened. I guess they're making their own realities based on their beliefs, right?

The Apollo anniversary has been in the news all week. According to this article, we should be back on the moon in 5 years and heading to Mars. I keep having this thought that we're going to want to start sending all our trash to the moon...

Back in 2001 Charlie Duke from Apollo 16 spoke at a local church. We bought his enormous photo book filled with images from space travel. It was published on the 30th anniversary of 11. Charlie signed it for my son, who was 6 at the time and thrilled to death. One of the cool photos in the book is his footprint and family photo that he left on the moon in 1972. Or on the floor of the "set" for those who think it was faked, lol.

[jbseth]

Hi Deb,

Thanks for sharing. Having grown in Florida during that era, I've always been fascinated with NASA, space craft, space travel, astronomy, etc.

I'll bet that was pretty awesome seeing Charlie Duke and getting his book.


During the late 1980's I had the privilege of attending an international reliability conference in Los Angeles. The guest speaker of this conference (unfortunately, I don't remember his name right now) was an astronaut who flew on the space shuttle during one of the more recent missions, at that time.

As part of his presentation, he showed the audience a 30 minute video that he had made while actually onboard the space shuttle. This video contained lots of scenes of the crew floating around from point to point while inside the shuttle. It also contained many scenes of the earth, taken from the shuttle windows. All very beautiful.

One of the interesting things he did in this video while onboard the shuttle was to shake up and then open a can of Coke. After opening the can, he then merged many of the floating blobs of coke that came out of the can, into a blob about the size of golf ball. After this, he spun this large blob of coke vertically with a pencil.  Interestingly enough, as this blob of Coke spun, the light brown fizzy foamy portion of the Coke all merged to one side of the blob, while the dark brown liquid Coke all merged to the other.   

Then he opened his mouth, slowly floated up to the blob, and swallowed the whole thing. 

It was an awesome video.

- jbseth

[Sena]

jbseth, thanks for this topic. Neil Armstrong was not the first, according to Seth:

"So-called objective science gives you a picture, a model, that has served well enough in its own fashion, enabling you to travel to the moon, for example, and to advance in a technology that for a time you set your hearts upon. In the framework of objective science as it now exists, however, even the technology will come up against a stone wall. Even as a means, objective science is only helpful for a while, because it will constantly run up against deeper inner realities that are necessarily shunted aside and ignored simply because of its method and attitude.2 No objective science or splendid technology alone will keep even one man or woman alive, for example, if that individual has decided to leave the flesh, or finds no joy in daily life.

[... 3 paragraphs ...]

I am not making a prediction here. I am simply pointing out one probability that exists. There have indeed been civilizations upon your planet that understood as well as you, and without your kind of technology, the workings of the planets, the positioning of stars — people who even foresaw "later" global changes. They used a mental physics. There were men before you who journeyed to the moon, and who brought back data quite as "scientific" and pertinent. There were those who understood the "origin" of your solar system far better than you. Some of these civilizations did not need spaceships. Instead, highly trained men combining the abilities of dream-art scientists and mental physicists cooperated in journeys not only through time but through space. There are ancient maps drawn from a 200-mile-or-more vantage point — these meticulously completed on return from such journeys."

—UR1 Section 3: Session 702 June 10, 1974

When Seth says that previous civilizations did not need spaceships, he may be referring to "remote viewing". Ingo Swann claims to have gone to the moon by this method:

"In his 1998 autobiography Penetration: The Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy, Swann described his work with individuals in an unknown agency who study extraterrestrials (E.T.), his remote viewing of a secret E.T. base on the hidden side of the Moon and his "shocking" experience with a sexy scantily dressed female E.T. in a Los Angeles supermarket."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingo_Swann

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_Who_Stare_at_Goats

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

Nice catch.

Yes, according to Seth, there have been others who have travelled to the moon, so Neil wouldn't have been the first. Though it sounds like these other may have gotten there using something like "remote viewing".

I think the Ingo Swann, "remote viewing" folks, were doing something pretty interesting. I've always wondered, if these folks ever concluded that there exists probable realities, as Seth tells us.

jbseth

[LarryH]

I think the Ingo Swann, "remote viewing" folks, were doing something pretty interesting. I've always wondered, if these folks ever concluded that there exists probable realities, as Seth tells us.

Just yesterday I was listening to a downloaded interview of a remote viewer. In response to a question as to whether a precognitive warning could "change" the future, he had an issue with that wording and said that the warning could shift what we experience to a different probable future, but that all probable futures are valid. He mentioned quantum theory and Schrodinger's cat, both dead and alive in the box until it is observed. By the way, I always thought that this thought experiment was flawed in that it did not take into account the consciousness of the cat, who would be in the best position to "observe" what happens.

[Deb]

By the way, I always thought that this thought experiment was flawed in that it did not take into account the consciousness of the cat, who would be in the best position to "observe" what happens.

Wow, I never would have thought of that. It was a theoretical cat, but the experiment would have to involve some living conscious being, so even a plant would have to be a cooperative, observing participant.

jbseth, I loved the Coke story. I remember seeing a short video eons ago, something similar to that. I wondered if the liquid wasn't drunk, where would it end up? I had visions of people pouring Coke on their battery terminals to remove the corrosion... too many switches, controls and wires in a spaceship. Uhhhh, Houston, we have a problem...

I found a post by Ron Card on Facebook yesterday that contained a bunch of quotes about the moon and the lunar landing. Even though it will repeat some of what Sena put up, I thought this post was a nice place to tuck in more Seth material. Funny how TES Book9 has been coming up a lot lately! I've arranged these by session number. The first part is Rob, I've italicized his words to set it apart from the Seth quotes.

In a brief time I seemed to be concerned about the landing of the astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin on the moon this afternoon.

(I seemed to briefly hover just above the two men after they had left the spindly ladder of the landing craft, & stepped onto the moon surface.

(I do remember that I briefly wondered, as I fell asleep, if the experience reflected a quite natural concern over the moon-landing's potential hazards.

[skip]

(After retiring at about 1 AM on July 20, 1969, on Sunday morning, after Jane & I had been to the Steak Shop for a few drinks...

(Actually my concern was over some kind of accident to Armstrong after he & Aldrin had left the lunar module or landing craft—this I believe is scheduled for 2:17 AM Monday, according to [this morning's] Sunday paper.

(I saw him fall to, or lying, on the moon surface, in some kind of trouble.

(I do not think that in my experience I ever "stood" on the moon surface.
—The Early Sessions, Book 9, notes By Robert F. Butts for July 20, 1969

- - -

"Any strong emotion carries within it far more energy than, say, that required to send a rocket to the moon."
—NoPR Chapter 5: Session 625, November 1, 1972

"As your spaceships to the moon must wait for the most effective overall conditions before taking off, so in other terms are there rhythms having to do with energy.

"Now: As there are better times than others in your sphere of activity for sending rockets or spaceships to the moon, so there are peak periods when the self and the soul (or entity) coincide — when communication is at its best."
—NoPR Chapter 19: Session 668, June 6, 1973

"So-called objective science gives you a picture, a model, that has served well enough in its own fashion, enabling you to travel to the moon, for example, and to advance in a technology that for a time you set your hearts upon.

"There were men before you who journeyed to the moon, and who brought back data quite as "scientific" and pertinent."
—UR1 Section 3: Session 702 June 10, 1974

"(Long pause.) To some extent you participated in putting a man on the moon, whether or not you had any connection at all with the physical occurrence itself. Your thoughts put a man on the moon as surely as any rocket did."
—NoME Chapter 10: Session 873, August 15, 1979

"As solid as it seems to you, there are constant chemical reactions between it and the world, electromagnetic adjustments, alterations of balance, changes of relationships—alterations that occur between the body and its relationship with every other physical event, from the position of the planets and moon and the sun, to the position of the smallest grain of sand, to the tiniest microbe in anyone's intestine (intently)."
—DEaVF1 Chapter 6: Session 906, March 6, 1980

[jbseth]

Hi LarryH, Hi Deb,

Hey LarryH, thanks for that. So it appears that maybe these remote viewing folks, in a way, may have validated Seths, "Probable Reality" concepts.

While I would agree that all probable futures are valid, the real trick for the remote viewing folks was to figure out how to predict the specific probable future that will be actualized. I'm not sure that's possible given what Seth says, and maybe that's what they finally concluded as well.

I'm guessing that maybe Schrodinger and his contemporaries probably didn't think that a cat actually had a consciousness. I wonder if/how their thought experiment might have been changed, if someone insisted that instead of a cat, there had to be a human in the box.

Your comment about the cat and its consciousness, makes me think of the section in The Seth Material, where Seth was talking to Rob and Bill McDonnald, I believe, about there being not just 1 glass in the room, but rather several glasses instead, one created by each person; and one created by Willy the cat as well. 


Hi Deb,

Thanks for sharing the wonderful Seth posts from Ron Card, about the moon, etc. 


-jbseth