How far will we go before we get back to where we were a million years ago?
How much BELIEF is built on me-too think or memes of emotional NEED for 'easy answers'?
Why do our paradigm institutions or media sell only that which "appeals to base human urges" (Machiavelli)?
Some of what is said in the above link - I like. I also know it is hard to cover all that is being covered in it without some dissonance and conflicting interpretations based on what I know versus what the author knows. It certainly raises good questions we should consider.
"Minds work in similar ways to Internet trolls, who are at present causing much distress on Twitter. Trolls are anonymous and believe they can not be called to account. Gods and other such minds also believe they can not be called to account.
• Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle starts to reign supreme with minds being both in human bodies and existing as disincarnate at the same time. The truth is probably that in any one case, each is feeding the other, so it is a case of looking for the source. This is a case of circularity.
• The ultimate source is the Big Bang, memories of which have been interpreted and mis-interpreted, especially by priests and religions to justify their opinions. These opinions have evolved into modern religion. However there may be a source even further back which led to the Big Bang.
• "The God gene hypothesis proposes that a specific gene (VMAT2) predisposes humans towards spiritual or mystic experiences (Wikipedia)." This gene is alleged to exist in about 50% of the human race. When one is ready, this gene can be targeted as a mind, but we suspect it is not the only one.
• The concept that astrology is written on our junk DNA comes back to haunt us. We blame Jehovah for this one. Again astrology appears to exist both in our DNA and as a disincarnate entity, and can be targeted as either.
• It is most uncomfortable to be judged on the wrong moral code. Responsibility generally involves being prepared to be judged by one's own moral codes.
• The last Judgment is not a judgment on man, but a judgment on God or gods.
• He who sits in judgment sits at the top of the hierarchy and the top of the psychic food chain.
• Targeting the various aspects of Judgment drastically cuts down the uncertainty principle and clips the effects of all minds. If you are the judge, then no one can turn around and judge you. This a case of the survival of the fittest. "
I know genetic information transfer occurs - I have experienced it consciously for most if not all of my life. St. Germain set up schooling in Vienna to facilitate it and related aspects of wisdom acquisition that Hitler and his father spent time or more being inculcated into. It includes "trance oration" and what some will call Channelling and angel work. My book on him addresses these matters, but it is not available so I would say Hitler and the Occult which is available will come closest. I deal with related concepts in many books including Integrating Soul and Science.
Here is a review of Dr. Hamer's book and work in genetics.
Like his and Peter Copeland's Living with Our Genes (1998), geneticist Hamer's provocative new book begins with the caveat that a single gene rarely accounts for a complex behavior, such as homosexuality, which was instanced in Living, or spirituality, the focus here. Still, Hamer has done sufficient research to argue that a single gene is implicated in spirituality, and his highly accessible exposition of how he arrived at that point is pretty impressive, if occasionally a bit Mr. Rogers-like in tone. Later, he adopts antireligious geneticist Richard Dawkins' concept of the meme, or transmissible unit of cultural information, to expand upon how culture and genetics interact to prompt expressing spirituality through religion and thereby to sustain faith traditions, such as in the demonstration case here, Judaism. (Hamer thinks Dawkins' attitudes toward religion less than rational, by the way, and poses those of sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson as a healthy alternative.) He ends with another caveat: distinguish between beliefs and the act of believing--and the war between science and religion just might be resolved. Ray Olson
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title."