Monday 07 March 2005
Friends,
When your elders declared that spiritualism was a science of observation, they did not suspect the accuracy of their words, ideas which the spirits inspired them.
Here, this evening with you and in your space, we will take up these words by following the logic it contains. Spirituality but also the essential element that it implies and that you recognize as being the spirit, only exists and shows you its state in a more or less well elaborated and commented action of observation.
But the spiritual world is omnipresent and remains active without even your life, your planet and your solar system. This reality is the existential principle of the universe, of the universes. The spiritual world is therefore a unit which determines what you call the world of forms. Your observation of it does not determine its purpose. This act of visualization, of explanation, of comparison, only sends you back a truncated image of its reality. The act of focusing on spirituality, of collecting messages does not come here to give the walls necessary for one’s life. No, that gives you indications either, but which cannot depict you the virgin moment, that is to say the one which will not be demonstrated, remaining active like a final reflex, far from any human intellect. The images, the sounds,the ideas that you receive from us are therefore a ricochet, images sent back from a reflecting surface which cannot in the absolute depict in depth and fundamentally the spiritual reality.
Us:
You stopped writing at one point when I turned to address Tony. Does the fact that I’m talking to him bother you?
Them:
Yes, we need you to deal with you. Do your business before questioning us.
Us:
We tried to follow your last recommendations a bit, so we reversed the direction of the dishes and also changed the positioning of the panes.
So we would like to know what you think of its changes?
Them:
They are positive for you, so logically they will be positive for us as well. Then let’s stay logical, there are still too theoretical aspects in your installation. It will then be necessary to think of « materializing » them. We think your changes are wise. You understand the importance of media, whether light or sound. You also seem to find a certain « concordance » with the focus of the
module, to use your words but which will still have to be rethought. Go therefore to the simplest not for handling but to hope to approach logic. You have to start from a recognized and well evaluated concrete to then embark on the journey discovering the unknown. There as it is, you identify the problem of convergence and the human aspect. This is a good thing.Be careful, however, to the reflections that we will call pirate reflections, directly constructed, induced by the windows.
Us:
You tell us « that there are still too theoretical aspects in your installation » What do you mean?
Them:
Yes, your audio phonic configuration and the interference aspect of laser light for example. The theory is good, the installation poor.
Us:
Is it a positioning or material problem?
Them:
It’s more of a problem of emission for the sound and convergence for the laser. The 141 hertz is painful to us, although its physique is in some cases, appreciable. We need more, many more. The sensitivity of the microphones, the reproduction of the speakers is very poor yes, but that bothers us less than the frequency you emit. As for the laser, it is necessary to spread the beam, it does not illuminate enough. Its light suits us but its reflection and its width are insufficient.
We must not remove the support of 141 hertz but multiply their genres.
Us:
Don’t you think we could add the frequencies on the computer and send them back to you on the module?
Them:
Yes of course, but someone with me tells me that you have already thought about it. Besides, he inspired you with the example of Spiricom.
Us:
We have a question from an internet user Claudia.
Gabriel and Eric said during the session of February 14, 2005: « however man will not be able to design the typical machine ……… .. » What do you mean when you say, « at its peak this elaboration will no longer have anything to do with a machine? «
Them:
Let’s try to be clear. We would like to go over the different stages of your technique. Man of any age in his logic and search for well-being, has never ceased to want to make his life better, inventing all kinds of things to supplement his strength, to serve his skill, his art always evolving for it. » help to move etc.
As his fundamental approach to science progressed, he developed machines in increasing order
towards the complex but also the ever-renewed human perfection.
This is how the telephone, communication in general, aeronautics and its movements, medicine and the reduction of physical death, then emerged from the inconsistent. But in this quest, man did and today only ape his own mind because it does surprising things. He communicates, moves and heals himself without waiting. It would therefore be logical that his technique seeks to approach the absolute spiritual meaning. And this observation holds true for everything else. To come back to TCI, the journey is analogous and the moments you live will be seen with a smile in the future of your humanity, as the flying madmen make your current airplane pilots smile. But think about it, how will you view modern aviation when you are in the age of teleportation?
Yet it took a Berlioz to achieve this, a Boeing to invent these machines, cutting-edge aspects that will not deny the outcome I am mentioning.
We cannot therefore say that the technique for communicating with us is obsolete and useless. No, it helps you to understand all the intertwining that exists in these things. The communication that you will have with us in the future will go hand in hand with the development of your technology. And then, what you understand by machine today will only exist in the aspect of a technological principle adapted to the planet and the air of the moment.
So what you do in these times is very important to you and your mind. So do it with full knowledge of the facts.
Us:
So you are telling us that our machine will make people laugh years from now like the aviators of yesteryear make people laugh today?
Them:
Yes, however, we will make a remark, your module will make people laugh not in several years, but in several decades, see several lives or generations. The technology of your future will no longer take up space, it will not be controlled by desks, it will not consume. No, it will be the whole matter that will form your desires. You will reach here, the fusion between the ideological world of the forms and the service which it must render you. A technical evolution that will fuel your most fertile imaginations.
We will leave you, your medium tired. In conclusion, help each other.
Late