I did a reading with the "Galactic Heritage Cards" recently, and, amongst other matters, was told to be less inflexible, and not to make decisions when in a state of fear and desperation - which covers decisions about my day job, in particular.
The information also related to "galactic" (i.e., UFO / "UAP") matters - which led to me adding the post script to this post. I still have serious doubts about some of the claims being made - e.g., I think some of what is being observed is nonphysical (or less dense, to use that field's terminology - perhaps 4D or higher?), not physical.
There are other problems, some of which I have touched on before now.
- The first is the uniformity of terminology - particularly for the various species and planets. Now, that could be because "everyone" is tuning in to a genuine truth . . . or it could be because some people have jumped on to the bandwagon and are copying those who went before, POSSIBLY for nefarious purposes - but equally possibly for good reasons.
On that, some of my reluctance could be because I have a strong negative reaction to tying to channel names and specific information. I know I've had a past life where such information I channelled was misused, but I also feel that people are focusing on irrelevancies - it's a bit like seeing an elephant in a school classroom and getting in a tizz over whether the elephant had a pink or blue ribbon tied on it, rather than the fact that it is an elephant in a school classroom. So . . . FEEL THE ENERGY! Don't obsess about physical world details like names - to some extent, they either don't exist or are vastly different (would you ask how rivers and lakes are named in the middle of a desert?) in other realms.
Going back to the issue, I have no firm answers one way or the other on that, so I will not commit and will wait for more information. It isn't important enough to actively chase - there are far higher priorities.
- Next is one of the biggest ones: polarity.
It is utter *****y rubbish to think that gender is only limited to stereotypical male at one end, stereotypical female at the other, and nothing in between. I mean, there are even calls for doctors and other medical staff to be trained on Intersex variations when learning about anatomy - because Intersex conditions affect 1% of the population. When wee finish getting rid of all the bigotry that we are socially conditioned into, we will, in my opinion, find around 1 in 5,000 people are transgender (including those under that umbrella who identify as male or female - the word is an adjective, NOT a *****y noun, and those are neither are non-binary - and there are aspects such as gender FLUID [if you find any of that unsettling or threatening, get competent psychiatric help to deal with your insecurities) and 80% of people are bisexual (and note that at least some animals naturally show same sex attracted behaviour - NONE of this is an aberration, and if allegedly spiritual beings don't know that, then I immediately have powerful doubts about their credibility).
How come none of the civilisations that have been around for millions of years have picked that up and started educating those they are talking to on this fundamental of inclusivity? Or were those listening blinded by their "unconscious biases"? (In my experience, some are just outright bigots.)
- Similarly, the term they should be using instead of race - which has incredibly negative associations of bigotry, hate and small-mindedness - is species.
I've been struck for decades by how white-centric / white-normative much of the imagery is, and by the use of terms such as "dark". Many New Agers / "white lighters" use "white" when they should be referring to clear - for instance, Tibetan Buddhism refers to clear light, not "white light".
(As a somewhat optimistic counter to this, look at the rainbow coloured "orbs" not quite half way down this page.)
- There is also a very neochristian / Abrahamic religion bias to much of this field, in my opinion (IMO). There may be an element of truth in that there is a single, unified intelligence at the "centre" / spiritual "peak" of the Universe (this was referred to in the definition of the Divine given in "Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth"), but much of what is being expressed has all the baggage of bigotry of Earth religions.
- Carrying on from "Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth" (and see also this post), many people have multiple lives on multiple planets. That means, just as people have experience of lives as stereotypical female, stereotypical male, and everything in-between, so too do they have experience of multiple planetary species (possibly limited to similar expressions) and races within species.
To say someone is "X" when they could also have been A, D, M, Y, and AZK is meaningless - or, at the very least, potentially misleading. - The focus on war is a human perspective and/or bias, IMO.
Dr. Steven M Greer has what I consider excellent material on the stages/levels of civilisation/consciousness, and I consider that material shows how kindergarten-level our wars, conflicts, and violence actually are.
There is no logical reason to assume that, just because we have a certain characteristic (violence), others elsewhere will. Such assumptions drift perilously close to the "humans are the pinnacle/Earth is the centre of creation" rubbish.
Having said that, I am moved by the "Star Wars" series, but I haven't bothered to try to sort out how much of that is good storytelling, tapping in to universal mythology such as "the hero's journey", personal past life recall from this planet, personal past life recall from other planets, or something along the lines of the galactic history being advocated for.
I'm not inclined to, either: there are more urgent and pressing needs in front of me, such as attaining peace and overcoming the evils of poverty and bigotry on this plant here and now.
- The approach is quite dismissive of human potential and fallibility.
It is clear that we humans are capable of stuffing things up - see the above discussions on wars, consider the climate crisis, and for those thinking all that can be explained away by external interference, think of the problems we have in personal relationships.
Think also on how people can often solve those personal problems, perhaps with a bit of help from an expert (human) counsellor - or no more than a BPM Guide.
We are also capable of doing things well - great things, sometimes, including development of political organisation, ways of addressing crises, and social progressivism.
Neither the good nor the bad is all attributable to others - and doing so actually on "bad" issues is a cop out, IMO.
- I have some concerns about historical accuracy of what is often being described, based on scientific evidence that I consider reasonable (e.g., regarding continental drift).
Having made those points:
- I consider that there is some validity in the ideas being proposed - and for a convenient summary, perhaps consider this (particularly here), this, and this;
- I agree that there has been extraterrestrial involvement in human evolution;
- I consider most of that involvement has been beneficial, but accept that there also has been some truly harmful experiences - and some that seemed harmful (Whitley Strieber covers that aspect well);
- I consider that the "way forward" needs to be based on love & spiritual evolution (irrespective of the veracity or otherwise of ETs/ET involvement / UFOs/"UAPs"), and the “CE 5 ET
contact” movement.
I have no answers for some of this now - which is an exercise / lesson in patience, priorities, and proper focus 😊
