Is our Sun a massive UFO Stargate?
Back in 2011 Nassim Harramein unveiled an artifact discovered deep inside a Mexican Mayan pyramid.
This ancient artifact depicts alien spacecraft that seems to be heading into the sun carved with what looks like a giant triangle. Was this triangle perhaps a portal of some kind?
Around that same time, NASA started posting images of the sun with giant black isosceles triangles on the surface, just like in the artifact.
One year earlier, in 2010 NASA had posted the incredible footage of massive objects approaching and leaving the sun. Soon after the images were posted, they were suddenly removed and re-posted, doctored to appear as though these large moving spots were comets, according to guardianlv.
Images above, taken from the video, are original NASA images of earth sized alien craft using our sun as a Stargate, a portal to other systems.
Replies
"Everyone on this forum has the right to speak from their own perspectives understandings and experiences without being shouted down"
No you did not do that! Your claim was so assertive that it simply put other pple off, those who donnot belong to your EPISTEMOLOGIC box. If you are not comming from phyc perspective, what business do you have with a physicists attempt to reconcile the laws of the seen to those of the unseen?
I shouted at you because you tended to belittle me by assigning my questioning to a lesser important folder labled '3d'. This is eroneus, the universe is ONE and it isn't apropriate to lable what we know of as '3d'. If the universe is multidimensional as in 26 dimensions or such, then we are all 26d!! This is what slips completely over your head. You think, like NA that a man need to change what he is to grasp the multidimensional reality but you are at great eror! That we perceive a world in 3d is a human nature. Who knows if grasshoppers with thaosands of eyes might be perceiving the same world as though it is thousand dimensional? Has it never occur to you that whether universe is 3d or 5d is a matter of the consciousness of the individual perceiving it? It hasn't! You think that having a capability to see in more dimensions will necesarily lead you to see more things than 'being limited' to 3d perception. What a great error! Its like saying a millipede is better off at walking than a cheetah just because it is 'multilegged'. Whether you walk with millions of legs or you walk with 2 legs, you navigate the same same reality. Whether you see with millions of dimensions or with 2d, you see the same same universe.
Infact this is what string theorists are now discovering it via ADS/CTF correspondence! To their surprise, whether universe is 1d, 2d etc is a matter of sheer perspective! Theories requiring 26 d are now being squarely squeezed just to 2d. The what used to be versionable 'you can't squeez a teserract to 3d' is becoming obselete. It is pretty not very 21st centuary. It is 20th centuary mathematical phyc.
So welcome to 21st centuary.:) you can warm the floor by mapping a calabi-yau manifold to 2d using ADS/CFT correspondence. it looks impossible, doesn't it?
"Everyone on this forum has the right to speak from their own perspectives understandings and experiences without being shouted down"
No you did not do that! Your claim was so assertive that it simply put other pple off, those who donnot belong to your EPISTEMOLOGIC box. If you are not comming from phyc perspective, what business do you have with a physicists attempt to reconcile the laws of the seen to those of the unseen?
I shouted at you because you tended to belittle me by assigning my questioning to a lesser important folder labled '3d'. This is eroneus, the universe is ONE and it isn't apropriate to lable what we know of as '3d'. If the universe is multidimensional as in 26 dimensions or such, then we are all 26d!! This is what slips completely over your head. You think, like NA that a man need to change what he is to grasp the multidimensional reality but you are at great eror! That we perceive a world in 3d is a human nature. Who knows if grasshoppers with thaosands of eyes might be perceiving the same world as though it is thousand dimensional? Has it never occur to you that whether universe is 3d or 5d is a matter of the consciousness of the individual perceiving it? It hasn't! You think that having a capability to see in more dimensions will necesarily lead you to see more things than 'being limited' to 3d perception. What a great error! Its like saying a millipede is better off at walking than a cheetah just because it is 'multilegged'. Whether you walk with millions of legs or you walk with 2 legs, you navigate the same same reality. Whether you see with millions of dimensions or with 2d, you see the same same universe.
Infact this is what string theorists are now discovering it via ADS/CTF correspondence! To their surprise, whether universe is 1d, 2d etc is a matter of sheer perspective! Theories requiring 26 d are now being squarely squeezed just to 2d. The what used to be versionable 'you can't squeez a teserract to 3d' is becoming obselete. It is pretty not very 21st centuary. It is 20th centuary mathematical phyc.
So welcome to 21st centuary.:) you can warm the floor by mapping a calabi-yau manifold to 2d using ADS/CFT correspondence. it looks impossible, doesn't it?
"Trying to explain an hypercube using 3d plane"
Just because you have never tried hard enough to do it does not mean that it is impossible to do it. Not only can hypercube or teseract can be explained using 3d, an n-dimensional realm can be maped onto a two dimensional plane while priserving all the info! Example of such technique is ADS/CFT correspondence. (Antidesitter Conformal Field Theory correspondence).
Understand it this way: Isn't hollogram just a 2d surface? Yet it can contains all the info pertaining to a 3d solid! The depth is just pure aesthetics and has nothing to do with UNDERSTANDING. Besides the claim 'an n-dimensional tesseract cannot be understood in 3d terms' does not conduct electricity because these concepts are inventions of 3d mathematicians using 3d tools. These are not the works of 'higher beings'. What one need is just set theory and topology and not an extra visualizations. The all the math can be squeezed not to a 2d paper but even to a straight line meaning that even a 1d creature can understand a tesseract!
You see you see a cube and think that it is to huge to squez it to 2d plane. That is an error that fails to account for scalling, transformation and the fact even a 2d plane can contain more space than a 3d object. For instance, there is more than enough space in a tennis court to squeeze a billiard ball. Then squeezing has nothing to do with understanding. Even the sun cannot be squeezed into a phyc book. Does it make the sun 'beyond 3d physics?'
" 'Attempting to explain multidimensional reality in terms that compatible with 3d precepts and rules will be futile'
Exactly what do one offer as a prove to this bald assertion??"
Ease off a bit, my friend. Everyone on this forum has the right to speak from their own perspectives, understandings and experiences without being shouted down.
As someone who does see and photograph ships regularly, and as a member of the Ashtar Command on the ground, I am allowed to assert that from my view, in their higher dimensions, stars are portals and ships pass through them...and that ships of the Ashtar Command do so regularly, multidimensionally and interdimensionally.
Whether you agree to consider that assertion or not is of course your choice.
This forum is called the Ashtar Command Crew, and I am simply here to share how I experience star people, starships, and soul connections, to the best of my current ability.
Coming from an arts background, not a science one, for me to attempt to define multidimensionality to 3D focused awareness is like trying to explain a higher dimensional hypercube through a single plane whilst illuminating every facet of the hypercube/tesseract. It becomes abstracted and flattened (limited). I come from a perspective prepared to embrace apparent contradictions so as to truly see, feel, experience and live in a way that the ships and beings I see, photograph and communicate with - and regard as family - that is as clear, unlimited and joyful as possible.
I am curious what the beings in the space ships eat and drink and how much food storage would be needed for flights across space. Would they have gravity on there space ships and also with some of the beings being so tall the height of the roof in the ships must be high. Also do they sleep.
Murray,how the ships appear to me is 'bigger on the inside than the outside'. Star family don't need to eat for survival in the way beings do in this physicality on Earth, nor do their ships use 'fuel'; they generate infinite energy. I have never seen anyone asleep on the ships, though they do relax, and could create food and drink if they wished to, from focused intent - because that is how they live.
Namaste, Joanna.
Exactly what do one offer as a prove to this bald assertion?? 'God works in ways no man can understand' is just a manthra we parrot from religion and thus we never form the habit of taking the picoseconds it takes to understand things. You donnot know what it is that you are lableing it as '3d'. You can't stand in any boundery and lable a '3d'. Do you comprehend laws of '3d'? If not then you cannot possible know whether or not the phenomena of 'multidimensional reality' can be reconciled with 3d laws. However such assertions would realy demand that you know everything so you may congently make. If you donnot understand phyc, for instance, you cannot possibly be knowing what it is that is futile for a physicist to try to explain. Leave such know it all attitude to priests.
But more importantly, such assertion, with regard to what I said is a STRAW MAN. I was talking more of how to modify 3d laws to be compartible with new data that may come from other realms and not modifying the other realms to fit 3d laws. Also there exist rational explanations using 3d as to how a UFO may travel. This does not mean that anyone is trying to explain 'multidimensional reality' using 3d any more than when Darwin explained the origin of man, he was trying to explain how god works! It is INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL that we are interested with in this particular issue and NOT 'multidimensional reality' . It is irrelevant how we may get to stars than getting them. We donnot have to be whisked there like witches flying with their brooms any more than you have to be magicaly raptured to your work place. Therefore a rational theory of UFO propulsion works as well.
Then holus bolus in the mid way, when you show him that such acrobatics near the sun violate known laws, he switches gears and say that he is talking solely of unobservables and 'multidimensional reality'! This is not any new tactic at all. I am quite farmiliar with it. The joker card 'God works in ways mortal men cannot understand' is the bread and the butter of all religions. This places UFOlogy squarely under the basket of religion!
You are told that god exist up there behind the blue sky. When you tell the pastor that the earth is infact going to throne of god every year and we are not seeing it, he switches gears and say he isn't talking of sky. He is talking of a 'spiritual realm'. A NA thinks that by brewing a whisky termed 'multidimensional reality' where 'everything is possible' he is bringing anything new to the world! Everyone knows what he is trying to do. He is merely trying to make UFO UNFALSIFIABLE! He knows that by definition, no one can table a 'multidimensional reality' (MR) so we may check if UFOs are star treking there! It is a very convinient place to hid santa!
MR is simply taking the place of 'God' and 'mortal men' is 3d. What mortal man can explain God? We swap the fuel and peddle the same mindset of religion. A religion 'knows everything'. He knows what or what not a human can understand. He speaks from a false perspective of 'beyonds'. Beyond knowledge, beyond boundaries, beyond understanding, beyond 3d.
PASTOR: 'God loves you and he will burn you in hell'
ROARS: But thats oxymoron
PASTOR: With god, we can embody oxymorons without contradiction. You see, we can't explain god in terms of earthly things.
So you are asked to quite using ur brain that you know it exists so u may buy into a speculation such as UFOs, wormholes, a$sholes, MR etc.
If I were to ask you to prove to me a 'multidimensional reality' or even define these words unambiguously, I am quite sure you will only apeal to your own subjective world. So you have labled a phenomena you know of via personal experience a 'multidimensional reality'. But everyone has his own personal experiences and it should occur to you that thus everyone has his own version of 'multidimensional reality'. Nobody is trying to explain YOUR own personal 'multidimensional reality' like no one is trying to explain why your pants might be blue. Up until you table your knickers do we give a shit about explaining why they are blue.
In phyc, we donnot try to explain things that most likely doesn't even have any objective reality to begine with. That is the tasks of psychologists and psychiatrists. I am interested with if a REAL UFO do pass through the sun and as KK describes it, it is clearly a 3d object. He is talking of something photographed by ordinary camera by NASA. Therefore the object can reflect light like anything else. I was not in to a fague notion of 'multidimensional reality' that should only interest you as a person.
The question is simple: are UFOs entering the sun? We want to know if UFOs has an objective reality. How can you answer such a question by making some other claim of a 'multidimensional reality' that is even harder to verify its objective reality?
The biggest problem comes from logicians themselves when they use 'true' where they should use 'valid'. The statement 'Jane is taller than Janet and Janet is also taller than Jane' is an INVALID statement. It is not proper to call it a FALSE statement as the statement simply carry no info as per the agreed upon of words. Therefore one has no onus to 'prove' that the statement is false by taking an adventure in a multidimensional reality! What am I going to prove? Before we prove we must first UNDERSTAND the claim and we cannot understand claims if they are oxymorons. Then mark the word CLAIM very clearly. One can subtitute it with 'we cannot understand the multidimensional reality'. No no no no! It has not gone from 'a CLAIM about multidimensional reality' to 'multidimensional reality'
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next