I have been waiting for a thread like this to begin. Frankly, I am quite surprised that it has not as of yet appeared...so here it is!

Anyone have any ideas as to why that might have been the case??

Much of what R/JZ teach is claimed to have a scientific foundation. For myself, I think that this is an incredibly large part of the "hook".

When I have spoken to rse students, they babble (no offense meant) on about Quantum Mechanics, neuronets and various astrophysical phenomena and virtually accept without question r/JZs equation of C&E= reality!

However, when questioned a bit they do not even have (nor have they been taught) the basic fundamental laws of science that one learns in a high school chemistry, physics, or biology course not to mention the mathematics involved needed to understand most of these sciences. i.e.; Newton’s three laws of motion, the first law of thermodynamics, morphogenesis, blood brain barrier, and the law of natural selection to name a few.

r/JZ teaches these in the weird, broken grammar of ramspeak when the fundamental language linking them all is mathematics.

I am neither a scientist nor mathematician, but my "intuition" has let me know that there must be a fundamental understanding in all of these sciences in order to best attempt to comprehend Quantum Mechanics and the strange world within which it exists. I have had to crack open some very basic books on the subject in order to help clarify my understanding.

I would like to hear from others why they felt that they were able to "know", meaning, fully comprehend Planks law, Heisenberg’s principle without a fundamental background as well as any other comments you all may have on the subject. I know there are some x-members who understand this waaaaay better then me! Where are you c???

Hi journey... I was in RSE 10 years, & when I started one of the books on the suggested reading list was Gary Zukav's "The Dancing Wu Li Masters". He takes & synopsizes some of the basic principles in terms the lay person can understand. Some of the others, e.g. Fred Alan Wolfe have also written non-mathematical books. With my own background in nursing for 27 yrs, I have a basic knowledge of neuroscience & blood/brain barrier. It's not always necessary to go into the mathematical aspect to have a basic understanding of systems & principles that can be written in prose. I did not need a lot of mathematics to learn anatomy & physiology in nursing school. If one wants to have a more detailed understanding of quantum mechanics, then I can see the need for mathematics & for proving one's own theories; however, for people to know the basic functions of their bodies (for instance) they don't need to take a full college course of anatomy. Having some basic knowledge does help make it more believable to those that were brought up in total ignorance of themselves as co-creators. The problem may be that JZ may be teaching disinformation along with truth, which may be causing extremely confused information. The information on neuronets was taught primarily (to my understanding) by Dr. Joe Dispenza whose post-graduate studies have been in neuroscience & biochemistry. These teachings would be quite accurate, as I co-authored the index to his book. It may be also that the students don't have a good grasp on the understanding of the neuronets, especially if they've been taught at wine ceremonies. It does take hearing scientific information more than once to process & understand even basics, & unless the students do that on their own, they may not have a good grasp of it. I know one of the scientists who had attended the school & spoke to us at the LARSE gathering in Sept. mentioned that some of the quantum physics information that's being presented is "all wet behind the ears".

It's all called pseudoscience.

I remember being in an audience about 3 years ago, and we were given some "homework", so to speak. While on a long break, small groups gathered together to discuss certain terms we were given - scientific terms. But, we had to describe them according to Ramtha's model of science, not the currently accepted model (with regard to bosons, fermions, spin, rotation, etc).

In any case, I remember a man who kept saying, ever so politely, "That can't be true", referring to what Ramtha said IS true. Students disagreed with this guy ONLY because Ramtha said so, so it must BE so. I sat slightly off to the side, thinking to myself, "I agree with that guy - that's what I remember learning in college, too."

Well, I could go on with that story. I did speak up about some concepts a little later on, after hearing a person totally misrepresent a concept. I had the book and showed them...whatever. It's just one of those things that "bothered me", but that I set aside, like a dingbat, on the back burner for too long. Ah, well. No crying over spilt milk.

Later on, I also heard from friends as well as the person himself, about connections between JZ and the scientists. How she had asked to be connected, and then Ramtha started teaching what was in the writings that she was then introduced to. If Ramtha is all knowing and beyond time, that "synchronicity" didn't need to be. In any case, I wish that person would speak up on this forum !!!!

As you readers probably already know, there were complaints from several of the scientists that were interviewed for hours, about content for the What the Bleep movie. Yet, they each got about 10 MINUTES of presentation time in the film, saying that what they appeared to have said in the movie, and the fullness of what they really said was quite misrepresented by the film makers. There are articles written about this.

Below is just one of several examples.

"Some credible researchers appear, including neurologist Andrew Newberg and physicist David Albert (Albert has since disassociated himself from the film, saying his views were misrepresented). "
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/154/story_15452_1.html

Okay, that's enough for now....on to reading more posts!

"there were complaints from several of the scientists"

Watcha,
I read every article I could find concerning WTB and only David Albert publicly voiced objections to the way he was portrayed. What other scientists are you referring to and would you please cite the
article(s)? Thanks!

Yes Watcha, please be specific. It is inaccurate statements like these that make this site lose credibility with those of us that are looking for the facts.

OnTheFence…quote..
“It is inaccurate statements like these that make this site lose credibility…”

Your post reads like a slam…

Where is the inaccuracy in whatchamacallit’s post?

Why not simply ask whatchamacallit as did “WannaKnow”
Who was the other scientist they were referring to?…

Play Nice..

David

Watcha, who were the other scientists you were referring to? Thanks!

How is that David? Please let me know if I am being out of line. I would like so much to FOLLOW all the rules of this forum. bah bah ...bah

Please do not be offended I am most sincere in my desire to have you tell me how to think, feel, and speak. bah bah, ...bah.

OnTheFence….

Where is the inaccuracy in whatchamacallit’s post?

David.

For those interested, here is a link to what I have found one of the most comprehensive essay/article on WTB:

en:wikipedia.org/wiki.What_The_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3f

I personally interviewed Dr Albert for several hours on several occasions. A Very kind and nice man. He was nice enough to allow me to play devils advocate for QM playing a part in one creating ones reality.

He was patient and gave me quite an education on the history of how the whole idea of how that concept came about, why it had been discarded years ago, and many proofs as to why it just ain't so. He also went into quite a bit of detail about his interview for the movie.

As far as I know, he is the only scientist who has come forward about their position being misrepresented in the film. The others have been pretty busy on the lecture and book circuit.

However, since there had been such uproar in the physics and much of the medical community over the misrepresentation of the facts in the film, it would not surprise me if any of the others might have come forward.

Anyone interested in finding out more might look at the scientists lecture schedule and attend one where they might get to pose their questions. Or, just shoot them an e-mail. You might be surprised and actually get an answer!!!

P.S. To the best of my knowledge, Dr, Andrew Newberg is a radiologist , not a neurologist.

WannaKnow: Thank you for your respectfully posed question asking about further information about scientists and articles. There are a number of them listed below. Several of the scientists (Albert and Wolf) addresses misrepresented views from the two cult movies, WTB and The Secret.

With regard to my previous post, I could have also added the movie, “The Secret” to what I was talking about re: film makers and misrepresenting certain experts. In any case, I made the point in the previous post that I had more to say on the matter, but wasn’t doing so at the time of that posting.

Read on about Albert’s and Wolf’s comments.


“One of the scientists who was in the film and had never appeared at the school is Dr David Albert Professor and Director of Philosophical Physics at Columbia university.
He has stated in several venues that his views were totally misrepresented in the film. He claims that in over 5 hours of interviews he explained to the film makers why their concept of how Quantum Physics works has virtually no support in the scientific community.
He even called in to a radio program the director was on to discuss this and was cut off. The host of the show said this was done because it was “negative”
so much for no good or bad, that is unless it is convienent.”

“Evidently Albert claims he was taken advantage of, that his interview was heavily edited to misrepresent his views.”
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=83

“Some people are accusing the filmmakers, who are also apparently students of Ramtha, of making the film as an agenda to support Ramtha propoganda. Other experts in the film were grossly misrepresented. “http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/09/16/bleep/index1.html


What the Bleep!?’s most academically kosher expert, Columbia University philosophy professor David Albert, told Gorenfeld, “Had I known that I would have been so radically misrepresented in the movie, I certainly would not have agreed to be filmed.”

http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol7No3/ChannelingBleep.htm


For the formation of crystals in certain shapes in response to a word on the bottle, or music being played, what the filmmakers don't tell you is that for each type of crystal, Emoto takes 50 samples, and then spends (hours, days?) browsing through each of them for the one that looks right based on the word he selected. From Emoto's website: " we look at a sample of water 50 different times and take photographs when the right image appears"
http://www.yelp.com/topic/4svrpiey7FS8ZNFXY26Qmw

What about other observations like the claims of Dr. Masaru Emoto who was cited in the movie for his photographs of "water"? According to the movie Emoto set out containers of water with various labels—"love and appreciation", "You Make Me Sick, I Will Kill You", etc.—affixed to them, then photographed their structure through a microscope the following day. The photos revealed structures amazingly related to the labels. For example, "love and appreciation" had a beautiful snowflake form while "You Make Me Sick, I Will Kill You" had an ugly disjointed appearance.
Although not discussed in the movie, the photos were actually made of frozen water drops 4. Also not discussed were Emoto's "experiments" with names like "Adolf Hitler" and "Mother Teresa" as well as labels with the same term in different languages.

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/bleep.html



Even the father of the Isn't the Universe Amazing genre, the late Sagan, called Ramtha out. He opened his 1997 book "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" by asking why, if Ramtha is 35,000 years old, he gives us only "banal homilies" (sample: "I have come to help you over the ditch ... It is called the ditch of limitation") instead of telling us, say, about the currency, technology, social order and use of birth control in prehistoric Lemuria -- a country popularized by Madame Blavatsky, the turn-of-the-20th-century psychic. Sagan's argument, which couldn't be further from the movie's, is that science has exposed so many natural wonders, there's no need to gild the lily with gray aliens, telepaths and the spirits of Cro-Magnon shoguns roaming the Evergreen State.Needless to say the book isn't on the film's reading list, which instead suggests reading the works of Ramtha.
http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2004/09/16/bleep/index2.html?pn=4

Controversial aspects of the film
[edit] Factual errors
The movie states humans are "90% water" when in fact newborns have around 78%, 1-year-olds around 65%, adult men about 60%, and adult women around 55%.[14]
The movie also relates a story about Native Americans being unable to see Christopher Columbus' ships. However, there is no mention of this in any of the journals of those voyages, and the oral traditions of the local population were lost in the following 150 years of Spanish rule. The story in the film may be a garbled and mis-interpreted version of an incident described in Carl Sagan's Cosmos. Episode XIII describes an oral retelling of how the Tlingit encountered the La Pérouse expedition in the 1780s. The Tlingit were afraid to look directly at the ships at first, because they imagined that the ship and its sails were manifestations of Raven, who might turn them to stone. One of their party was an old man who was nearly blind, who decided to take a canoe in closer, and eventually understood the vessels and their crew for what they were.
The animated sequence showing electrical signals moving directly across a synaptic cleft is misleading. Signals are in fact carried between neurons chemically via neurotransmitters; signals are propagated electrically only within individual neurons and via gap junctions.
It is also claimed in the movie that 20 amino acids are created in the human body. However, only 12 can be synthesized by humans; the remaining 8 amino acids are considered essential and must be acquired from consuming food.

David Albert, a professor and the director of the Philosophical Foundations of Physics program at Columbia University states that the film completely misrepresented his views.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3F

Then there's statistical data, a specialty of John Hagelin who triumphantly proclaimed that 4000 participants at the Maharishi University of Management had lowered the crime rate in Washington DC from June 7 to July 30, 1993 using meditation. (The movie claimed by 25%.) Never mind that the violent crime rate in Washington DC was higher in 1993 than any of the previous 30 years. Never mind that starting in 1994 the crime rate declined every single year until it was 49% lower by the year 2000. 6 Maybe the DC police took up meditation. In 1994 Hagelin received an Ig Nobel Peace Prize, the absolute pinnacle for "achievements that cannot, or should not, be reproduced", such as pseudoscience.
http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/bleep.html


David Albert, a philosopher of physics and professor at Columbia University, speaks frequently throughout the movie. While it may appear as though he supports the ideas that are presented in the movie, according to a Popular Science article, he is "outraged at the final product." The article states that Albert granted the filmmakers a near-four hour interview about quantum mechanics being unrelated to consciousness or spirituality. His interview was then edited and incorporated into the film in a way that he claims misrepresented his views. In the article, Albert also expresses his feelings of gullibility after having been "taken" by the filmmakers. Although Albert is listed as a scientist taking part in the sequel to What the Bleep, called "Down the Rabbit Hole",[10] this sequel is a "director's cut", composed of extra footage from the filming of the first movie.[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3F

Fred Alan Wolf
At the following website, Fred Alan Wolf describes how he does NOT believe that we create our reality only by what we think. He said to say that is the case according to him, is misrepresenting what he believes. Yet, he was projected as believing we create reality in two movies; The Secret, and also in WTB, which obviously was promoting that what we think is what we create in our lives.
Fred Alan Wolf: In the "secret" listen to what I said carefully in the
film. I was not advocating what the filmmakers were selling. I didn't even
know what the film was about when they filmed me. In fact I appear very
little in the film. My thoughts are indeed such philosophical
extrapolations from what we know about quantum physics and do not reflect
any endorsement for any product. Perhaps this is what your brother meant.
And if so he is correct.
http://alessa.powerfulintentions.com/forum/thesecret/message-view/2134396



Basically the film takes the viewer through the bizarre world of quantum physics (which is misrepresented) then jumps to discussion of meditation, telepathy, consciousness etc. In the process, the viewer is shown results of dubious experiments from questionable "experts", that are presented as facts. The result is a mixture of pseudoscience and even pseudo-religion that produces a lot of nonsense. If in doubt, check out what the community of real scientists have to say about this film.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Bleep-Down-Rabbit-Hole/dp/rentals/B000GPPPYA

I am still surprised that this thread gets so little attention considering how much use(and misuse ) of science goes on in RSE.

Anyone have any ideas why that might be?


In any case, just a note on JZ's/r continued misuse of other peoples acheivements.

Awhile back there was a big article and it made the rounds on the news shows about a study by Tony Ro nicknamed "Blindsight"

This must have rung some bells for JZ/r. as another thing she could try to piggyback on and give her/r's "disiplines" some valitity based in science.

After all, one can only go around blindfolded and duct taped for so long.......

Here is a portion of what she said in her newsletter found on the geniusmaster.net european web site;

Blindsight: Scientists Seeing without Eyes
and Ramtha's "Henry Sugar" Training

A team of scientists from the Department of Psychology of Rice University in Houston, Texas, discovered the brain's capacity of seeing without the aid of the visual cortex. Jennifer L. Boyer, Stephanie Harrison, and Tony Ro submitted the findings of their breakthrough experimental research to the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America for publication in their proceedings journal in November 2005.
[link to www.pnas.org]

"In humans, the primary visual cortex (V1) is essential for conscious vision. However, even without V1 and in the absence of awareness, some preserved ability to accurately respond to visual inputs has been demonstrated, a phenomenon referred to as blindsight," reported PNAS. [link to www.pnas.org article]

Ramtha, in his classic teachings on creating personal reality and the difference between consciousness, mind, and the brain, has always taught his students for decades that it is the brain that sees, not the eyes. Ramtha explains the significance of this phenomenon to a beginning class in 1998:



Ramtha, in his classic teachings on creating personal reality and the difference between consciousness, mind, and the brain, has always taught his students for decades that it is the brain that sees, not the eyes. Ramtha explains the significance of this phenomenon to a beginning class in 1998:

"The brain is what is seeing, not essentially the eyes. It is how you have programmed the brain that gives you the ability to see."
"This is at once both disturbing and enlightening: Only objects and lanscapes are recognized thru the eyes as our brain is programed to recognize and know them. So I want to ask you a question: How many beings and how many lifeforms exist in the empty space between you and I that you can't see? Oh, the eye is looking right at it. Why can't you see that? Because you don't know it."
"Now you begin to understand why the greatest life we can live is a life in pursuit of knowledge. Notice that I didn't say truth, I said knowledge, because had that ancient culture had the knowledge of the galleons and the Spaniards and the epic coming of them, they would have been prepared for what they were looking at. But as it were, they were unprepared and worshipped them as deities."
"So how many things have gone on in your life that you had a hair-raising experience from but couldn't see? How much about your life do you not know? So the eyes are not a judge of reality; they are a confirmation of it. Your eyes do not determine reality; they simply confirm it."
— Ramtha
(Excerpt from: Creating Personal Reality. Beginning C&E. Workshop, May 2-3, 1998. Ramtha's School of Enlightenment. Copyright ) 2005 JZ Knight)


I contacted Dr. Ro and had a lenghty interview with him. While their were many different and controversial findings in his study he did not find anything in his study that would "support" anything that JZ/r teaches.

In fact, one of the more interesting things about his "blindsight"study had to do with the methods involved.

Quite the opposite of JZ/r the eyes MUST be open, they cannot be blindfolded or closed or covered in anyway!!

PS,
the message about the spaniards and the galleons is more then likely the place the producers of what the bleep got thier information about the indians not being able to see the ships because they had no concept of them (hogwash!) since in no other references there is any mention of it.

Judith constantly refers to the "scientific study" conducted on her property on February 8-9, 1997 as scientific proof she is not faking it.

“we got results which could not have been manipulated”
“She’s not faking it,” added Ian Wickramasekera of San Francisco’s Saybrook Institute.

This is a statement from a man who knows how to manipulate and fake.

………………………………


Metroactive News & Issues | A Touch Too Much.

Wickram, 64, pleaded no contest in August to felony charges of sexually exploiting his patients. A name well known to most alternative-psychology practitioners, Wickram is a frequent lecturer and speaker, giving addresses at conferences like the 1999 fall meeting of the Biofeedback Society of Illinois at Loyola Medical Center, the 1998 Biofeedback Society of California's 24th-annual convention "The Heart and Mind of Biofeedback," and "Brain and Behavior: Allies in Health," the 17th-annual Biofeedback Society of California's Conference in 1991.
Stanford Medical School, where Wickram worked on a contract basis from 1998 until he was arrested in April, sheds very little light on the situation. "We are cooperating with law enforcement authorities on this matter," Stanford spokesperson Michelle Brandt tells Metro, when asked for the results of the school's independent investigation.

Stanford's world-renowned Dr. Ian Wickram had a reputation for excellence in alternative medical treatments using biofeedback. But there was more to his treatments of young, female clients than meets the eye.
By Allie Gottlieb
Link…

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/10.10.02/wickram-0241.html

What is equally disturbing is…Wickram use to treat victims of sexual abuse.

David

hey david,

haddn't heard that about Dr. W. I had also interviewed him and he had much to say about what his and Krippners study actually amounted to and why. You can imagine that it differered substancially from the way JZ presents it!

journeythroughramthaland you seem to have interviewed quite a few people, have you published these interviews anywhere, I am sure they would be of interest?

might I add that all three producers of
What The Bleep are no longer associated with RSE.

Do you have details on that, Tree?

Cowboy, I'm not Tree, and I do hope she replies. But, I can share some info to reply to your question. I did hear this second hand, but I was told by a friend of the three people who were the driving force behind the movie, that they left the school.

My understanding is that Mark V is now living in upstate New York, and has started some type of New Age group up there that is open to members by invitation only.
As for the others, I heard that they left the school because of conflicts with JZ over what should be done next (after the movie), how, etc. Guess who wanted things her way ?

Now, if that is not accurate, which I really understand that it is, someone feel free to correct me and explain what they know.

Hi,

I am still quite surprised, given the amount of time spent in the "teachings" and the "science behind them that there has not been more disscussion about this on this thread.

I hope you do not mind me brining it to the surface every now and then.

I am interested in hearing how the "science"of the "teachings" effected ones belief in them and if in any cases if the unravelling of the science, helped them find their way out of the "void " of RSE.

In a fit of… “I will not be upstaged” …Judith walked up to Betsy during her WT Bleep release party and announced that she and her unborn child were in terrible danger… that they were going to die!
Betsy quit RSE soon after…

For those that do not know….
Betsy Chasse was the Writer, Director and Producer of the WTB movie, along with William Arntz and Mark Vicente.
Since the movie’s release they have all quit RSE.

The WW Bleep movie is another sad case of...
When fame and fortune beckons…
ethics are easily trampled.

David.

In answer, I think, to journeythroughramthaland's question about how people reconcile the discrepancies in the science of RSE to themselves, my experience with my mother has been that like with all of the other RSE discrepancies pointed out to her, her answer is "well, I don't know, I don't really understand it and can't explain it".. and then she'll tell me to read a book or something... The scary part is that people are devoting their whole beings to something they don't understand -- her words -- and can't explain!...

Just another good example of the part that hypnosis and mind control plays in these cults...and as someone else put it, pretty thin evidence to give up everything for... essentially only Judith Knight's "word."

See the thread: What the Bleep, Aug. 25.
This is what Tree posted:

this is what I know:

after the movie came out, JZ went to Will Arnzt and asked for a cut of the profits. he said that was not the deal. he did not come back to an event.

there was a party thrown by Betsy Chasse. JZ wanted to look at the at the guest list for the party and insisted Betsy's husband not attend. at the party, she told betsy "you and your child are going to die in a car crash next year."
Betsy was horrified. That did not happen (this past spring).

Mark Vicente, who had had the 'priviledge'
of having a nearly open door entry to JZ, told her that many of the staff was not being totally truthful to her. she called a staff meeting. when she asked the staff had they been up front with her about goings on, dead silence. Meekly, Greg Simmons said, "well, I was not totally turthful only once. And that was when you were very ill and I thought it in your best interest not to distrub you any further."
Mark was booted out the front gate.
I had not seen him at any event last year.

It's incredible that the staff allows themselves to be Soooo controlled by JZ. I can't suggest strongly enough, to watch a movie on DVD that was suggested to myself and others, called The Devil Wears Prada. It so boldly shows the insidious effect of Indoctrination into a High Demand Group situation. Fortunately, in the movie, the main character finally sees the light and frees herself. I'm not much for watching movies, but I sure enjoyed this one ! It speaks volumes !!

After What The Bleep.........

I was in audience when R.A.M. stated what he wanted to see the next movie after WTB to be about.

R.A.M. wanted to make a dream that Judy had into the next movie. The name R.A.M. gave to the dream, after he told a grueling four hour exposition of the dream, that had background music provided by the Allman Brothers Band, Was THE EL CAMINO.

The true meaning of the EL CAMINO is known by very few. And I am sure that the WTB group didn't have a clue to its meaning no less how to turn the thing into a movie.

I am not sure what Judi's little fit was about.

I don't know if she wanted her dream to be made into the next full length movie feature or if she wanted here life story to be told with Johnny Depp playing Ramtha. I don't know.

One thing for sure. Those of you who sat through R.A.M.'s grueling four hour exposition of that dream sure as heck wouldn't pay to see it on the big screen.

Unless you can explain what it really meant.

Then you wouldn't need to hear that "Thing" again.

Wolf,

Ohhhhh, El Camino !

How dreadfully boring that was. I not only had to sit through that once, but several times.

a whole entire assay, and then a video re play of said
assay. If I EVER heard another thing about some
stinking El Camino. or how Yelm Hwy (507) should be
called "Enlightened Hwy", I think I was going to puke!
Even more so was to have heard the story of Seabiscuit
a bazillion times during wine ceremonies!!!
How many times did we (thankfully I was on staff then
and did not have to) pay to hear that crap about
that STUPID horse!!!!
Even during the time of the ElCamino crap, I thought
I was behind the eight ball the entire time as I
really did not "get it."
What a farce.

Shirley MaClaine did the El Camino alone. Was this about the time Jayzee and Shirley had their falling out? Jeff Knight's video mentions something about their falling out. Perhaps Jayzee was a tad upset Shirley had outdone Judi?

Is there supposedly a ley line running through Yelm?

For some of us who were out of RSE by then...

Can someone please explain what is El Camino?

G2G,


"Perhaps Jayzee was a tad upset Shirley had outdone Judi?"

My understanding was that the falling out resulted from the horse JZ sold shirley (for an obscene and rediculous price, claiming that it was one of Rams steeds) went hooves up three days after she bought it!

El Camino was this teaching based upon a dream of JZ's.
Had to do with being able to walk about
the "past", seeing ghosts in church yards,crap like that, seeing what a potential might
be like for you in the future-
and in the end the end there was this El Camino(Spanish translation "The Road") in the dream. And near the end, the El Camino was travelling along
"enlightened highway" (SR 507)

OMG. She REALLY lifted and double-helixed that one. The El Camino is a Pilgramage beginning in France across Northern Spain and ending in Santiago, Galicia. UNESCO deemed the El Camino de Santiago to be a Patrimony for all Humanity. Although some are tourists only, others take the grueling approach for a way of understanding self and spiritual awareness. Shirley MaClaine did this journey -alone- while in her sixties and it was apparently quite grueling. There's more to it, but here's a link that might offer some insight for those who aren't aware of this (I suspect there are LOTS out there who are). But goodness, for JR to take this and make it into "teaching" - what more can I say except I don't think Jayzee has made this journey. imo, Shirley earned my respect for undertaking this without frills which she could easily afford. What I gathered is it's about the experience of one's self. It's over 800 kilometres.

http://www.bootsnall.com/articles/05-04/el-camino-de-santiago-northern-spain.html

"Pilgrim, leave what you are able; take what you need."

El Camino.......

The El Camino in the story IS a car.
A 1959 Chevy El Camino.
Judy was riding around in the back of it acting like the little Prom Queen that she thinks she is.

Even the "I have always been 30 yrs. old" is a bit beyond her prom years - let alone 60. Maybe an AARP prom? (do they still make the old El Caminos?)
Must be the "frequency specific" wish of her HS days with the parallel life of being a grandmother.

She said, from the stage, others have 'seen' Ramtha (TM) - because 'when one is living with a channel' (leave the rest to your imagination but the interpretation among many was the guy would want to be sure he wasn't doing the deed with the 'male' entity!

Have any of her children admitted to having seen the big guy? I've read so many things, and with the immense brainwashing that goes on I wonder about her children and how they were able to maintain a normal teenage life.

Wow! G2G! I had no clue.
What a total hijack!
Sure, she can sue the bejeezuz out of people for the things she copyrights, but
she can use a humanitarian effort
at no cost, and make a teaching and half
a mil off it.

What I don't get is, doesn't she think anyone else reads the 'obscure' books she has? People have had them for years. I imagine it's only when you get deeper into the teachings and if you're someone who HAS read a great deal about this subject matter and religions of the world, physics, pilgrimages and whatnot, you begin to scratch your head and think, 'hey, I read that before."

Just like Adler's blue webs, Shiva-one of the Hindu trinity of God - the "OM" from Sanskrit which is used in Hinduism, Buddhism, and is described as the 'sound of the universe' or the auditory presence of God-the Supreme source. I almost forgot to mention the "Great Ram of the Hindus people." THAT would not go over well in some Asian countries. The "veil of illusion" and "seven levels" are also from the east. I could go on, and probably have in other posts.

Just so the woman understands. WE CAN AND DO READ.

She can copyright a teaching and ...guess what? She's not the only one who can do that. Here is a website that has Energy and Consciousness...TRADEMARKED.

Maybe they can duke it out.

http://english.energyandconsciousness.com/

Here's a similar one, that offers no name connected to the website, either. Just drivel that sounds like it's right out of RSE (sevel levels and such):
http://energyconsciousness.com/index.html

I guess energy/consciousness is the mirror image of consciousness/energy ?

I happened upon a Kabbalah TV and heard Dr Alan Wolf
say that he was convinced that the Kabbalah explained quantam physics perfectly. However, even though the rabbi was impressed with the correlations between the Kabbalah and quantum physics, when asked if science could ever explain God, the rabbi emphatically said no! LOL LOL LOL

I've always felt that RSE was just a step "behind " the knowledge. For example: Sir Laurence Gardner says "Jesus had red hair,it is the Royal coloring".Then Ramtha talks about Jesus having red hair etc. blah,blah,blah....I say potato and you say potato....

JZ/Ramtha is/are like Madonna....her real talent is in "re-inventing" herself. Now it is UFOs. What next, Bigfoot....the re-incarnation of Lemurians?

Science and spirituality...heck, Buddhism is one path that articulates a "scientific" ideas:

Chant of Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism(Japanese)
"Nam Myoho Renge Kyo"

Basic translation: I devote my mind and body as an inseparable unit to the mystic law of cause and effect and all vibration(energy/life activity, animate and inanimate) in the universe.

Sounds like physics to me!

p.s. Speaking of UFOs. I heard Dr. Greg on BTO speak about UFOS. He said he saw two but his eyes were closed. Come to think of it, his eyes were closed when he levitated! What is up with that? If I levitated, I'd want to check out the view!

And.....he really displayed his stupidity when he made fun of of fact that the Dalai Lama(the present one and past ones)wears glasses. What superficial BS.

Just think of how powerful a person he would be if he was free!

or his stupidity when he said he could jump start the interviewer's car battery with a touch, or
even to make fun of the Dali Lama needing
glasses when JZ has a hearing implant, needs
reading glasses, and Greg is going bald!!

but his mouth is big enough to cover it all up.

http://english.energyandconsciousness.com/
looks like a lawsuit for judy.i wonder if this lady knows or just created or....d a n m this rse patterns

This is not the correct thread but I wanted to share what I posted on the Masters Connection Message Board It is a thread about wine where I mentioned "The Two Paths" video. I got one response..."Ramtha does not get drunk" This was my response:

I call them as I see them. My family has run a "Biergarten" since 1937. It is in my interest to reconize the symptoms of a drunken state. My State requires this and so does my Liability carrier. It was obvious. He started boasting, slurring words....rather drunken behavior in my book. It was subtle, but considering how much wine was consumed at that point....I need not say more. It was folly to institute a wine ceremony where such quantities are consumed. I accept a "few small sips", but what I witnessed was in consumption in excess. Red wine is very strong and hard on the body. I bet there were lots of sick people. I hear the these wine events have slacked off as of late. Thank goodness for common sense.

WOOOOOO I feel the hot breath of a webmaster on my neck!!!!

OOOOHHH It just dawned on me why JZ looked so "puffy". Wine!!!!!! and they blamed her edema on "channeling".

I once knew a woman who lived fairly close to me (not in WA state at all), who was introduced to RSE and was planning to go to a Beginning Event. She wanted me to go with her since I knew the area, blah blah blah.

What unfolded was, I invited her hubby and her to my home to watch the Rockumentary. They did. She was still gung ho, but hubby was upset. His career is as a drug and alcohol counselor. While the basic premise of an eastern philosophy was appealing to them, the husband recognized, immediately, the "signs" of alcohol abuse. He said that in his professional opinion, she was an alcoholic and proceeded to share with us, why. What the symptoms were.

Bottom line was the the woman backed out of going. I still went. Lucky her, foolish me. OH, well.
I just wanted to share that since it ties in to the other comments being made here.