The International Space Station is real

crazy_killer · 2022-10-12 16:47:21

The International Space Station (ISS) can be seen flying up in the night sky with the naked eye.

Its location is published online and it's easy to see as it's the third brightest object in the sky after the sun and the moon.

There have been 67 expeditions to the ISS, 263 individuals from 20 countries have visited it.

It has hosted more than 3,000 research investigations from over 4,200 researchers in more than 100 countries.

There is a ton of videos and photos from the ISS including of the research being conducted there and its results.

The ISS is Earth's one and only microgravity laboratory - all these experiments could not have been done anywhere else.

So I find it very strange that the Taygetans insist it doesn't exist.

naringas · 2022-10-12 17:45:33

the taygetans are likely coming from 'a different timeline' (or something)

they insist that the moon is fake and they seem to really dislike it. I'm not certain they fully understand the role of the moon in the larger scheme of things. at least not the specific taygetians who are talking to Gosia. (though in all fairness, I should concede the possibility that I'm the ignorant one who doesn't understand)

however, if there really is a secret space program (and associated stories), then clearly there's a lot more to the ISS than we've been told.

also, what they said about nuclear energy has really sent me off into a spiral or rabbit's hole as to what does the electricity grid really does and where does all this energy comes from (I fear I'll end up concluding that a lot of this electric energy is siphoned from life, so all the grid really does is move it around, and measure it to bill you for it; however I suppose a lot of energy has also come from fuels, and maybe it's only by the nuclear era that they developed the technology to make electricity from life-force-energy; tesla's buried work?)

Last edited by naringas (2022-10-12 17:46:19)

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-12 21:40:18

naringas wrote:

the taygetans are likely coming from 'a different timeline' (or something)
they insist that the moon is fake and they seem to really dislike it. I'm not certain they fully understand the role of the moon in the larger scheme of things. at least not the specific taygetians who are talking to Gosia. (though in all fairness, I should concede the possibility that I'm the ignorant one who doesn't understand)
however, if there really is a secret space program (and associated stories), then clearly there's a lot more to the ISS than we've been told.
also, what they said about nuclear energy has really sent me off into a spiral or rabbit's hole as to what does the electricity grid really does and where does all this energy comes from (I fear I'll end up concluding that a lot of this electric energy is siphoned from life, so all the grid really does is move it around, and measure it to bill you for it; however I suppose a lot of energy has also come from fuels, and maybe it's only by the nuclear era that they developed the technology to make electricity from life-force-energy; tesla's buried work?)

I was living inside the Terrestrial 3D materialism science reality bubble until 2014 when I came across Tom Campbell's My Big Toe trilogy that helped me realize/remember that it's not matter that creates consciousness but that it's the other way around.

Since I was a teenager I could never understand how a previously unconscious matter could suddenly gain consciousness and start seeing colors and stuff by simply rearranging atoms in a different structure. The missing puzzle piece that I got from him was that instead of making matter fundamental you make consciousness fundamental and you make matter out of consciousness instead of the other way around. And that was like my Morpheus red pill moment that got me out of this materialism science matrix. Before that I wouldn't touch these ET and other woo woo stuff with a ten foot broomstick.

Where I'm getting at is that I was living in that reality bubble where the moon is a natural satellite and the moon landing was real and the ISS missions are real and the solar system outside earth is like the official Terrestrial science describes it.

But with the information from CA very naturally and organically the reality I live in changed and I now live in the reality the crew is describing, where the moon is an Andromedan biosphere spaceship and the moon landings didn't happen and the ISS is an empty floating can, and the solar system is as the crew describes it and not as NASA describes it.

So which reality is real?

My answer is they are both real. It doesn't matter that the reality I was living before 2014 was built on lies and mind control. That reality was real for me and is real for the people that are still living in that materialism 3D matrix.

It may have been based on a lie but I believed it so my mind made that reality real. So back then the moon was a natural satellite for me because my mind made that real. And now I have "escaped" from that matrix and have different data so my mind is making a different reality real for me. And now what is real for me is that the moon is an Andromedan biosphere spaceship and the ISS is empty and the missions are fake.

Our minds create the reality we live in and it is our minds that make it real so it's not about what is real and what is not. But it's about what is real FOR YOU. It's your responsibility to decide what is real for you(I am speaking in general not about you personally), you are the sole authority on what is real for you. No external authority can come and tell you what is real for you. And it's your responsibility to decide what is real and what is not.

And each time you decide what is real for you you vibrationally make a perceptual agreement with other people that have consciously or subconsciously decided that the same thing is real for them. And this way you live in the same timeline/reality, although it is never exactly the same.

So which reality is real? The reality that the Taygetans and Swaruunians describe or the reality that for example Corey Goode describes? Is the moon empty with only some federation technicians visiting it for maintenance or are there Lunar bases on the moon?

The answer is that for the Taygetans in their reality there are no bases on the moon but for Corey Goode in his reality there are bases on the moon. And the question is which one is real for you? It is your own responsibility to listen to both and then decide for yourself which one is real for you.

The timeline and reality is fractured. We don't all live in the same timeline, reality. Understanding and keeping this in mind can reduce our conflicts in the alternative community.

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-12 21:41:45

Scalar Internet - MultiDensity Properties of Internet - Anéeka of Temmer (Taygeta, Pleiades)

(Bold mine)

Anéeka: [...] So from the explanatory point of view of "timelines" seen as separate lines, what happens online and is reported on the Internet is not necessarily what goes on in the timeline of another person who is observing it. So what is provably false news for one person is provably true for another. And everything will depend on the level of consciousness and perception of each individual.

In other words, the Internet contains information, events, data, and everything related to various timelines that humans consider different. To the degree in which some terrorist attack is not carried out in one timeline, for example, and in another yes it was carried out.

Creating with this extreme confusion among the human population since what is perfectly true for one person or group, is completely false for another. Strictly speaking, both being right. This is a problem that has not been detected by human science due to its null understanding of the nature of time, densities and reality itself.

So the Internet will contain many timelines, with contradictions and all, creating there a sea of confusion, a soup of information and misinformation bordering on the impossible to verify. Leaving to each individual, as we have explained many times, total control and responsibility to discern what is real and what is not. Empowering yourself with responsibility for what you believe and why you believe it.

[...]

Robert: Good. Last question. How to know which information is correct? Or we cannot know? Or will it be correct because it is in accordance with our level of consciousness, understanding consciousness as "our ability to perceive multiple things"?

Anéeka: Things, data, whatever, are not correct or incorrect, neither true nor false, it is the observer who gives them that value with his own scale of values and according to what he knows and what fits into the framework of reference that he has created or accepted for himself as objective reality.

The observer has two options.

1. Going with the mainstream and comfortably believing whatever the "authorities" tell you to believe.

2. Taking your own responsibility to learn everything you can about all possible topics and to build your own conceptual framework from which to decide for yourself what is real and what is not.

Option 1 leads to disaster and the end of civilization.

Option 2 leads to freedom and a free, holographic society.

You decide.

Gosia · 2022-10-12 22:15:13

They never said it doesnt exist. They said there is NO ONE IN IT. But it´s there. An empty can floating around as they say

crazy_killer wrote:

The International Space Station (ISS) can be seen flying up in the night sky with the naked eye.
Its location is published online and it's easy to see as it's the third brightest object in the sky after the sun and the moon.
There have been 67 expeditions to the ISS, 263 individuals from 20 countries have visited it.
It has hosted more than 3,000 research investigations from over 4,200 researchers in more than 100 countries.
There is a ton of videos and photos from the ISS including of the research being conducted there and its results.
The ISS is Earth's one and only microgravity laboratory - all these experiments could not have been done anywhere else.
So I find it very strange that the Taygetans insist it doesn't exist.

Gosia · 2022-10-12 22:16:56

Again, misunderstanding of the information. Moon is not fake, it is there, but it´s not a natural object. It´s an old spaceship.

naringas wrote:

the taygetans are likely coming from 'a different timeline' (or something)
they insist that the moon is fake and they seem to really dislike it. I'm not certain they fully understand the role of the moon in the larger scheme of things. at least not the specific taygetians who are talking to Gosia. (though in all fairness, I should concede the possibility that I'm the ignorant one who doesn't understand)
however, if there really is a secret space program (and associated stories), then clearly there's a lot more to the ISS than we've been told.
also, what they said about nuclear energy has really sent me off into a spiral or rabbit's hole as to what does the electricity grid really does and where does all this energy comes from (I fear I'll end up concluding that a lot of this electric energy is siphoned from life, so all the grid really does is move it around, and measure it to bill you for it; however I suppose a lot of energy has also come from fuels, and maybe it's only by the nuclear era that they developed the technology to make electricity from life-force-energy; tesla's buried work?)

naringas · 2022-10-12 22:53:36

Jupiter wrote:

I was living inside the Terrestrial 3D materialism science reality bubble until 2014 when I came across Tom Campbell's My Big Toe trilogy that helped me realize/remember that it's not matter that creates consciousness but that it's the other way around.

I've been teetering around this issue for a while. I think by my own nature I'm trying to reconcile both viewpoints. I don't think either is strictly correct.

- matter creates consciousness
- consciousness creates matter

maybe primordially (or theoretically, or ultimately) consciousness created the matter; but this has never meant that consciousness gets to somehow ignore the 'rules' of matter (to refer to the inherent dynamics by which matter works). I suppose I somehow understand how such a perspective also leads to misery and catastrophe.

however, neither is it fully correct to say that matter creates consciousness, which is an error with much better known consequences around these parts (and times).

--

maybe I can conclude that yin is one and yang is the other, and there's something silly about arguing which comes first, yin or yang? chicken or egg?
(clearly the yin precedes the yang; but the issue is that such a primordial yin is preceded by another more-primordial yang and by another yin; you can always go backwards more so it's silly to look for this answer)

I suppose this can also be regarded as asking which is 'first' time, or space? (but this involves a deep analytical understanding of time, space, and energy as abstract concepts on their own; which is uncommon to find in other people I've talked to)

Last edited by naringas (2022-10-12 22:54:00)

mitkobs · 2022-10-13 05:21:00

You can take both view points for real but do you want know what is truth exactly, because I want to know it. I can accept my fantasies and my previous beliefs as such, because there was not other information that state something else and was not possible to think something else. Now comes this information from CA and I know something else. In both cases I cannot confirm it is true so I have to accept what is true for me at this point and what is not but on the back of head I still know that I do not know and things may be different when I will be able one day to explore and see how it is really.

Last edited by mitkobs (2022-10-13 05:22:25)

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-13 17:11:00

naringas wrote:

Jupiter wrote:
I was living inside the Terrestrial 3D materialism science reality bubble until 2014 when I came across Tom Campbell's My Big Toe trilogy that helped me realize/remember that it's not matter that creates consciousness but that it's the other way around.

I've been teetering around this issue for a while. I think by my own nature I'm trying to reconcile both viewpoints. I don't think either is strictly correct.
- matter creates consciousness
- consciousness creates matter
maybe primordially (or theoretically, or ultimately) consciousness created the matter; but this has never meant that consciousness gets to somehow ignore the 'rules' of matter (to refer to the inherent dynamics by which matter works). I suppose I somehow understand how such a perspective also leads to misery and catastrophe.
however, neither is it fully correct to say that matter creates consciousness, which is an error with much better known consequences around these parts (and times).
--
maybe I can conclude that yin is one and yang is the other, and there's something silly about arguing which comes first, yin or yang? chicken or egg?
(clearly the yin precedes the yang; but the issue is that such a primordial yin is preceded by another more-primordial yang and by another yin; you can always go backwards more so it's silly to look for this answer)
I suppose this can also be regarded as asking which is 'first' time, or space? (but this involves a deep analytical understanding of time, space, and energy as abstract concepts on their own; which is uncommon to find in other people I've talked to)

The way I see it is that in a theoretical or hypothetical or fictional universe, you can use anything you want as the fundamental thing and build the theoretical physics and science of that theoretical universe using that as the first fundamental thing.

But the point I wanna make is that if you are trying to create physics for the real universe we live in, you can't start with anything you want as the fundamental. If you are creating physics for a fictional theoretical universe like the universe of the lord of the rings or the universe of star wars you can create whatever physics you want. But if you wanna create real physics based on data gathered from experiments and measurements, not theoretical physics, you can only start with one thing as the fundamental thing. And that is consciousness/the observer/the scientist.

In the real universe it's impossible to do scientific experiments without a scientist, an observer, a consciousness to do the experiments. It's impossible to create even theoretical physics without a consciousness to create that theoretical model.

So whether you are creating a model of reality based on empirical data you have gathered or you are creating a theoretical model of reality, you can't do that without a consciousness to create that model. So it's self-evident that that is the most fundamental thing since you can't do anything else without the presence of that consciousness.

You can't have science without the scientist, you can't have philosophy without the philosopher, you can't have abstract concepts without the presence of a consciousness that is aware of the abstract concepts.

You can't have any of those things existing on their own without the presence of a consciousness. They can't exist without a consciousness so it's self-evident that that consciousness is the most fundamental thing. If you remove the consciousness then there is none to be a witness that they exist.

If you remove you from the equation then it's impossible to know if those things can exist apart from you. You are the most fundamental thing. It's impossible to know if the concepts or ideas or measured objects can exist without your presence.

It's impossible to know if matter, concepts, ideas can exist without the presence of a consciousness being aware of them.

But it is possible to know if consciousness can exist without the presence of matter, ideas, concepts.

Consciousness can exist without matter, ideas, concepts. But matter, ideas, concepts cannot exist without consciousness.

You can exist without the presence of matter, ideas, concepts. But matter, ideas, concepts cannot exist without you.

And even that fundamental you, that "I", that consciousness, is an idea, a concept of You and not the real You. The real You is the Supreme Self, the Absolute Self, the Self of all the selves but that's another story.

I am talking about this mostly from the perspective of duality. I don't know if you have studied non-dual teachings naringas. If you haven't then that's where you'll probably find clues on how both of those viewpoints are teconciled.

In the non-dual perspective the observer is the observed. You don't live in a reality, you are reality. Matter is consciousness. The created is the creator. The game is the player. You don't live in the world, you are the world. You don't live inside the matrix, you are the matrix(and that's why you can be in control of matter and all the laws and rules of reality, you can be the master of your reality and no rules can limit you, the only thing that is limiting you is your own limiting ideas)

naringas · 2022-10-13 18:02:57

hi, thank you.

the way you explain this is different from mine. In my own wonky way, I even answered my own question with the comment about yin being theoretically first. but clearly, how I typed it all out was missing some parts which your response doesn't. I'll take this as a lesson xD.

--

Jupiter wrote:

In the real universe it's impossible to do scientific experiments without a scientist, an observer, a consciousness to do the experiments. It's impossible to create even theoretical physics without a consciousness to create that theoretical model.

I guess I'm tangled up (stuck) observing (obsesively) what makes expermients necessary in the first place?

considering that in pure consciousness, no experiments are strictly necessary.

maybe consciousness can exist without matter, but then my question becomes whether concsiousness can exist without other consciousness?

and up to which extent is 'matter' some other disjointed consciousness?

I suppose this is what I'm actually trying to undesrtand, but as I look for a way to ask this question, I pick up duality and ask the question using that.
I guess there's also something to be said about which question one asks (and how it's asked).

ask a dual question, get a dual answer

thanks again.

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-13 18:42:58

mitkobs wrote:

You can take both view points for real but do you want know what is truth exactly, because I want to know it. I can accept my fantasies and my previous beliefs as such, because there was not other information that state something else and was not possible to think something else. Now comes this information from CA and I know something else. In both cases I cannot confirm it is true so I have to accept what is true for me at this point and what is not but on the back of head I still know that I do not know and things may be different when I will be able one day to explore and see how it is really.

The way I understand it so far is that each point of view is not THE reality, but it is A reality. It is not THE truth but it is A truth.

Each POV is how the Absolute Reality looks from that POV(from that "I"). Each POV is how the Whole Painting looks from a singular angle. And if I want to know the Absolute Reality, the Absolute Truth then I have to look at the Absolute Reality, at the Whole Painting from ALL the angles, from ALL the POVs, simultaneously.

And I can't do that if I am attached to an "I", to a singular POV, I have to let go of absolutely ALL the attachments to ALL ideas or POVs. And one way to do this is through Ramana Maharshi's "Who Am I?" self-inquiry. And it's not something you can do, it's sth you can know, sth you can realize, it's knowing, realizing, the answer to that question that can be known, realized, but cannot be put in a concept. It's knowing, realizing, what "Know Thyself" is pointing at.

And you can confirm if the CA information or any other information is true using your feelings.

But here in the lower densities it's not enough to only use your feelings to know if sth brings you closer to Source/The Absolute Truth or further away from it.

You also have to use your logical analytical mind to know why does a CA video makes you feel the way it makes you feel. A video may lower your vibration and make you feel bad but if look into why it makes you feel like that you may discover that you misunderstood or misinterpreted what the crew is trying to say. So it was your own interpretation of the info that made you feel bad and not what the crew is actually saying.

Or sth the crew or someone else said may make you feel really positive emotions but what makes you feel a very positive emotion could be your own interpretation and if you actually stand still and listen and hear what they are actually saying may make you feel bad.

So if you use your feelings combined with an awareness of why you feel the way you feel you can confirm if a certain info brings you closer to Source/The Absolute Truth or further away.

I highly recommend to everyone to reread/rewatch this excellent transcript/video from our little spiritual genius:

Emotions: What Are They? (Yazhi Swaruu - Pleiades - Extraterrestrial Communication)

And also this video from another spiritual genius:

The Problem With "What Resonates" With You

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-13 19:48:01

naringas wrote:

hi, thank you.
the way you explain this is different from mine. In my own wonky way, I even answered my own question with the comment about yin being theoretically first. but clearly, how I typed it all out was missing some parts which your response doesn't. I'll take this as a lesson xD.

I wish sometimes we had our telepathy cause trying to put these things into words is really hard. And I wish I could express myself as clearly as little Yazhi, she just has a way to express very complex things in a very simple way. I love her so much.

naringas wrote:

Jupiter wrote:
In the real universe it's impossible to do scientific experiments without a scientist, an observer, a consciousness to do the experiments. It's impossible to create even theoretical physics without a consciousness to create that theoretical model.
I guess I'm tangled up (stuck) observing (obsesively) what makes expermients necessary in the first place?
considering that in pure consciousness, no experiments are strictly necessary.
maybe consciousness can exist without matter, but then my question becomes whether concsiousness can exist without other consciousness?
and up to which extent is 'matter' some other disjointed consciousness?
I suppose this is what I'm actually trying to undesrtand, but as I look for a way to ask this question, I pick up duality and ask the question using that.
I guess there's also something to be said about which question one asks (and how it's asked).
ask a dual question, get a dual answer
thanks again.

What I call consciousness is still in duality. There is consciousness and what consciousness is conscious of.

If you have an "I"/a consciousness then you have a not-I/unconsciousness and you are in duality. If you start thinking in terms of time the you have a before and after and you are in duality.

Whatever concept or idea you introduce whether it is the fundamental idea/concept of "I" or the concept/idea of time then you put a boundary a limit to the Absolute Unbounded Oneness and you are in duality again.

According to Ramana Maharshi one question that can lead you to know and realize that which can be known, realized, but cannot be put into a concept, cannot be expressed as an idea, cannot be given a form is "Who Am I?" You cannot answer this question with a concept or an idea or a form. You can only know/realize the answer without putting it into a concept.

The Supreme Self, the Supreme Reality is what is behind that "I" and that is the only "thing" that it's existence doesn't depend on anything else. That's what "Know Thyself" is all about.

crazy_killer · 2022-10-13 23:07:40

I see no particular problem in siting for hours at my kitchen drooling as I gaze at an apple, wondering if it exists or not. Did I create it by being in the kitchen? If I leave the kitchen would it still exist? Does its existence relay on at least one person existing before? Or after? If all humanity goes extinct would it still exist? Would it still be an apple? What about cockroaches!? So if all humanity goes extinct in an nuclear holocaust and cockroaches are left behind and they covet my apple would it exist because of their desire of it? This relays on their level of conciseness? Because I can change it to be Amoeba instead of cockroaches.

This game is fine as long as I clean the large puddle of drool from the kitchen floor when I’m done. But the problem starts when I get so confused by these stupid questions to the point that I decide that I won’t eat apples any longer because it might hurt the apple’s feelings or be subject to the revenge of Amoeba.

It is true that I am free to create my reality. I’m totally free to create a stupid one and free to hurt myself by making stupid decisions based on a reality that doesn’t exist.

Creating an imaginary world is not very difficult, children do it all the time. It is much harder to learn about the obviously real shared reality and then manage myself properly within it - meaning make smart choices based on my understanding of it.

If the ISS is an empty can than it makes little sense to spend millions of tax payers dollars to scam people into believing they are visiting it. This money could have been used to build schools and hospitals.

If the moon houses technology that is used to trap souls and dumb down the population then it might be important to send military forces there to attack it. However if it hosts our own bases of soldiers fighting moon reptilians then maybe it would be better to send flowers there instead in gratitude.

You see, while it’s pretty much pointless to explore the infinity of the imaginary realities we can create - apart perhaps of it's potentially entertaining aspect. It is in fact super important to know for sure what is the one real and true shared reality and be crystal clear about it or at least work hard for it and strive to be. Because this is how we know whether Gosha should be rewarded for her exceptional journalism work or whether she should go to prison for endangering the lives of thousands of people due to her distaste of papayas.

Jupiter 9 · 2022-10-14 00:24:11

Oh noes don't tell me you are thinking of reporting Gosia to the police too....

Operator: Yes, this is the police.

Caller: Hello, my name is Crazy Killer and I'd like to report a crime.

Operator: Your name is Crazy Killer?

Caller: Yes, and I'd like to report a crime.

Operator: And which one is your first name, Crazy or Killer?

https://youtu.be/aZTJoyeK710

Last edited by Jupiter 9 (2022-10-14 00:30:11)

naringas · 2022-10-14 01:37:40

crazy_killer wrote:

It is true that I am free to create my reality. I’m totally free to create a stupid one and free to hurt myself by making stupid decisions based on a reality that doesn’t exist.
Creating an imaginary world is not very difficult, children do it all the time. It is much harder to learn about the obviously real shared reality and then manage myself properly within it - meaning make smart choices based on my understanding of it.

the not so easy part, is to create an imaginary world which overlaps (or aligns very will) with the real world which you're surrounded by. this is what our culture is/does.

crazy_killer wrote:

If the ISS is an empty can than it makes little sense to spend millions of tax payers dollars to scam people into believing they are visiting it. This money could have been used to build schools and hospitals.

now consider that this imaginary world which creates money, is chock full of people and various actors trying to trick you into beliveing falsehoods about money for their own profit; and then to figure out how money actually works? THAT will make any head spin.

of course, money is just an example, an specific case where it's easy to see why would anyone try to mislead people into false beliefs

(bonus phoentic/etymological reasoning: badly aligned 'imaginary' worlds... mal-aligned, malign i.e. evil)

there is quite a lot of misleading partial truths out there.

there's also something to how many realities (or imaginary worlds inspired by them) can contradict each other and all be real truths (from their own perspective).

--

crazy_killer wrote:

It is in fact super important to know for sure what is the one real and true shared reality and be crystal clear about it or at least work hard for it and strive to be

first you must clarify your own understanding/version of real truth. do not let anybody else do this for you, you must do it for yourself (this can, sometimes, feel like a double edged sword).
in my opinion, if another person choses the truth for you, they are going to be capable of making you their slave; if they're enslaved themselves, they will almost certainly try to pass that on.

in my own life, I have found something missing from what my culture was saying the real truth actually was; so eventually I recalled that my own culture had also told me that I had the right to believe whatever I wanted (freedom of belief!), so I chose to use this right and started making up my own imaginary world trying to align it to myself and to the world I'm in.

crazy_killer · 2022-10-14 01:58:56

We have no choice but to choose our own reality.

The world is so complex.. even those trustworthy Extraterrestrial Channelers share contradicting realities.

I don't know about you but I'm being lied to so often by colleagues, family, corporations, and everyone I'm not even angry about it anymore - I'm used to it.

And if my friends and family lie to me... and ETs lie to me... so it's only fair that governments and would lie to me as well.

And I'm only talking about intentional deceit. If I include all the idiots that share falsehoods by mistake - WOW.

But even within all this craziness - and perhaps because of it - I think there is great value in those organizations that are suppose to do the hard discernment for me because it requires a lot of time and effort and expertise. Examples would be Science, Health Officials, Professionals, Health Officials, the Law, Health Officials, and the list goes on..

Of course even those douchebags can betray my trust but I'm trying to do the best that I can to survive and flourish in a crazy and mostly evil environment. I don't know if this is really limited only to low conciseness 3D Earth - I suspect that as the shit is below so the shit is above. Maybe after death in the spirit world things are better... probably not..

Kahi Harawira · 2022-10-14 02:36:47

crazy_killer wrote:

Maybe after death in the spirit world things are better.

You will love it, truly will.

Invest in this future, be the good person now, you will never regret it.

mitkobs · 2022-10-14 12:17:12

You need to get acquainted with the information from the beginning, most of these questions are answered and others you will answer yourself based on the later.

See also how a big Hollywood movie production is made, they have the money and the resources to make stunning visuals from what your head will spin.

mile11 · 2022-10-23 10:33:37

naringas wrote:

the taygetans are likely coming from 'a different timeline' (or something)
they insist that the moon is fake and they seem to really dislike it. I'm not certain they fully understand the role of the moon in the larger scheme of things.

Aaaaayy !!! When they ever said the moon is not real or anything in those lines? And they said explicitly the moon affects biological cycles. Aren't you having issues with covering the material properly before posting?

crazy_killer wrote:

There have been 67 expeditions to the ISS, 263 individuals from 20 countries have visited it.

My goodness that sounds just like those live covid statistics they run in 2020. The numbers of beds, the deceased, the total hours nurses were on duty. If you didn't see anybody around you in hospital or dying it would be dramatic. Oh, I just noticed, you have been banned. How surprising!! (not)

Incredible!

Yankee · 2022-10-24 00:49:25

Sometimes zero G is filmed on a craft going at high speed with a downward arc. With a high enough speed they can create 0G with a small enough arc to match the curve of the atmosphere over Earth and hold this for quite some time. This is mainstream knowledge, as far as this goes.

robertcb · 2024-02-20 22:23:20

Anéeka: Not much to see right now! Looks like a lot of clouds down there now.
Gosia: How fast are you moving?
Anéeka: 7.9 Kilometers a second. Altitude 505 km high. Ship right over the China / Mongolia border now. I see red glow below, as the first rays of the sun hit the red Mongolian desert. I see long shadows now, or the red rock formations below. My room is to Port, to the port side of the ship, Port-Bow. A few hours ago I could see a thunderstorm over south America. Quite violent. Some of the lightning bolts flashed upwards. Sprites they are called. Those are spectacular at night, these I saw during the day. They go up into the stratosphere and branch out like an electric tree. Those are only visible from space. The Earth looks small and fragile, I can see the thickness of the atmosphere from here now. It's best at dawn and at dusk as the sun hits it sideways, just a thin coating of air. It gets transparent and it fuses into the darkness of space. Ship over East Russia now. Approaching the Sea of Okhotsk.
Anéeka: Just south of Aleutian islands now... Over north Pacific. Yes, we've never been so phisically close to you as we are now, just a few miles, that's all. Nice sunny day here now. I can see the sun reflecting on the ocean now. I can see Alaska from here, the closest clouds and the white extension of the North Polar Region. We are visible to the naked eye as a moving very bright star. Fast moving. Over Central North Pacific Ocean Now. All i see is water in sunlight, and the polar cap falling away behind the horizon.. And yes the Earth is most definitely round! We are just above the ISS. Can the astronauts see us from there? Oh, they could IF there were any astronauts! They are lying to you... that thing, the ISS is an empty useless lifeless can!
Anéeka: No, the ship is moving in an equatorial low orbit, it shifts slightly each circle, making it cover most of the world as it goes, so we can monitor nearly every place from here having a possible fly-by over every location eventually, even if it may be a few weeks. Ship's orbit is by design. And the one who does this is Eridania Yelena. Ship over the Bering sea now, plain daylight now. Every 42 min I can see dawn

A starship located in an orbit similar to the ISS, but with a height of 505 km (the ISS has an orbit with a height of about 420 km)
Everyone can see the ISS with the naked eye, it is as bright as Jupiter or Venus and what's more - when we see the ISS in the sky above us - we can check its position in the ISS tracker - it is actually in our vicinity.

Why then have I never seen or heard of anyone seeing the Taygetan ship (even though I know many astronomy enthusiasts, sky watchers and ham radio enthusiasts)? Since the ship is in an equatorial orbit of 505 km, it should be as visible and as frequently observed as the ISS.

Anéeka: We are visible to the naked eye as a moving very bright star.

There are no astronauts on the ISS?
And who do I and thousands of other hams around the world communicate with on the 2m band?
Who broadcasts SSTV PD120 images on the 145.800 MHz NFM (ARISS) frequency from time to time?
Why is there a signal only when the ISS is actually visible above the horizon?
Anyone can receive signals from the ISS even on a regular cheap Chinese RTL-SDR.
Frequencies:

145.800 MHz NFM-SSTV (occasionally, mainly from the Russian Zvezda module, callsign RS0ISS)
145.825 MHz NFM- digi APRS gateway (also occasionally)
145.990 MHz NFM CTCSS 67 Hz - audio repeater uplink
437.800 MHz NFM - audio repeater downlink (you can receive this signal on any Baofeng or RTL-SDR as soon as the ISS passes over you.
You just need to be outside and have a view of the sky without trees or tall buildings above you.

Just remember the Doppler effect.
For the frequency of 437.800 MHz it is +-10MHz, this means that when the station has just emerged from above the horizon and is approaching you - receive 437.810 MHz, Then gradually move down to 437.800 MHz (ISS above you) up to 437.790 MHz (ISS moves away from you to hide behind the horizon.

In addition, direct radio communications with astronauts on the ISS are often carried out from various schools around the world!
After obtaining an amateur radio license in your country and purchasing equipment for $200-300 (a 2m/70cm transceiver with a power of 50W and an antenna, preferably directional but also omnidirectional, it will work) - you can radio connect with astronauts on the ISS yourself!
I have been a ham radio operator since 1997. I still remember the MIR space station and the cosmonauts' communications that I heard on the 143.625 MHz frequency.
This frequency is still sometimes used even from the ISS (because there is also a Russian module there and there are Russians).

They can tell people that the Apollo missions were a hoax or that the moon is empty or a hologram,
but don't let anyone tell me that there are no astronauts on the ISS!
This is not a story from 50 years ago, but a present-day story that everyone can verify for themselves if they have enough determination.

For more information please click here.
https://www.ariss.org/contact-the-iss.html

Not enough evidence?

https://www.space.com/space-station-spa … cope-photo

Last edited by robertcb (2024-02-20 23:23:53)

wandereringsoul · 2024-02-20 23:42:18

Why then have I never seen or heard of anyone seeing the Taygetan ship (even though I know many astronomy enthusiasts, sky watchers and ham radio enthusiasts)? Since the ship is in an equatorial orbit of 505 km, it should be as visible and as frequently observed as the ISS.

Anéeka: We are visible to the naked eye as a moving very bright star.

Grab a pair of binoculars and point it in the night sky at a bright "star". You'll notice what a true star looks like and a ship with its strobe lights on mimicking a star. Some strobes will come across as strange objects projecting lights onto another object. Theres some strange visual treats up there.

Good luck with your journey.

robertcb · 2024-02-21 00:14:39

If the Galactic Federation doesn't mind, let the Taygetans set up a website to track their ship in low Earth orbit, just like they do with the ISS.

http://www.isstracker.com/
https://live.ariss.org/dashboard/esamap/

Or at least they will send a list of flights like this:

https://heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544

Then I will know when to look at the sky and in which direction so as not to confuse the Taygetan ship with something else

Ariya · 2024-02-21 07:41:41

robertcb wrote:

…
There are no astronauts on the ISS?
And who do I and thousands of other hams around the world communicate with on the 2m band?
…
They can tell people that the Apollo missions were a hoax or that the moon is empty or a hologram,
but don't let anyone tell me that there are no astronauts on the ISS!
This is not a story from 50 years ago, but a present-day story that everyone can verify for themselves if they have enough determination.
…
Not enough evidence?
…

Hello robertcb,

There are no astronots in the ISS. Athena confirmed this :
Please see this transcript: https://swaruu.org/transcripts/starlink … r-findings

Robert: Yes. They say they would be at about 550km.
Swaruu X (Athena): I searched from 1000 and below. They might be emulating them using normal satellites.
Robert: I thought that too. They are up to something.
Swaruu X (Athena): A lot of junk and that's it. The ISS is there. But there's nobody there according to the life sensors.
Robert: And the ISS China?
Swaruu X (Athena): Also. Empty.

I also see from your post history that you have a keen interest in the moon and the Apollo missions

If you haven’t already, you may wish to look at this video and transcript Apollo Moon Missions - Fake or Real? PART 1 - Conversation with Swaruu of Erra
https://swaruu.org/transcripts/apollo-m … uu-of-erra

And also here where Dale explores his own doubts : https://swaruu.org/transcripts/swaruu-o … ale-harder

wandereringsoul · 2024-02-21 09:08:39

I thought Stanley Kubrick did a good job in filming the moon landing considering the technology back then.

#1 2022-10-12 16:47:21

The International Space Station is real

#2 2022-10-12 17:45:33

Re: The International Space Station is real

#3 2022-10-12 21:40:18

Re: The International Space Station is real

#4 2022-10-12 21:41:45

Re: The International Space Station is real

#5 2022-10-12 22:15:13

Re: The International Space Station is real

#6 2022-10-12 22:16:56

Re: The International Space Station is real

#7 2022-10-12 22:53:36

Re: The International Space Station is real

#8 2022-10-13 05:21:00

Re: The International Space Station is real

#9 2022-10-13 17:11:00

Re: The International Space Station is real

#10 2022-10-13 18:02:57

Re: The International Space Station is real

#11 2022-10-13 18:42:58

Re: The International Space Station is real

#12 2022-10-13 19:48:01

Re: The International Space Station is real

#13 2022-10-13 23:07:40

Re: The International Space Station is real

#14 2022-10-14 00:24:11

Re: The International Space Station is real

#15 2022-10-14 01:37:40

Re: The International Space Station is real

#16 2022-10-14 01:58:56

Re: The International Space Station is real

#17 2022-10-14 02:36:47

Re: The International Space Station is real

#18 2022-10-14 12:17:12

Re: The International Space Station is real

#19 2022-10-23 10:33:37

Re: The International Space Station is real

#20 2022-10-24 00:49:25

Re: The International Space Station is real

#21 2024-02-20 22:23:20

Re: The International Space Station is real

#22 2024-02-20 23:42:18

Re: The International Space Station is real

#23 2024-02-21 00:14:39

Re: The International Space Station is real

#24 2024-02-21 07:41:41

Re: The International Space Station is real

#25 2024-02-21 09:08:39

Re: The International Space Station is real

Board footer