There are many ideas about where we come from and how we arrived at the current state of development. There is a mainstream biological theoretical framework and a mainstream historical and cultural framework.
These notes outline my grasp of important issues about our human origins and the ideas that shape my understanding of Farsight’s work. Is there material here that resonates with the unfolding story from Farsight?
I see the world in terms of linguistic frameworks and ideologies and do not believe there is a simple or true explanation of anything. I am a simple generalist because my patience for careful detailed work ended a long time ago when my concentration and clarity of thought declined. Age, poor health, disillusionment, mental and physical exhaustion are the enemies of careful research. This is a speculative and lightning review.
1. Historical, Cultural, Religious Frameworks
The mainstream euro/us-centric historical academic orthodoxy is being chipped away at even from within its own ranks as new archaeological finds, helped along by new technologies, are making a nonsense of the long accepted timelines. Recent discoveries like the Gobekli Tepi digs in Turkey have pushed even the mainstream archaeologists to accept city building taking place 11,000 years ago. Recent finds in Europe have found stable and housed communities lasting hundreds of years dating back to 9,000 years ago.
There is a huge alternative movement contributed to by free thinking scientists, renegade archaeologists and theorists which is trying to make academia admit that its framework is full of holes and this critical movement uses existing well known archaeological artefacts as well as new finds to offer evidence for its claims.
I suggest checking out the work of Ben at UnchartedX as an entry point into the idea that an advanced worldwide civilisation predates our modern idea of a stone age. Ben is a content provider with a brash confident style that may be annoying to some but his thinking and argumentation is coherent. He brings together the work of others to offer a place to start with this area of exploration. Ben thinks that stories of ET are 'Woo Woo'. Fine, he can think that and be part of another kind of dogmatic orthodoxy but it does not detract from the significance of the material he consolidates. This new approach to rediscovering ancient history has the strength of working with powerful physical evidence:
Here is a starting place for much investigation if your interest is piqued.
Religions have stories about our origins of course. These origin stories are seen occasionally as divine truth but most religious members tend to look at these stories as allegorical accounts or ancient myths that have contemporary use in helping to us place ourselves in God's/Gods' great order of things without being taken literally. Psychoanalysts see these origin stories as myths originating deep in our human psyche, so they appear in all cultures in similar forms. Thus origin myths can be seen in Jungian terms as Archetypes.
An interesting shift in perception we can make is to see the ancient texts and oral traditions that underpin human religions as something else altogether, these texts can be seen as human record keeping. In other words humans have attempted to understand and make a record of real events. These records by accident or by intent have often been changed or manipulated over long periods of time. Our familiar translations of ancient texts have assumed that ancient humans had no grasp of technology or any useful vocabulary to describe extraordinary beings and events. So religions give us translations that talk in magical terms, spirit terms, and not technological or concrete terms.
Of course translators of the ancient texts in the 'middle ages' or the 19th Century for example would not have had words or concepts for technology themselves. How could a 19th Century Biblical or Vedic scholar have talked about anti-gravity flying machines? It is worth investigating the work of Mauro Biglino to see a leading philologist explaining how words for technology and extra-terrestrial beings in the Bible have been misunderstood or deliberately mistranslated to fit in with the religious orthodoxy. I wonder if ‘dragons’ in ancient oriental texts had an another meaning when the original events were recorded, airborne reptilians perhaps?
Mauro Biglino, a biblical scholar who has worked on ancient Hebraic texts and has been employed by the Vatican at one time has revealed a translation of the Old Testament god that fits well with Farsight’s glimpses of the same character. You can read his recent book showing biblical translation at work translated into English.
Mauro Biglino is quoted from an interview in the snippet below where (his English is a little awkward) he argues that the abstract and mystical language used in our bible translations is not a reflection of the language used in the source material:
"The founders of Christianity have concealed the purpose of Yahweh, replacing it with their own purpose, which was to create a religion. and more...
In the whole path of the research on the original Masoretic text of the Bible, a constant factor emerged. And this constant factor is concreteness. There is concreteness in the Book of Genesis, in the Exodus, in the Book of Numbers, in the Deuteronomy, in the Book of Zechariah. Wherever we have looked, and examined the original text in depth and with accuracy, we have found concreteness.
The Elohim and Yahweh are flesh and bones individuals, the Angels - the Malakhim - are flesh and bones individuals, the "Blessing" has a concrete and very material meaning, even the kevod - translated in modern Christian Bibles as "The Glory of God" - is a very concrete and material device routinely used by Yahweh.
We have not found any trace of anything "spiritual" in the Bible.
It appears evident that all the spiritual meanings we read in today’s Old Testament are just a theological construction, inserted on purpose, distorting the meaning of the original Biblical text.
There is no "God" in the Bible. "
So Biglino finds a stark disjuncture between the religious translations we read and the source texts. He sees record keeping of real events by intelligent humans describing physical interactions without magic or mystery or ‘spirit’. I recognise Farsight’s RV findings in Biglino’s work. Both are engaging with real events in the past. One through RV contact and one through an accurate translation of an ancient text.
On a personal note, translations aside, it is a kind of madness reconciling the Yahweh of the Old Testament with the Christ of the new testament. And I do know how theologians try pull this stunt. Those of us raised in the ‘christian world’ were told from early childhood to accept this bolting together of texts but step back from the conditioning and open your eyes and it is a dubious confection – according to me at least. Yahweh is clearly, to my eyes, a narcissistic psychopath. A conquistador and a smiter when he does not get his way. The Christ story is one of ethics and self-sacrifice aimed to offer humans a value system that transcends immediate personal gratification. Sadly it also tells humans that justice is be found in a future divine reckoning and not something to strive for in the present. Rulers love the masses to follow Christianity for this very reason.
2. Biological Approaches to Our Origins
On the biological side there is an orthodoxy based on Darwin's theory of evolution. I have no problem with Darwin. He was a brilliant man of his time using scientific method to make sense of the world he studied and using a huge collection of material to arrive at a 'Theory'. His intention was not to challenge religion but to apply post-enlightenment thinking to a question in biology. The ways the theory has been used and abused ever since is not Darwin's fault.
Darwin was himself a church attender and his wife was devoutly Christian and the daughter of a Christian minister which made him very reluctant to publish his ideas. Wallace was about to publish the same theory independently of Darwin. The anger against religious orthodoxies was so great amongst modern thinkers since the16th Century that the resounding explosion of feelings on both sides of the evolution theory echoes down to our present times.
There are problems with evolutionary theory and natural selection theories. Like all human explanations of reality through human storytelling, whether loose and poetic or tight and bound by rules of logic, procedure and method, evolution theory is always a story in progress. There is no point of Truth, just an endless attempt to reach out for a better explanation of what we are and why. Science provides a toolset for thinking and acting, just as religion, literature and Remote Viewing.
Perhaps the biggest problem for human evolution theory is the fact that we have a pair of fused chromosomes that does not exist in the other primates on this planet. I think this may be clear evidence for tinkering with our underlying biological structure as no mechanism in Natural Selection theory can account for this. While the theory holds that successful gene mutations can produce a more successful version of an organism and that an incremental build up of successful changes over millenia can radically alter a species or generate a new species, mutations in ‘higher’ animals are seldom successful and need to be small changes to produce viable progeny. The fusing of an entire pair of chromosomes is currently inexplicable in evolutionary terms. I understand that the so called ‘missing link’ is the hoped for intermediary fossil between primates with 43 pairs of chromosomes and humans with 42. A scientist would have to say – it must be possible because it happened. That is belief, faith even.
It is also interesting that the average human carries around 400 genetic defects as opposed to the great apes who each carry about 40. These faults give rise to thousands of genetically inherited illnesses, auto-immune diseases, malformations and dysfunctions in humans. A key element in our built in obsolescence. Do we have so many defects because the gene splicing and manipulation was not part of a natural process weeding out the weaknesses in our genetic makeup over millions of years? Accidentally or deliberately the gene splicing and cutting and pasting that gave rise to us produces a flawed piece of biology.
There are other interesting problems too. Domestic animals and crops have a genetic complexity and oddness that is hard to reconcile within the timeframe in which humans are supposed to have been involved with them. Look at the Aurochs for example and try to get your head around primitive humans taming and domesticating these monsters to produce the modern milk cow. Modern wheat has a complexity that is hard to explain through simple plant management by humans a few thousand years ago while they were transitioning from hunter gathering to settled agrarian lifestyles. Interesting that we try to modify plant crops now not by selective hybridisation but by genetic manipulation.
I was deeply impressed by Sitchin’s work on the ancient Sumerians who are the acknowledged source of huge amounts of the early books of the Old Testament: the Creation of humans, the Great Flood and Noah, The Tower of Babel and so on. But again, although Sitchin’s accounts are compelling he was always driving his work too hard to convince us of his ideas about the primary role of the Annunaki in the creation and evolution of humans. Farsight is revealing a more complex ET web entangling our origins than Sitchin finds.
I feel all too ignorant of the ancient texts of Hindu religion, the Chinese civilisation, and the beliefs of people across the Americas and South Eastern Asia. I am aware that they too reflect on a time of great beings with extraordinary powers dominating humans and shaping their development.
I am very doubtful that humans at any period have sat down and used myth making as part of an inherent drive to make meaning out of chaos. Knowing us humans all of our stories would have been about our own magnificence. These gods demanding obedience and worship (work) and physical offerings of food, virgins, temple building and so on do not sound like the kind of thing we would make up. I feel that Plato’s account of Atlantis was an attempt to carry forward an ancient story full of real events and I think our ‘religious texts’ were written with the same intent.
On the biological side of the human origin issue:
The biological home of the IS-BE on prison planet earth is prone to endless faults. IS-BE’s in such a body will spend a great deal of time struggling against illness and fulfilling procreative urges. We become aware of the idea of mortality almost as soon as we awaken to ourselves in childhood. Our achievement is our remarkable drive to carry forward our ideas and inventions to the next generation as a collective. To try and make some worthwhile things collectively in the physical and the social realm for future generations.
Do we inside the Farsight discourse need to explore any of the strands I have outlined here? The starting point in my notes here has been mainstream physical reality. I am trying to work from the mainstream and everyday 3D world outwards. Not from the 6th Density downwards. I cannot take a starting point from a non-material belief system and try and impose it on life here and now because there are too many mystical systems to choose from and each needs some intense level of predetermined faith. And I do get it, people do have intense contacts with non-corporeal realms and do interact with non-human beings with a story to tell. I have briefly experienced other beings. I do not accept that any has earned our devotion. Nor should we give devotion. Mutual respect sounds acceptable and none of these entities seems to have treated us with respect.
Courtney Brown often mentions the seeming lack of creativity and joyful expression found in ET species he has interacted with. He describes IS-BE’s that while fully aware of themselves are striving for a deeply conservative and rigid consensus. To resist change the only political solution seems to be one that is rigidly hierarchical. A hierarchical society demands a top down approach and the top position is achieved and maintained by violence. A way of being that allows a creative and imaginative sparkle leads to an unstable and unpredictable society. No place for freedom of thought and action in a regime that reaches for eternity.
So as a final thought, our punishment in our short lived human bodies has made us both a threat and an object of envy. Our IS-BE selves have compensated for being ‘reduced’ in awareness by being explosive in our creativity. Humans suffer terribly in this prison but still we are not crushed. We turn adversity into poetry, art, beauty. Give us an inch and we write a song, paint on a wall, tell a story. We cry a lot and yet still we have hearts and minds that know how to laugh.