http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Edward

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Allison_DuBois

I'm a fan of Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia. It has helped me with research essays in my past as a quick easy resource, but when it comes to the afterlife and spiritiuality I see the ugly side of a site like this.

I know some of you guys probably like to keep to yourself in this forum and maybe some of you think John Edward is a fake too but still Its upsetting being reminded of just how much work there is to do to OPEN the minds of sceptics. There are too many people with a totally closed mind out there. Gifted mediums get a bad rap simply because so many closed minded sceptics assume what they do is impossible.

The sad thing is that i myself do not have the clear personal proof of the afterlife and ability to communicate and experience the spirit realms like others on these forums. For the record I have seen some curious people in dreams and odd de ja vu sequences and a number of things that might have spiritual meaning but I'm not sure. Yet I have through an enquiring but open mind come to a very strong personal belief that there has to be something to all of this. It would be insane to believe everyone was lying about their experiences, especially those with some positive affirmation.

I worry about the world when we have so many judgemental, close minded people who think they know everything when they know so little about the information that is out there.  :(

Sorry for the temper of the post but I'm really annoyed that an 'encyclopedia', something which is purely meant to state the facts, reflects such a blatant bias on a topic and I just wanted to share that with you.

Everything is part of being human, don't forget that us humans are capable of extreme situations in both the  bad and  good sides. The last century was the century of science , 100 pact years filled with tremendous discoveries in every scientific field  that changed human lives forever....don't expect the weight of this way of thinking to change easily...Someone said that the last century was the century of matter,  this century will be the century of spirit....you can already see that...take the academia, schools of paranormal studies are appearing like mushrooms, experiments are carried out, people start searching, wandering.....what is this consciousness, were we come from, take the hard question..... and were there is smoke there is certainly fire....rest assure that many things will change in the following years...

Was Jambo here who said a while back  ... minds stuck in concrete  ;)

That's why I'm excited when I read websites like this one below.

http://www.2012.com.au/unlimited.html

I've seen many people on here talk about earth changes and 2012 as well.

I'm learning about it with the open mind of discovery. The knowledge is very important to our future.

I'm sad because I don't understand why some people can't be more open minded like myself (not to sound arrogant).

You know why I, despite having lingering doubts due to the condition I've been brought up, is on the side of the afterlife?

Because when the information about the afterlife taken as a whole, despite certain points of differing, is very consistent and makes so much sense that any open minded person cannot simply dismiss it. It BEGS exploration and the spirit of learning because it never ceases to intrigue. Afterall the afterlife I am told is a world where we create our own reality. We even do that in this realm too without many of us really understanding it. There is no limit to the mind's creativity and imagination if we choose to always keep it open.

That is why close minded sceptics are not true sceptics at all. Sceptics seek to understand and learn about what they are scrutinising with atleast a degree of balance. Unlike those Wikipedia keyboard warriors.

Nice link NSD ..  Stay calm everyone! lol maybe a bit hyped though?

Which link is hyped?

The 2012 unlimited one?

I've listened to a 2 hour podcast about earth changes and I listened to a 1 and a half hour interview with this man

http://www.johnjayharper.com/

If you have I Tunes you can listen to his interview on the podcast 'Ghostly Talk'. The show dated February 26th, 2006.

All I can say is these things made alot of sense to me. Usually if something makes alot of sense to me, fundamentally its either a truth or if it isn't its an incredibly clever con. I prefer the former  8-)

Well i've just watched half of Kyo's video link - under UFO topic ... omg im going to sit for a moment in a quite room filled with soothing music .. and get drunk!!

no wait .. it was bound to happen .. um ... okay cool ... exciting .. this could be it then?

Hello again already NSD,
When you say " For the record I have seen some curious people in dreams and odd de ja vu sequences and a number of things that might have spiritual meaning but I'm not sure," and you speak so clearly about your interest, then it seems you are ready to take the next step of setting your intent to experience more.  Setting your intent is just saying to yourself clearly and firmly "I intend to learn more about spirituality" or some such wording, asking for guidance to keep all experiences positive. I came here having some accidental experience with the spiritual and somewhat fearful to proceed. but I have been amazed at the kindness of PUL (Pure Unconditional Love) just waiting to teach us more.
bets
Oh, and in the past it was easy to alter Wikipedia's entries.  Don't know if that is still true, but it was set up to be the peoples' encyclopedia, developed by volunteer contributors. I wrote some in my professional field and if I can do it, anyone can, if they haven't changed their rules.

Hi NSD

i say it is a bit hyped because it comes across as a highly stylised television commercial ..
but im not saying it is not true .. nearly everything they have spoken about may be confirmed.

To me it lacks .. a certain Vital Force, it is as if they have accumalated all the knowledge from various sites and slapped it together.  For instances; our 2 strands of DNA changing to 12 strands .. very very nice .. but tell me, how do they imagine this is going to happen? overnight?! The process of evolution is through experience and through experience we progress our metabolism into a higher state or vibration ... unless what they are saying here is a group of people will be experimented upon a ufo and sent back to earth ... is this what they imagine?

my thoughts.

Greetings,
I haven't yet read all the sources you're discussing, but just want to say I like Augoeideian's description of a test or reaction to new material---
"...it lacks .. a certain Vital Force, it is as if they have accumalated all the knowledge from various sites and slapped it together."
That's a really good filter to put new information thru, A.
Another way that's more plodding that I've been trying is to google my way through several layers of new(to me) names I come across. The first layer is the original article, the 2nd I find in the original article, say 'the MJ12.'  So I go to MJ12's website and sort of filter and digest what that says. Then something from that website gets the same treatment. So their credibility has to go through at least 3 layers. Only a small percentage get through that way.
Fear has been used by castle-owners, churches, governments, etc to keep people in line and exact tribute from them. I'm so weary of fearing. I find no fear at this site, only a sense of exploration, concern, and comraderie. I applaud everyone here for accomplishing this.  :)
bets

John Jay Harper says because we've ignored the wisdom of the ancients, we don't understand that events can change very quickly.  ;)

Greetings NSD,
the pages you referred us to are devoted to controversies; they are trying to show how difficult it is for Wikipedia to get one entry that 'defines' certain topics; they aren't the direct encyclopedia, but are more like an appendix or supplement. Sometimes when a topic is getting alot of conflicting contributors the topic is removed from the regular listings until issues are sorted out.
That there is controversy doesn't surprise you, does it? Even here there are disagreements but that's what keeps people from stagnating in their views.
This community is very supportive of various spiritual experiences but even this membership is a drop in the bucket of the population as a whole. Controversy is everywhere! :P
Sometimes you have to ignore some sources until you figure a way to absorb what truths they may offer.
Thank you for helping me see that.
bets

Generally, I'd be careful about Wikipedia. I've found factual errors in it.

Love,
Rob

NDS, the Saturn in me gave my first opinion - caution - but there is nothing wrong with that site - it is contemporary and fresh.  The ancients were very much Saturnites in their wisdom!  We find in the bible that God says .. he does not lean towards the mysterious .. there is a time to plant and there is a time to sow.  The reason why the phrase 'Mystery knowledge' came about was to protect the un-intiated or un-educated from themselves (the three headed dog guarding the gateway)

Unless though .. we are at the cusp of the end of a 2125 year cycle .. now that could cause a huge paradigm shift in conscious.  But even here my theory is .. the earth reaches the end of a cycle and shifts on its axis - this means a natural catastrophe happens and society as we know it today is virtually wiped out.  No electricity infrastructure, no nothing ... the survivors of this (but we are always the survivors spiritually or physically) most probably live in caves for years after this event and then slowly build up civilisation again - which most probably takes 2125 years.

There is good evidence that this has happened in the past (Graham Hancock is an excellent reference) .. the great Flood, the destruction of Atlantis and Lemuria - all great civilisations seem to reach a point or peak and crash down to start again.

i think this is a brilliant way of advancing the spirit in ones self. and also i wouldnt mind going back to basics!  

But now if we at the end of a Great Year 26,000 years (2125 x 12 cycles) then .. i think the show will be far greater.  

:)

Well there's alot of different viewpoints on what's going to happen after 2012. I like to think it will be a great awakening and peaceful but there is the 'chaos before peace' theory.

I feel a bit awkward when people talk about making plans post 2012. I don't want to start telling them about 'earth changes' because they might think I'm a looney. I tell my mum about it because she is quite interested and open to afterlife and spiritual matters.

My sister is a Christian and usually I don't try to impose my views on her but  she laughed off the idea of earth changes. I was upset by her dogmatic and superior approach to this.

When earth changes are occurring to the point where they cannot be denied or ignored, I have a joke for my sister.

'MY KARMA RAN OVER YOUR DOGMA '  ;D

Quote:

'MY KARMA RAN OVER YOUR DOGMA '

Excellent. I love it. ;-)

Don't be upset by people's dogmatic and superior (they think) ideas. We all learn in our own time. It does no good to push as then there's resistance. At least you've gotten the door open with your sister even if she laughs at you.

With Love,
Mairlyn ;-)

Quote:

I'm a fan of Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia. It has helped me with research essays in my past as a quick easy resource, but when it comes to the afterlife and spiritiuality I see the ugly side of a site like this.

The unfortunate reality is that Wikipedia has a very strong bias towards atheistic/materialistic rationalism, or what we might also call "mainstream" scientific thinking...which in turn leads to an extremely limited view of the universe in general.  This perspective is actually enshrined in Wikipedia's formal policies, which is what the atheists are able to point to for justification if their perspective is challenged.

It's also worth pointing out that the above perspective, despite being called rationalist, in fact does not really have anything to do with rationality at all.  Most people with the above perspective that I've seen are almost entirely emotively oriented, and they also tend to refuse to research a given subject before refuting it outright.  Given that, I'd actually suspect that most of the people accusing John Edward of fraudulence are actually those who know virtually nothing about what he really does at all, and also have no desire to know.

Another example of this is Stanley Meyer, an inventor who was actually assassinated for his attempts to develop hydrogen electrolysis from water into a viable means of power generation.  You would think that the assassination itself by economic interests would serve as ample evidence of the scientific legitimacy of his work.  However, even after he had been killed, promoters of the atheistic status quo on Wikipedia ridiculed him in nearly every concievable way short of directly labelling him as a crackpot.

Another thing to know about Wikipedia is that each article is maintained/authored usually by a specific group of people, and they are very often a group with a vested interest in maintaining a specific bias regarding the subject.  One example is the article about Amway, where virtually all information critical to the organisation has been removed over time.  Another very good example of this is the article about Richard Stallman which again, is authored by a group of his followers who, rather than maintaining actual neutrality, again refuse to allow any information critical of him to appear on the page.

I've often said to people that Wikipedia is only really good for topics which are entirely harmless/emotionally neutral, such as zoological information or material about television series.  For anything related to individuals or politics, it should be strictly avoided.

Petrus wrote on Jul 17^th, 2006 at 6:17am:

Quote: I'm a fan of Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia. It has helped me with research essays in my past as a quick easy resource, but when it comes to the afterlife and spiritiuality I see the ugly side of a site like this. It's also worth pointing out that the above perspective, despite being called rationalist, in fact does not really have anything to do with rationality at all.  Most people with the above perspective that I've seen are almost entirely emotively oriented, and they also tend to refuse to research a given subject before refuting it outright.  Given that, I'd actually suspect that most of the people accusing John Edward of fraudulence are actually those who know virtually nothing about what he really does at all, and also have no desire to know. .

Couldn't have said it better myself  ;)

Most people with a supposedly purely 'rationalist' outlook refuse to accept that anything could be possible that mainstream science cannot explain. They are big on agenda and a everything's false until proven true mindset!