ForumGarden

A friend who is into New Age stuff gave me a crystal together with a book "Pendulum Magic For Beginners." According to this and other books I have read on the subject, crystals can help with most everything including establishing angelic contact. During meditation, an angel stone (or stones) should be held in the hand, or one may be placed on the brow to facilitate the opening of the third eye chakra through which angelic communication takes place. :-3

Does anyone have any experience of "angelic comminication" in this way?

I'd say crystals are as effective at contacting angels as they are at contacting Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy.

But not necessarily in that order ?

My laptop has three crystals incorporated. One mediates between the angelic memory host and the angelic processor data bus, one mediates between the angelic cheerleader display team and the angelic direct shared memory access, the final one mediates between the angelic microprocessor command pipes and the angelic 128-bit registers.

I would imagine they would work for someone who truly believed that they did

Jeez, it would be nice if they did work JJ. I have crystals, Irish good luck charms, and a voodoo doll that I like sticking pins in when someone annoys me...LOL

I also use fung shway to bring peace and harmony to my life:-6

Here's my voodoo doll...

Attached files

I haven't met a Crystal yet that worked. They're usually fired within a week.

All crystals work - do you not have a quartz watch? Does it keep time well?

This isn't a joke post (and neither was my last, come to that) - if you'd told anyone a hundred years ago that we'd keep time to within a second a day using a flake of quartz you'd have been laughed down. Does that make crystals "magic"? Seeing today's wrist-watch through the eyes of a hundred years ago you might perhaps have said yes or used "angels" in your vocabulary describing the way they worked. Or perhaps the word "angel" would have been as equally meaningless to you then as it is to me today, in that it implies an external observer and agent with no physical attributes.

Richard Bell;1365178 wrote: I'd say crystals are as effective at contacting angels as they are at contacting Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy.


You called?

Oh my word, we have a problem. Who on earth...

Reminds me of a marvellous novel called "Moon Tiger" by Penelope Lively. Describing her daughter Lisa as a "dull child" she nonetheless delights in the child's imaginative questions.

"Are there dragons?" she asked and I said that there are not.

"Have there ever been?" I said the evidence was to the contrary.

"But if there is a word dragon," she said, "then once there must have been dragons!"

There is a word "angel". The understanding of the nature of things by some people in some cultures gave the word a meaning for them though not, of course, a physical reality. Such people, if they existed today, would perhaps be called superstitious. The issue of whether they ever had physical reality is unchanged by the belief system of previous generations. The word is still current because it describes an aspect of that particular discredited aberrant view of the world.

I should imagine that because most of us who live in the west were raised in "god fearing" environments, either imposed upon us by our parents, schools or the state, our

conception of an angel quite naturally tends to focus on the biblical description.

Religion comes from a period of prehistory when earthlings were afraid of their own shadow. Darkness, illness, solar and other eclipses & freak weather systems, now all easily explained, frightened the daylights out of them.

The pre-teenage boy and girl of today, knows more about such things than the most learned sage of that time.

So at the time the bible was written, if it flew it had to have wings. Might not then the visitor from beyond our planet who explained these things to them, be thought of as an angel with wings?

You're taking "the visitor from beyond our planet" as common ground. It's as fantastic and misconceived as the angel we started out discussing, with rather less excuse.

spot;1365382 wrote: You're taking "the visitor from beyond our planet" as common ground. It's as fantastic and misconceived as the angel we started out discussing, with rather less excuse.


Surely you're not simply dismissing the concept of life beyond our planet or galaxy as "fantastic & misconceived?" In all that space ... in all that time? It takes a brave man to make such a sweeping statement.

You must have heard of the Drake Equation? N = R fp ne fl fi fc L - He estimated that there are 10,000 communicative civilizations in the Milky Way alone.

I'm not saying there was or is such an entity as an angel ... just that if there was, it might well have been an E.T.

jones jones;1365387 wrote: Surely you're not simply dismissing the concept of life beyond our planet or galaxy as "fantastic & misconceived?" In all that space ... in all that time? It takes a brave man to make such a sweeping statement.Beyond our galaxy? What relevance could that have to visitors to this planet?

What relevance has "life beyond our planet" either? A visitor to our planet requires not merely life but an interstellar civilization which is an entirely different concept. Drake produced a figure for life, not for interstellar travel.

I have a reasonable counter-argument, that any interstellar civilization would expand exponentially across this galaxy and fill it within a mere few million years. The fact that they don't currently occupy this planet argues that none has ever existed in this galaxy. There may be a lot of life but if we end up an interstellar civilization we'll be the first this galaxy has known. Your visitors are consequently imaginary. Had they ever occupied Earth the unbroken local DNA record of the last three billion years would have been supplanted.

Do Crystals Work?

Yes, They Do (Ron Ron)!

spot;1365391 wrote: Beyond our galaxy? What relevance could that have to visitors to this planet?

What relevance has "life beyond our planet" either? A visitor to our planet requires not merely life but an interstellar civilization which is an entirely different concept. Drake produced a figure for life, not for interstellar travel.

I have a reasonable counter-argument, that any interstellar civilization would expand exponentially across this galaxy and fill it within a mere few million years. The fact that they don't currently occupy this planet argues that none has ever existed in this galaxy. There may be a lot of life but if we end up an interstellar civilization we'll be the first this galaxy has known. Your visitors are consequently imaginary. Had they ever occupied Earth the unbroken local DNA record of the last three billion years would have been supplanted.


The relevance is that a life form does not have to come from our galaxy but could be able to travel here from far far beyond. I doubt that any intelligent life form would simply exist in a vacuum so to speak and would inhabit or be part of a civilization.

Indeed Drake produced a figure for life, but in a universe that is some 14 billion years old, surely among those "figures" there might possibly be five hundred, one hundred or maybe ten civilizations who have evolved to a point where interstellar travel is to them what driving to the office is to us?

Your counter argument may fall down for a simple reason. According to some sources man has inhabited planet earth for some 200,000 years, yet we currently occupy no other planet. Saying that we are the first "civilization" this galaxy has ever known is rather presumpteous don't you think, given the lack of evidence? This is I believe simply supposition on your part and merely an opinion (to which you are fully entitled) albeit without a shred of evidence. My visitors then, I believe, are no more imaginary than then your supposition.

Your DNA argument only hold water if these visitors either remained here or "mated" with earthlings.

I do so enjoy enjoy these debates Spot because you bring out the intellectual best in me. We have moved quite far from crystals to interstellar travel and I have enjoyed it. I don't want to be a party pooper, so although I want to move on a bit to something new, I am going allow you to have the last word, only because of your seniority in terms of membership of FG.

In addition I am going to give your a gift ... It is a quote I recently came across ... no it is more of a great "put down." (It obviously is NOT ever to be used against the likes of you and I!)

"I would challenge you to a battle of wits, but I don't want to fight an unarmed opponent."

I doubt the ability of any life-form to travel from one galaxy to another. I take it we agree that the speed of light is currently regarded as a barrier? It's why I said other galaxies were an irrelevance to visitors to this planet. Unless, of course, we abandon science and write science-fiction here in which case the rules are whatever you choose them to be.

I explicitly said the Drake equation shows we're unlikely to be the first "civilization" this galaxy has ever known and I didn't claim we were. I said the evidence suggests that if we become an interstellar civilization then we'd be the first in this galaxy because the nature of an interstellar civilization is to spread exponentially to fill the galaxy in a relatively short time. Drake says absolutely nothing about the likelihood of a civilization acquiring an interstellar capability.

spot;1365638 wrote: I doubt the ability of any life-form to travel from one galaxy to another. I take it we agree that the speed of light is currently regarded as a barrier? It's why I said other galaxies were an irrelevance to visitors to this planet. Unless, of course, we abandon science and write science-fiction here in which case the rules are whatever you choose them to be.

I explicitly said the Drake equation shows we're unlikely to be the first "civilization" this galaxy has ever known and I didn't claim we were. I said the evidence suggests that if we become an interstellar civilization then we'd be the first in this galaxy because the nature of an interstellar civilization is to spread exponentially to fill the galaxy in a relatively short time. Drake says absolutely nothing about the likelihood of a civilization acquiring an interstellar capability.


Wow ... That your best shot? I'm disappointed. Okay, until next time.

jones jones;1365640 wrote: Wow ... That your best shot? I'm disappointed. Okay, until next time.


It's very much my best shot, yes. I might make progress if someone provides a reasoned argument demonstrating where my thinking falls down.

I wouldn't dream of suggesting visitors bred into the local DNA. My comment was that if they arrived then every one of the descendants of any life they brought with them failed here. Every life form on Earth descends from the same common ancestor, none descends from any alien germ line. That suggests to me there's been no visitors. They'd come with a large number of other species, just as we would if we sent something tomorrow like the lunar lander to land on Mars. We're one life form, we're hosts to many many others. I can't imagine none of the alien species finding a niche on so rich a variety of habitats as Earth.

spot;1365642 wrote: It's very much my best shot, yes. I might make progress if someone provides a reasoned argument demonstrating where my thinking falls down.

I wouldn't dream of suggesting visitors bred into the local DNA. My comment was that if they arrived then every one of the descendants of any life they brought with them failed here. Every life form on Earth descends from the same common ancestor, none descends from any alien germ line. That suggests to me there's been no visitors. They'd come with a large number of other species, just as we would if we sent something tomorrow like the lunar lander to land on Mars. We're one life form, we're hosts to many many others. I can't imagine none of the alien species finding a niche on so rich a variety of habitats as Earth.


Then I will end with another quote ... this time by Edgar Allen Poe. He was of course referring to reincarnation, but it is appropriate nonetheless:

"It is mere idleness to say I have not lived before & that the soul has no previous existence. You deny it? Let us not argue the matter. Convinced myself, I seek not to convince."

I suspect Professor Drake wouldn't have been much impressed by that argument.

spot;1365644 wrote: I suspect Professor Drake wouldn't have been much impressed by that argument.


Well you know what they say: "Whats good for the Drake isn't always good for the Dander" or words to that effect.

A friend of mine who was having some issues getting pregnant was offered a crystal to insert into her Va jay jay by one of these healer type people, apparently crystals can fix anything.

buttercup;1366253 wrote: A friend of mine who was having some issues getting pregnant was offered a crystal to insert into her Va jay jay by one of these healer type people, apparently crystals can fix anything.


Ooooh what are you meant to do? leave it there? ouchy!!



Good to see you Butter :-4