The chicken or the egg? Creation or evolution? We all have heard those debates and some of you may at some point have defended either side of such debate with a conviction of being on the correct side of the debate.
Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest and the idea of the evolutionary ladder from single cell all the way to monkey and eventually man. While we see variations of species we’ve never found any evidence of the famous missing link. In recent years we found several different species of humanoid types which seemed to have lived at the same times, even further in the past than science would like. But when we look at the other side of the debate, creationists bring up things such as the complexity of the eyes and question how does it know all the parts all at once to become an eye?
Both are convinced of their right and the other side being wrong.
But neither science nor creationists are able to come up with solid evidence, but what I am about to explain with all the evidence around you is that they are both right and both wrong. Don’t jump to conclusions half way this article as I first sum up a few things that are known facts yet do not at first seem to add to proving either right or wrong. But it will be logical and fit like a glove. Also take into consideration the previous articles which will complement the logic and make sense.
So again do not enter here with a conditioned mindset as it will not be an aid to seeing the logic.
Let’s start with those pointers that will later make sense. Holograms, most of you know that if we shine a light on a holographic plate we get a 3D kind of image and when we brake the holographic plate into pieces then each piece shows the whole image, but just a little less in fine detail.
We also know that cells have receptors through which they interact with the environment, and some even kind of walk and move about and perform functions, some single cells get really large and even look like plants, just go and have a look at some of them.
Receptors are senses just like our senses and where cells join into more complex systems their receptors become more complex too.
When we look at nature we see a kind of wholeness that fits every need, like flowers and bees, a whole functioning system a bit like a complex machine that if it weren’t for us taking it out of balance would run as a perfect whole.
Before moving on here, I’d like to mention that the fractal and holographic nature is talked about in the articles.
I received a question which fits in well in this article: “How do we access the realm of forms of Plato?”
How it’s done is explained in the articles, but without it would take years of searching and effort if reached at all, first goal is to achieve philosophical knowledge, not a collection of ideas, but a connection to the thing itself, whether that thing is material or transcendental, an object or an idea.
Plato suggested that the mind is the only part of people that was in contact with the forms, the world of the forms, the structure of reality, the real world behind the world of appearances. The two level world of Plato, a world that is changing (our material world) and a world that is permanent (the world of forms), which leaves us with a gap between the two worlds. But Plato suggests that the mind is the only human structure that can bridge the gap, and only by a great deal of effort. The mind is capable because it is the only structure in human being that has similar characteristics with the world of forms. I often refer to this world of forms as the blueprint.
Now this world of forms, blueprint or structure, whichever you prefer, is whole, from the smallest to the largest, balanced, connected as a whole just as we see in nature (if we don’t meddle with it). All interrelated just like the flowers and the bees. Each part with the principles present in different scale and expressions, the whole model of nature in the egg of time and space.
We are able to see that the laws of nature that build the material world such as golden ratio etc. are part of the structure, blueprint, these underlying principles are coming to expression throughout nature. Like a holographic 2D plate by light expressed into a 3D world.
The only thing that we can call evolutionary is consciousness and perhaps the coming into being.
Details of the blueprint can be found in the articles.
So to be clear, there would be no flowers without bees, no plankton without fish, no monkeys without bananas, no apples without humans. Metaphorically speaking that is. The grand plan was already drawn up from simple number to complex numbers, larger numbers are really more complex versions of the 9. But there were 3 great shifts like 18 and 27.
Right now everything that is found that points to this and indicates to a history that goes far further back than the accepted theories can permit is filed away deep into the archives, far from the public eye.
Another such thing which will eventually come to light is their theory of the sun and other stars, and it will show that they are not a gaseous sphere of hydrogen without a solid mass. Much of the data already shows there is something wrong in their model. According to science the inner temperature is very very hot and leads to fusion, but as I’ve pointed out years ago, when you look at sun spots in infrared they show up as dark spots indicating it’s much colder than the outer layer. The source of fuel is not an internal but an external one that causes a reaction and it is a combination of the torus field, electromagnetic, thermodynamics, influx of cosmic particles. The sun in turn influences its planets and the same counts for so called black holes, they all interact. Then we have the hunt for dark matter which doesn’t exist but billions are spend to find it. Zero point energy too will only be understood through a new understanding of magnetism.
Their efforts to create a sun that will continue to self-run will never happen through the present scientific approach that brings with it high risks of radiation etc. Unless they are able to accept that they have been barking at the wrong tree.
The same counts for light, the so called expanding universe and the big bang, three other subjects in which science took the wrong approach and doesn’t dare to step away from.
While there are a handful of scientists and researchers on the right track, they too have been ridiculed, ignored, rejected or even hated. Sadly they are unwilling to work together as their ego is getting in their way.
It is very much the same for religion. While they all have a grain of truth, and all have the same source, the difference is in interpretation due to ego who is unwilling to accept its blindness that they will not accept the unification for which the very word religion stands for.
So it’s up to you to find within you that which unifies all. To know thyself, your true essence which is in all.
Moshiya van den Broek