Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Psychic Evidence for Atlantis and Lemuria


papageorge1

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Again, I think Cayce had true psychic abilities and was not studied in this other literature. Have you heard people from his society stating that he studied Sclater and Blavatsky or was even influenced by them? Or is this just from detractors? These are things I consider too.

I've already provided a source for you long ago in the previous thread - Edgar Cayce in Context: The Readings: Truth and Fiction by K.P. Johnson. Johnson provides a comprehensive analysis of Cayce's works, both favorable and unfavorable, and he duly notes Blavatsky's influence on Cayce. To think that Cayce had no outside worldly influences is naive. 

You're still missing the whole point that Lemuria originated only with Sclater as a scientific hypothesis.

Edited by Carnivorfox
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Carnivorfox said:

I've already provided a source for you long ago in the previous thread - Edgar Cayce in Context: The Readings: Truth and Fiction by K.P. Johnson. Johnson provides a comprehensive analysis of Cayce's works, both favorable and unfavorable, and he duly notes Blavatsky's influence on Cayce. To think that Cayce had no outside worldly influences is naive. 

You're still missing the whole point that Lemuria originated only with Sclater as a scientific hypothesis.

Map_of_Lemuria.jpg

See here is a map of Lemuria - now how can there be a map of place that doesn't exist? lol

Edited to add

Dang I could have used this in my D & D playing days back in college!

 

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

The Lemuria hypothesized by some physical scientist is irrelevant in my mind to the place being discussed by psychic sources. Names have been adopted by convention and I have heard the name Mu, Hawikiki, whatever in different languages. And the psychic sources are talking about the Pacific (not Indian) Ocean. 

Then those saying Lemuria is in the Pacific are complete frauds. Lemuria is not Mu. Lemuria is from the Indian ocean. Mu is a pretend continent supposedly once in the Pacific.

Frauds and hucksters adopt names from science in order to pretend there is some legitimacy to their shenanigans.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Such is your analysis, Mine is different.

Your analysis is based on the words of frauds. Anyone contacting Lemuria is a fraud - it never existed. If these frauds pretend it is in the Pacific then they are even bigger frauds since it was supposed to be in the Indian Ocean.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Canivorfox pointed out, there is a reason known today as to why fossils of lemurs are found in disconnected parts of the world today.

But when Sclater proposed Lemuria he was living in a different time with a different view of global geology. The proposal for Lemuria was appropriate and in line with the understandings of his time. New information has not shown that the lemur fossils have a different distribution. New information has shown a reason for that distribution which does not require the existence of land bridges. IIRC, Wegener discussed this issue in his treatise on continental drift. He had a proposal for the distribution based on his theory.

I pointed out astrologers cannot predict anything including large planets such as Uranus and Neptune but are certainly willing to add them to their collection of ideas when real sciences find them. Mediums are the same. They can't find anything on their own. They have to pretend, as is the case with Mu and Lemuria, or they have to wait for real sciences to discover things for them. That's what the astrologers did.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hanslune said:

My medium says that indeed Cayce did read and listen to and absorb other people's ideas and then presented those ideas as coming from trances.

My medium says I am now a large ..... :(

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MDagger said:

I think I am beginning to understand.  These places do not exist in our plane of ... existence but on some other plane; most likely imagination.

Well you are partially correct as these so-called New Age things involving ancient history involved dimensions beyond our familiar three-dimensional physical plane. BUT it would not be correct to say these things did not involve the physical plane at all and terrestrial land masses. Our thinking is three-dimensional physical only so these things are hard to grasp. Here is one discussion of Lemuria. I do not claim this to be all correct or clear but bringing it down to our thinking is no mean feat.

Just now, MDagger said:

If I am wrong then I require explanation on how to prove without physical science that something physically existed?

I am afraid the physical proof of the level you are probably looking for is not available. Most of it is lost to oceans and earth changes and cataclysms but remnants are found but they are controversial. Also there is growing body of generally ignored archeology showing signs of human or intelligent involvement at times in the deep past that do not correlate to the mainstream accepted timeframe. See Michael Cremo as just one example (but he is controversial too, of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carnivorfox said:

I've already provided a source for you long ago in the previous thread - Edgar Cayce in Context: The Readings: Truth and Fiction by K.P. Johnson. Johnson provides a comprehensive analysis of Cayce's works, both favorable and unfavorable, and he duly notes Blavatsky's influence on Cayce. To think that Cayce had no outside worldly influences is naive. 

You're still missing the whole point that Lemuria originated only with Sclater as a scientific hypothesis.

Does the A.R.E. (Cayce Study Society) claim Cayce was ever influenced by Blavatsky? I would have to check but I tend to doubt it after reading other versions from them about his background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All BS fringe claims are controversial. The controversy being why any intelligent, reasonably educated person would believe them. 

cormac

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Well you are partially correct as these so-called New Age things involving ancient history involved dimensions beyond our familiar three-dimensional physical plane. BUT it would not be correct to say these things did not involve the physical plane at all and terrestrial land masses. Our thinking is three-dimensional physical only so these things are hard to grasp. Here is one discussion of Lemuria. I do not claim this to be all correct or clear but bringing it down to our thinking is no mean feat.

I am afraid the physical proof of the level you are probably looking for is not available. Most of it is lost to oceans and earth changes and cataclysms but remnants are found but they are controversial. Also there is growing body of generally ignored archeology showing signs of human or intelligent involvement at times in the deep past that do not correlate to the mainstream accepted timeframe. See Michael Cremo as just one example (but he is controversial too, of course).

I appreciate your serious response and attempt at answering. But although in the future other dimensions and such may be discovered I do not believe 'mediums' or whatever can view these nor have any access to them.  Also I don't believe imaginary places reside there.

 

MDagger

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Well you are partially correct as these so-called New Age things involving ancient history involved dimensions beyond our familiar three-dimensional physical plane. BUT it would not be correct to say these things did not involve the physical plane at all and terrestrial land masses. Our thinking is three-dimensional physical only so these things are hard to grasp. Here is one discussion of Lemuria. I do not claim this to be all correct or clear but bringing it down to our thinking is no mean feat.

I am afraid the physical proof of the level you are probably looking for is not available. Most of it is lost to oceans and earth changes and cataclysms but remnants are found but they are controversial. Also there is growing body of generally ignored archeology showing signs of human or intelligent involvement at times in the deep past that do not correlate to the mainstream accepted timeframe. See Michael Cremo as just one example (but he is controversial too, of course).

Michael Cremo is a Hindu creationist, and he has been frequently caught using fraudulent items like OOparts to support his claims. 

 Seeing as the ARE is a Edgar Cayce foundation it is hardly impartial, they already responsible for editing out Cayce's failed predictions from publications. 

 I get you have read many books, but you have only stated that your reason for believing these people is they are complimentary. 

 You have indicated that Lemuria and Mu and such were different languages for the same thing, when Lemuria is a recent debunked scientific hypothesis and Mu was the result of a mistranslation. 

 This isn't different languages, this was failed hypothesis and bad translation skills. 

 If youre impressed they write along similar lines, do you think the Earth is hollow? Under 6000 years old? Flat? 

What is your opinion of Mark Lerner, the Egypt logistics who started out trying to prove Cayce right? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MDagger said:

I appreciate your serious response and attempt at answering. But although in the future other dimensions and such may be discovered I do not believe 'mediums' or whatever can view these nor have any access to them.  Also I don't believe imaginary places reside there.

 

MDagger

I shouldn't have taken so much time for a serious reply then is what I am hearing. Do you believe in any so-called paranormal things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Well you are partially correct as these so-called New Age things involving ancient history involved dimensions beyond our familiar three-dimensional physical plane. BUT it would not be correct to say these things did not involve the physical plane at all and terrestrial land masses. Our thinking is three-dimensional physical only so these things are hard to grasp. Here is one discussion of Lemuria. I do not claim this to be all correct or clear but bringing it down to our thinking is no mean feat.

I am afraid the physical proof of the level you are probably looking for is not available. Most of it is lost to oceans and earth changes and cataclysms but remnants are found but they are controversial. Also there is growing body of generally ignored archeology showing signs of human or intelligent involvement at times in the deep past that do not correlate to the mainstream accepted timeframe. See Michael Cremo as just one example (but he is controversial too, of course).

What a hogwash link about Lemuria. Is there anything at all in that link that is correct? I don't think so.

  • The age is way off.
  • There was no great flood
  • The world has always been the same dimension
  • The DNA claims are baloney
  • There are no million year old drawings - especially in NM
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I shouldn't have taken so much time for a serious reply then is what I am hearing. Do you believe in any so-called paranormal things?

Are there any you don't believe in?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I shouldn't have taken so much time for a serious reply then is what I am hearing. Do you believe in any so-called paranormal things?

What does that have to do with fakers pretending to communicate with a nonexistent Lemuria?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I shouldn't have taken so much time for a serious reply then is what I am hearing. Do you believe in any so-called paranormal things?

What I'm hearing is I should not have bothered taking the time to state I appreciated your serious reply.  I guess we choose what we want to hear.

Sure there may be subtle paranormal things but not to this degree where it is so far-fetched. 

This is the probably the wrong place for this type of discussion so let's agree we disagree on this topic.

MDagger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Does the A.R.E. (Cayce Study Society) claim Cayce was ever influenced by Blavatsky? I would have to check but I tend to doubt it after reading other versions from them about his background.

The Association for Research and Enlightenment is a heavily biased and unreliable source, considering it was founded by Cayce himself; the website is basically one huge love letter to Cayce without any relevant information. I'm still waiting for you to address the relevant point here - there was no Lemuria before 1864.

Edited by Carnivorfox
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carnivorfox said:

The Association for Research and Enlightenment is a heavily biased and unreliable source, considering it was founded by Cayce himself; the website is basically one huge love letter to Cayce. I'm still waiting for you to address the relevant point here - there was no Lemuria before 1864.

What ever you are getting at doesn't mean there wasn't a Lemuria (or whatever name) 20,000 years ago and that modern channels (since 1864) are not telling us things about it!

On your other point, notice how my sources are always biased or worthless and yours are always good and reliable. Hmmm.....I can win any argument with your tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

What ever you are getting at doesn't mean there wasn't a Lemuria (or whatever name) 20,000 years ago and that modern channels (since 1864) are not telling us things about it!

On your other point, notice how my sources are always biased or worthless and yours are always good and reliable. Hmmm.....I can win any argument with your tactics.

My sources are biased too (as pretty much any source will end up being), but at least they have tangible evidence to back them up. Like I've said too many times to count, if Lemuria existed some 20,000 years ago then there should be some record of it prior to 1864.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I am afraid the physical proof of the level you are probably looking for is not available. Most of it is lost to oceans and earth changes and cataclysms but remnants are found but they are controversial. Also there is growing body of generally ignored archeology showing signs of human or intelligent involvement at times in the deep past that do not correlate to the mainstream accepted timeframe. See Michael Cremo as just one example (but he is controversial too, of course).

You are not noting that the existence of a world wide advanced culture would have, by definition, been world wide. While some earth damaging events have occurred only a tiny fraction of the earth's surface has been so altered. So there should be evidence of the this world wide culture. Saying it was all wiped away while both not leaving traces of the agent that did this destruction AND leaving in place all evidence for earlier and contemporary cultures and signs of human endeavour is a bit hard to comprehend.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

*MY* psychic gift for research is real: it was a gift bestowed by Our Past Basset Masters' beneficence and grace. They gave it to me so I could make sure everyone else knows their psychic research is bull****. 

And none of you have ever communed with Our Past Basset Masters besides me, so no one can say I'm wrong, so nertz to any nay-sayers.

--Jaylemurph

Well, my Personal Ascended Master - Bool Krappi - can certainly say you're wrong.

However, since he agrees with your assessment, he won't.

Harte

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

What ever you are getting at doesn't mean there wasn't a Lemuria (or whatever name) 20,000 years ago and that modern channels (since 1864) are not telling us things about it!

On your other point, notice how my sources are always biased or worthless and yours are always good and reliable. Hmmm.....I can win any argument with your tactics.

The geology and geochronology of said location/region NOT supporting what you'd like to believe make such belief meaningless.

cormac

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

You are not noting that the existence of a world wide advanced culture

I don't recall any of the sources I referred to describing a 'world wide' culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, papageorge1 said:

I don't recall any of the sources I referred to describing a 'world wide' culture.

So what was Atlantis then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hanslune said:

So what was Atlantis then?

An advanced civilization that was not world wide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.