Posted by Roberta Grimes • November 03, 2018 • 18 Comments
Afterlife Research, Quantum Physics, The Source, Understanding Reality
The consequences of scientists’ need to believe our material brains create consciousness are manifold and ridiculous. It is not much of an exaggeration to say that scientists’ obsession with materialism has so hobbled scientific inquiry as to make any further progress impossible! So why do they still cling to their materialist dogma? More and more, their problem seems to be that for the university departments and the peer-reviewed journals this has become a binary contest. Either reality is a great machine that spontaneously arose from a dot in what they envision as a Big Bang, or Jehovah hand-created the universe six thousand years ago in less than a week. For scientists, it is one or the other. And since the other is obviously wrong, they must pursue their matter-only version of reality despite its cost in time and treasure.
The most peculiar example of the endless blind alleys this stubbornness has created for them is the question of whether human beings have free will. For scientists to maintain their certainty that consciousness is created by the brain, they are required to treat as settled science the theory that human free will is impossible. You cannot believe your lying eyes! You didn’t actually choose what to wear this morning or what to have for dinner tonight. No, every decision of every kind made by each of the more than a hundred billion human beings who ever have lived has been not the product of individual thought, but instead each decision has been an inevitable consequence of the Big Bang. Scientists even are figuring out in which part of the brain our stubborn illusion that we possess free will must be located.
You are laughing now. The notion that people who have been educated through the Ph.D. level could be sure that such nonsense is true is ridiculous! But their problem is that if we have free will, then their whole materialist assumption is wrong. And that would mean that a century of scientific research must be re-evaluated, and a lot of it will go out the window.
As I report in The Fun of Dying, it has repeatedly been demonstrated that our brains begin the muscular and nervous preparations to move a digit about 350 milliseconds before study subjects report having made the decision to move that digit. Of course, this fact is yet more evidence that our nonmaterial minds make these decisions and send them to our material brains, which begin to act and only then make us consciously aware of our intention to move. There is a simple explanation if our brains receive consciousness. If they generate consciousness, no explanation seems possible.
This blind insistence by scientific gatekeepers that consciousness must be created by the brain despite a growing body of evidence that something very different is going on has gradually tied mainstream science into knots. The century-long battle between scientists and religionists has largely come down to their disparate theories on the origin of species; and it is here that scientists have begun to confront important new information that may at last require them to question their foundational materialist theory. We know that the Biblical notion of a six-day creation has to be wrong! And it appears now that the same can be said of the mechanical theory of Darwinian evolution.
Let’s first summarize here once again what open-minded researchers have come to understand about consciousness:
So everything that scientists believe is material and imbued with a past possesses neither of these characteristics. As Nobel Laureate Albert Einstein said, “Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” Einstein also said, “The distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” Einstein died more than sixty years ago! He and Max Planck discovered what independent researchers are only now confirming. Yet even today, the mainstream scientific community that reveres both Planck and Einstein refuses to acknowledge the implications of their three most important discoveries: that consciousness is primary, that nothing is material, and that time’s arrow is an illusion.
This ongoing scientific insistence that consciousness is created in the brain, even despite a century of evidence that consciousness must precede matter, has led to an ever-increasing inability of mainstream scientists to understand much of anything. The century-long battle between scientists and religionists has largely come down to their disparate theories on the origin of species, and it is here that scientists have begun to confront important new information that may at last require them to question their foundational materialist theory. We know that the Biblical theory of a six-day creation cannot be true! And it is clear now that the same must be said of the mechanical theory of Darwinian evolution.
Darwin’s theory of evolution is so weak that an industry has sprung up to poke holes in it, perhaps with the thought on the part of Christians that once Darwinism is discredited we will be left with just Jehovah and the Book of Genesis. That is nonsense of course, but these religion-inspired attacks on a weak scientific theory have been useful to independent researchers who are trying to understand how reality works! And by now, even scientists can see that Darwin’s insight that species do evolve was only an inkling of what is turning out to be a very complex process.
The upper-level dead have consistently told us that the universe is not nearly as large nor as old as scientists believe it to be. They say it has been fine-tuned as a place for eternal minds to inhabit bodies so we can push against negativity in order to better grow spiritually; and now, amazingly, a new scientific discovery has revealed a crucial moment in that fine-tuning process. “In a massive genetic study, senior research associate at the Program for the Human Environment at Rockefeller University Mark Stoeckle and University of Basel geneticist David Thaler discovered that virtually 90 percent of all animals on Earth appeared at right around the same time. More specifically, they found out that 9 out of 10 animal species on the planet came to being at the same time as humans did some 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. ‘This conclusion is very surprising,’ says Thaler, ‘and I fought against it as hard as I could.’”
Of course he fought it! After what scientists believe was at least three billion years of separate evolution by natural selection of the more than eight million animal species that now inhabit this planet, we have just learned that nine out of ten of those species achieved their modern forms in a very recent eye-blink of time, and just as we humans achieved our own modern form. Absent some scientific explanation that is not apparent and seems unlikely, this is one development that could not have happened unless indeed we were seeing Consciousness preparing the earth as a place for you and me to grow spiritually. We will reserve final judgment. But for those of us whose minds are not stuck in failed materialist science nor in ancient Bible stories, the wonder of seeing concrete evidence that what the dead tell us really is true feels like beating back millennia of ignorance and beginning at last to glimpse a rising sun.
18 thoughts on “Evolution Evolves”
I’ve long now been persuaded of the notion that we experience incarnate life in an environment ‘fine-tuned’ to provide what we humans need and using bodies that are the latest versions of an LTE human form.
But in my view humankind looks set to remain largely ignorant of even such simple notions for some time yet and understanding anything more complex looks unlikely in the near future – however that term might be defined.
Dear Mac, what is an “LTE” human form? “Lost to Evolution”? “Let’s Talk Eating”? Or maybe just based on a cell phone??
I think it is important to remember that in reality there is no time, and from the point of view of eternal beings not now in bodies a whole earth-lifetime is a relative eye-blink. There are plentiful signs just in this new century that progress is being made in enlightening humankind after millennia when we saw little to no change at all, so I am pretty confident now that this will be the century. At the same time, those of us who have grown old in this work are now being asked to choose our successors so we know that we’ll be watching from the bleacher seats!
Thank you so much for this latest post. I am so grateful for the work you have done and are continuing to do. I’ve been listening to your interviews with your guests for the past several years. The interview that is working in me to good effect at this time is the one with Clif Taylor. I am currently reading his book “Connect”.
I think that scientists—or anyone for that matter—insisting that the human brain is the origin of consciousness is a form of idolatry. I am extremely grateful for the teachers in my life—both seen and unseen—who are helping me to broaden my perspective and deepen my understanding. Two of these teachers are Stewart Edward White—the author of “The Unobstucted Universe” and his wife Betty. How Stewart Edward White’s books came into my awareness is a testament to teachers and friends who continue on despite having experienced mortal death.
The following discussion of the relationship between the human brain and consciousness is an excerpt from Stewart Edward White’s 1937 book “The Betty Book”. This particular excerpt is one that I return to over and over again to help me loosen up my beliefs when my brain clamors to be in the driver’s seat.
* * * BEGIN QUOTE * * *
“Another angle of the same subject was well expressed much later, and though it is a bit of a digression, it seems worth insertion here. It was one of the few instances when a definite personality named himself as the source of the philosophical material. I will transcribe literally, as a further matter of interest as to the form in which we record these things.
BETTY: Some one named Willard (fictitious name here).
WILLARD: I am working for the whole scheme, and am interested in its followers, too.
MYSELF: We are interested, too, but we are greatly in the dark as to what it is all about.
WILLARD: Curious thing, that: and a great drawback in getting the most desirable intelligent workers. The stiffness of the humanly educated mind is a great problem to overcome. It is like a spoiled child. The constant humoring of this self-assertive side, the keeping it quiet enough to
communicate with the real person within is what makes the whole thing so difficult.
That is the crux of the whole difficulty. Heaven forbid that I should decry the human brain, but it should be proportioned. The eternal self must be developed as a fit controlling power. In trying to act DIRECTLY on the highest—call it organ—possessed by man, his eternal spirit, we are constantly interfered with by the more developed, the more easily
developed side of him which clamors, INSISTS on translating every instinct into its own language and limiting it to its own experience and comprehension; insists we shall go no farther than the facile ready-made symbols its world education sanctions. We have to ignore it as much as possible, keeping it quiet by systematically baffling its efforts at restriction. Meanwhile, under this anaesthetic we work directly,
stimulating the enduring part, trying to develop it. It should be the dominating part of man.
When this has been developed to its proper proportion, then the intelligence will have its innings again. The intelligence is an essential part of the whole, but it simply must be quieted down and made flexible in any way possible, in order that we may give insight beyond its comprehension.
I am trying to give this side of it in order to satisfy your natural intelligence as to this thwarting process. Let the big organ develop naturally and take control. See if the whole man will not be better proportioned.
I just had a notion I might be able to get this over to you a little more clearly. Get it?
MYSELF: As I understand you, for a time you purposely thwart the curiosities and workings of the mind in order to apply development work directly. When the eternal side has been developed up in proportion to an equality with the intelligence, then the latter will be turned loose again for the purpose of understanding what it is about.
WILLARD: Yes; but expressed in terms of your substance rather than mine.
The main idea of the whole thing is that the thwarting process is in order to develop beyond the comprehension of the brain, not to bring the enduring organs merely up to an equality with the brain: to work away beyond it, assuming at last control of the brain. The brain then becomes a functioning part of the general organ, which then enables comprehension. When it is adjusted to its proper proportion, then it will, later, be the channel for manifesting the level of development to others. We over here cannot work through the brain very well because of its great educational and perceptional restrictions. Don’t be so OFFENDED in your intellect. Give us a chance. We won’t do more harm than present your precious intellect something for it to work on for the rest of its natural life. Leave it in soak and keep it flexible, and we can go on. It’s BOUND to be satisfied later. When this becomes the leader of your intellect, it MUST immediately react on it; it MUST, just as the blood goes through your body to nourish all the parts. I thought maybe I could make you see the point; it’s always a great stickler. That’s why I came.
Working only in the limited knowledge of the brain is slow business. It takes generations to develop new respectable symbols.
BETTY: They let him in because they thought he knew how you felt.
WILLARD: Do you get the idea now? Beyond what you can understand, explain by the brain. If that is what we want to get to you first, how COULD we get it through your brain without the slowest of evolution?
MYSELF: I can see that as to the individual. How about getting it to the world? You have to use written symbols of the brain for that.
WILLARD: To get some things to the world you must yourself get the thing many times multiplied. No strength otherwise. There must be a large submerged foundation for the lighthouse. It is too puny at present to give out; too puny to be bountiful.
MYSELF: That all sounds reasonable and satisfying. But how can we best co-operate, if for a time our intelligence is supposed to go stand in a corner? Is it a matter of contact alone?
WILLARD: Let it go for the present with the development of your region of feelings, susceptibility,—AGGRESSIVE feeling. Let it go at that. That is the other side of the scale from the brain function. But there is a difference between the sloppy, sentimental, emotional thing commonly known as feeling, and the feeling of strength and stability that is absorbent of wisdom.
BETTY: (confidentially) You see, we haven’t any words around here for it. Maybe there are some, but they don’t come. I’m very bad on words, because they get so far away.
WILLARD: The more you live in abandonment of the heart, the nearer you come to it.
* * * END QUOTE * * *
LTE? = Long Term Evolution! It’s one of those over-used, infuriating acronyms increasingly deployed as an alternative to simple communication using full words!
I’d love to engage further on your blog topic, Roberta, but the weblog format is a pain in the derriere. Maybe you could run the same theme over on ALF as a discussion/debate thread and maybe some of the contributors here might be persuaded to join us all there.
But perhaps they don’t know ALF exists…. (afterlifeforums.com) Maybe you could invite ’em again?
Thank you, Keith! This is rather long, but some might want to read it. And I recall the Whites very fondly! They also did The Unobstructed Universe, which is where I read the first accurate explanation of how reality is structured from the viewpoint of the dead… and it was from the mind of a young soldier of the Great War!
Dear Mac, why don’t you try copying out the blog post above and making a new thread on ALF? I often think of cross-posting there, but I’m deep in writing another Fun book so I generally don’t get around to it.
Better it came from you, Roberta. 🙂
Roberta, Can only agree with your conclusions about the insistence of scientists to pretend that materialism is the only possible paradigm, and would add that they have two important motivations for continuing such nonsense:
1) They all feed off of their professional organizations and government bureaucracies for funding, so they could not possibly risk jeopardizing their careers and income by admitting it does not always work;
2) Those with guilt for any number of misdeeds must hope there would be no God to punish them once their body is dead–it’s ego protection.
You accurately described that part of the science community which relies on the Newtonian deterministic clock-works universe which leaves no room for free will. In addition, those scientists who fully embrace quantum mechanics jump to the opposite extreme from Newton to hold that it’s physically impossible to pin down the existence of elementary particles thru their location and momentum measurements, so we all must accept that everything is ultimately unknowable and thus inherently indeterministic or random–and these scientists thereby again eliminate the possibility of free will, despite their personal experience of routine daily choice in living. Intellectual hypocrites of the worst sort, and that’s why I suspect that part of their motivation for denying God in favor of materialism is driven by personal guilt.
Hello Jack! Yes, it is by and large a financial thing for scientists. They need to be able to keep the materialist dogma that has governed their careers going strong until the kids are through school at least. Until retirement? Even better! I am told that some young physics students actually are told – even to this day – that if they want to study anything not material they needn’t bother to get a degree because they will never get a job.
Your comment about quantum physicists going off the opposite far end of the pier from Newtonian physicists is interesting! I do know from personal interactions that at least some quantum physicists are shocked by our practical interpretation of their discipline, and by some of what Dr. Planck said. Physics has so deeply devolved now into the study of the miniscule using mathematical equations that they seem to be literally afraid of stepping back and even glimpsing a macro reality!
I don’t know whether or to what extent God even factors in for them. All the physicists that I can recall meeting lately are emphatic atheists, needing to use atheism to even further enforce their cherished materialist dogma!
Great discussion on religious dogma – and scientific blindness. There is a revelation called URANTIA book, that really bridges our fractured, dark world. ( Free download on the internet…. ) https://bigbluebook.org/49/1/
Thank you, Jon! I hear about the URANTIA book fairly often – people will say that what I teach reminds them of it. So then I cheerfully say, “So it must be right!” In fact, I don’t feel that I can read anything but original and older materials now, for fear that I will think I have gotten some point from the original materials that I really picked up from a book written more recently using someone else’s interpretation of those old materials. But others here may want to read it.Thank you very much for sharing it!
Thanks for this very interesting message! For a Seeker who finds what I have sought elsewhere(spiritualism, Swedenborgianism, other and traditional religions—and of course, materialism) sometimes peppered with some truth, but not quite intellectually and/or spiritually satisfying—this information is helpful and is now part of my electronic research library.
Thanks again! Rod Johnson
Wow, Rod, thank you – that is an accolade! I was quite rigorous as I did all this core research, and I tend to think now that all seekers are that way: you don’t want to be given half-baked or surface truths and asked to believe them anyway. It’s lovely to know that I am hitting the mark for you!!
The free will conjecture and debate are interesting. This exercise has been going on since way before what we now think of as “scientists” got a hold of it. St. Augustine spent a lot if time on it. The Ancient Greek philosophers too. it’s very difficult to measure. Surely our experience in this temporal realm FEELS like it’s guided by free will, but undoubtedly many of us are more guided through our days by habit.
In many cases, the relationships we have, good ones and bad ones, have much more power over our decisions than our own wills. Is a choice made out of fear of consequences really made of our own free will?
But free will invokes a cosmic perspective that goes so far beyond the choice to perform a physical act. And it’s only with this perspective that the issue has any real importance. What are we here for? Why did we choose this time amd this space. Why did we take this particular “mission” and what is our intention for the outcome?
Of course these are not material questions because thay assume a higher existence. That infinite existence, that overarching Consciousness is the source of the will that is being done. I am not sure but I think these choices are easier and more interesting to measure than whether my own brain beat my hand to the punch or not.
Great points, Mike! We are told by those that we used to think were dead that for us to have free will is in fact essential to the purpose of our lives on earth, since if we cannot choose love over fear then we cannot make spiritual progress. But that doesn’t mean that we are always consciously aware of making deliberate decisions!
Every decision that we make is in fact made by our vast eternal minds – our superconscious, which clueless materialists call our subconscious. There are three main categories into which each decision that we make must fall:
1) Some decisions are entirely automatic, which is how we can turn a doorknob or button a coat or operate a cellphone or even form a simple sentence! Our superconscious minds learn how to do these things for this lifetime in early childhood, and then for the rest of our lives they take our bodies through the steps while our conscious minds are occupied with other things.
2) Some decisions of necessity engage our conscious minds. This is where the “deciding when to move a finger” problem comes in, since our superconscious makes the decision and then lets our body know about it before making our conscious mind aware of it. The way that most of these supposedly conscious decisions are made, it is clear that conscious awareness has a much reduced priority! Our awareness is often the last to know, for example, when we recoil from a hot burner or spit out spoiled milk or avoid an auto accident just in time.
3) Finally, there are the only decisions that really matter from an eternal perspective, which are the actions we take in a spiritual crisis and whether and how to choose love over fear. These are the decisions that our spirit guides help us to make, and we receive their counsel while our bodies sleep: they won’t make the decisions for us, but they do try hard to help our superconscious – hampered as it is while we are in bodies by the ego-crazies that govern too many of our lives – to see beyond selfish ego and always make the right decisions. And whether our decisions are right or wrong, most people are so spiritually clueless that they will not until after they transition home and review their lives with their guides even be aware that decisions were made.
Please never forget this essential truth: whatever the question, love is always the answer!
Thank you, Roberta! Your original post is about religionists, too, so I just want to add that the urge back toward God because we never really “left” God is, or should be, a motivator in understanding the nature of “things.” The western religious view of God as a major manufacturer who cranks out souls, crankily sticks them in bodies manufactured (presumably in another part of the heavenly factory) in order to test their dedication is a very weird idea. Yet it is precisely what many western religions teach and what devotees seem to prefer. We’re told God “loves” us but this is confusing in this concept.
God isn’t much of a God is the relationship is that of manufactured and manufacturer.
It’s more difficult only because we’re brainwashed to understand that God is everything and everywhere (omnipresent) and we are intrinsically connected to God’s presence. This is what Jesus was trying to tell a 1st century materialist world and IT was the good news.
The main problem with our religions is that we are taught not only fear, but also separation, and then fear of the Other so we fear whatever is on the other side of all those separations. We are taught that there is separation between us and God, separation between the good and the bad, among seven billion individual entities, and even separation within God (i.e. the Trinity). But in fact, there is only God! God is not just omnipresent, but God is omni-existing – nothing else but God exists.
So all that’s needed now is a way to neutralise the influence that mainstrean church has had – and continues to have – on western civilisation? And offer an acceptable alternative set of beliefs or – better yet – simple facts.
piece o’ wet! 🙂