| |
|
Many works talk of the passage, but ZetaTalk is the first and only
to speak to 2003 [Note: see 2003
Date
explanation]. We are known for our bluntness, often
complained about, for one. Additionally, many groups are reluctant to
cause human pain, as the reality that they and their loved ones will die,
often painfully, and their lives as lived today hollow, their leadership
lying to them, is painful. Thus, they blunt the truth, and
clothe it in reassurances of better times to come. We have courage, and
are working with our emissary Nancy as we are because of her courage.
Comparisons to ZetaTalk are constantly being made. As we have pointed out,
at least half of all claimed messages from higher or other
sources are false. The perpetrators know this, are consciously
aware they are writing a fiction, and enjoying the attention they are
getting or the money they are getting if they are a disinformation artist
for hire. Beyond the deliberate falsehoods perpetrated, there are the
valid or semi-valid messages. Of these, the contactee is often mixing in
their own fear or prejudices, coloring the message. Of these, the aliens
communicating with the contactee or channel may have their own reluctance
to announce the truth, as the coming Earth changes will be horrific for
most of mankind. Then there are those valid messages relayed, which are
confused as to context. As with Cayce, who describes Earth changes the
week of the rotation stoppage, or during the hour of the shift, not
after the shift itself. Why would he do this? Cayce and those
communicating with him felt that mankind would be most aware, and relating
Cayce's message to their situation, during those times. So
those comparing ZetaTalk to Cayce find differences, not understanding
this.
Our general advice to mankind is to evaluate other
communications in accordance with their proven validity. Nancy
has been stating much, lately, that ZetaTalk has a track record. Scallion
too, and Cayce. If a site is not to be assumed to be just so much hot air,
and worthless, then it must have predicted, regularly, and be
found valid! If not, then please don't bother asking us for a comparison
to garbage!