2012 ~ Not the End ~ Division between 2 TimeLines

reply to post by princeguy


Would you post snippets and direct link to this evidence that "SCIENCE PROVES THERE WILL BE A DIVISION BETWEEN TWO TIME LINES"? I think the claim itself (i.e. science proves) is awkward, but okay.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Kovenov
reply to post by princeguy

 

Would you post snippets and direct link to this evidence that "SCIENCE PROVES THERE WILL BE A DIVISION BETWEEN TWO TIME LINES"? I think the claim itself (i.e. science proves) is awkward, but okay.

Thanks.

I agree that it is awkward, because there is no way to prove this. If you are really interested you can scour through his website looking for info. But there is A lot of info.

www.stankovuniversallaw.com...

Nice post OP! There has been a lot of conjecture and theorizing about ascension. Having read a few books on the subject (Mark Borax, Gregg Braden etc.) I too feel that the split timeline, or divergence theory is plausible. The idea that the timeline is splitting is actually that, the claim by some new age spiritualists that the 1987 Harmonic Convergence is indeed leading to a change in vibration and frequency of the planet. This new vibration, leading to the 5th dimension is accessible by those that are 'tuning in'. I for one feel very optimistic as I can see the benefit and growth potential for our species if we can split into a timeline that will leave behind war, famine, materialism, consumerism etc. There really is a way to exist in growth without those things. We need to change our perceptions and desires. Seek out fulfillment through communication, expression, kindness and love, leave behind the idea that we need to charge for it

Peace and light, I hope this post helps bring confidence and peace to those that read it. That truly is the necessity at this juncture. You need to be confidant and at peace with yourself that you are ready for change. I think they call it faith ... but I have a difficult time with that word

The many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics:

en.wikipedia.org...


Such polls have been taken at other conferences, for example, in response to Sean Carroll's observation, “As crazy as it sounds, most working physicists buy into the many-worlds theory”[81] Michael Nielsen counters: “at a quantum computing conference at Cambridge in 1998, a many-worlder surveyed the audience of approximately 200 people… Many-worlds did just fine, garnering support on a level comparable to, but somewhat below, Copenhagen and decoherence.”