posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:18 AM
Originally posted by RisenAngel77
reply to post by CosmicWaterGate
Any chance you can provide link or source to this? I was reading earlier that frequencies can be used to shatter objects aswell. You know how when a
singer sings in a high pitched tone and shatters a glass? That is because the singer managed to match the frequency of the glass.
Such weaponry is bound to exist in a similar way.
Everything has it's own frequency including solid objects. I think that is another key to unlocking psychokinesis or telekinesis as well.
I replied to your thread long ago, and genuinely love the idea of something like this helping us, but in what you ask for above here, there are many
of us who have replied to you with links that you have simply ignored. Of course frequencies and vibrations can do what you and the person your
replied to, as well, described. And many, including a scientist in biogenentics have replied to your thread and outlined the dangers to this while
you proposed the most beautiful of uses........I don't dispute nor intend to disregard the possible good in this, but I do call you on your ignoring
the other side of it, and what has been represented in a thread you started about it.So where did you go on this? Did you get vibrated into
nonexistence or what?
The other thing I would like to mention here, other than obviously things like this can be good, or very, very bad,
I heartily object to the "hand of God" refererence here. Heartily.
Probably you can change the consciousness, or mood or mentality of the moment, with said vibrational technology, but DNA. or even or especially the
"essence" of your biology, and whatever that means, which is a whole other thread, is totally up for grabs....just because some sounds can put you to
sleep or improve your mood somewhat doesn't mean anything more than that......
"science" and the implications of what it means to DNA, and therefore, the essence, or full scope, or even soul of a being are a very complex,
multilayered issue. And nothing quoted or referenced here has anything to do with that, so I am very critical of what you propose, as it is
inherently judgementally dangerous to the population at large. And the very small, as well.
edit on 7-7-2012 by tetra50 because: (no reason