Pure Science

When we talk about science we think about PURE SCIENCE, not about the compost heap of theories that is so common everywhere in present days. We think about the pure science of the Great Work, the science of medieval alchemists, Paracelsus’s or Paul of Tarsus’s pure science; a pure science like the one which was used by Jesus or Moses to perform wonders...

Pure science is direct, vivid and real experience. Pure science is superior ethics, analysis at the service of the BEING. Science nowadays is a false science, a science which is full of personal interest, a science that does not respect human beings’ spiritual principles, a science in which the end justifies the means, even when this implies the physical and psychological pain of any living creature, a science that justifies the most terrible atrocities with the word “progress.”

Moreover, today’s science is a science which dogmatically expresses a thesis and then, later, expresses the opposite in a typically arrogant way. It is a science full of contradictions

Paradoxically, it says that it only believes in what it can see and, at the same time, it firmly defends absurd hypotheses that have never been demonstrated.

This is modern science...

They are making some very "nice" comments; the materialistic science invents new hypotheses everyday; for example: they have established a very curious and quite ridiculous chain regarding our possible ancestors. The shark appears as the king of this chain and, according to the materialistic anthropologists, the lizard is the next descendant. A ridiculous theory, isn’t it? They then continue with the famous opossum, a creature similar to the crocodile but a little more evolved, as they emphasise. And from there, following the course of the great chain of wonders, they pass to a certain little animal which has been given great importance in these times. I am referring, in an emphatic way, to the lemurid or lemur, as they call it. They attribute a discoidal placenta to it; this question is rejected by the very zoologists themselves. We find tremendous contradictions in these turns of the materialistic science. And they continue by saying that from this little animal, which could have existed around a hundred and sixty million years ago, comes the monkey and then the gorilla. In this chain the gorilla is our immediate ancestor - man’s ancestor. Some anthropologists refer to the poor mouse when dealing with this matter and even want to include it within the chain as well.

How? In what way? They seek similarities; they want to make us believe that the shape of the shark’s mouth and head is the origin of other mammals, including our brother, the mouse. Saying that a feature which is similar in two faces may be the basis to state a possible ancestor is, in reality, as empirical as saying that man was made of mud, as accepting the literal sense of the sentence without realising that it is, in reality, something symbolic. But where are the links? How is it possible that the lizard appears from the shark in a moment or through some centuries, just like that? Millions of years have passed and sharks are still there, quite calm, and nobody has ever seen that new lizards are born from a species of sharks, either in the Atlantic or in the Pacific. And yet, aren’t they, ironically, the gentlemen of the materialistic science, those who say that they only believe in what they see, those who do not accept anything that they have not seen? What a terrible contradiction! They believe in their hypotheses and have never seen them. These very modern scientists are the ones who oppose the subject of the superior dimensions of nature and of the cosmos. But why? Just because their minds are decrepit, degenerated; they cannot see beyond their noses; that is obvious. The existence of a fourth coordinate, a fourth vertical, cannot be denied, but it disturbs the materialists. However, Einstein accepted the fourth dimension.

In mathematics nobody can deny the existence of the fourth vertical. But the materialistic people of this time do not even accept such a fact; they do not believe that there may be another dimension or superior dimensions in nature. They want all of us to enclose ourselves, by force, in Euclid’s three-dimensional world. Due to this false and absurd position that they are adopting, the advance of physics has been completely halted. At this time there should already exist cosmic ships which would be able to travel through infin ity, but such yearning is not possible as long as physics continues to be bottled up within Euclid’s threedimensional dogma. It will not take long until these dimensions of nature can be seen through very delicate optical devices. But until that day comes, we, gnostic anthropologists, can be sure that we will have to bear the same scorn as Pasteur when he talked about his microbes. But one day these dimensions will be perceptible by means of optical devices and the scorn will finish. For the moment, as I was saying, they are trying to do experiments to transform sound waves into images; when this is achieved we will be able to see all the evolutive and involutive processes of nature, and then the antichrist of false science will be left naked before the solemn verdict of public consciousness.

So, there are two sorts of science: profane science and pure science. In pure science there are no theories but facts. If I told you that the Count of Saint Germain lived during the 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, and that he is still alive, you would think that I am mad. I know the Count of Saint Germain and I testify that this is true. He is alive, yes; his life is maintained by a science that you do not know, by pure science, the Super-Man’s science, the science known to the extraterrestrials who travel across infinite space, the science of the lords of life and death, the science of those who have opened their inner minds... Those who have not yet opened their inner minds are only based on theories, on hypotheses that have not been demonstrated. Why should we accept all the materialistic utopias? Why should we accept the dogma of evolution or the three-dimensional dogma? Why should we live inside the world of hypotheses? Gnostic scientists have different systems to carry out research; we have special disciplines that enable the human being to activate certain latent faculties of the brain, certain senses of perception which are completely unknown to materialistic science and which allow us to verify, by ourselves, all of these questions...

Comments (0)