Abraham (Esther Hicks) has stated that a belief is merely a thought that you continue to think.
What if that thought was based on misinformation or information that was distorted or even inverted? Would the belief remain valid?
People occasionally tell me that they don’t have enough belief in German New Medicine. That’s it’s too good to be true. Well, I get it – but here’s the good news. German New Medicine is biology based not belief based. These are natural laws that have evolved throughout the millenia. Subconscious organic processes (the 5 biological laws discovered by Dr. Hamer) do not depend upon nor require belief anymore than does gravity.
German New Medicine for most is natural and intuitive. It just makes sense. Most resonate with these natural truths yet it takes time for the educated mind as well as the ego to embrace them.
For me, the widespread belief (a thought that I would continue to think) that mother nature could be so flawed that she was continually breaking down and making mistakes just never felt right to me. It felt wrong on so many levels, intellectually, emotionally and spiritually. Yes, spiritually. It was always perplexing to me that if we are truly made in the likeness of our creator – how we could be so flawed.
GNM was the first paradigm that expressed the perfection of our creator. No flaws. No breakdowns. No mis-communications. Simply perfection. This is the 5th biological law of GNM.
What we are served up as fact, i.e. evidence-based medicine, truly requires closer scrutiny as discussed in the August 18, 2104 issue of Sciencenews.org.
What then, is needed to alter belief?
A new thought or observation to replace the old one.
And how might we get there?
We must apply the scientific method wherever possible.
Excerpted and abridged from http://physics.ucr.edu.
“A theory is then the framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.The great advantage of the scientific method is that it is unprejudiced – one does not have to believe a given researcher, one can redo the experiment and determine whether his or her results are true or false. The conclusions will hold irrespective of the state of mind, or the religious persuasion or the state of consciousness of the investigator and or the subject of the investigation. Faith, defined as belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence, does not determine whether a scientific theory is adopted or discarded. A theory is accepted not based on the prestige or convincing powers of the proponent, but on the results obtained through observations and or experiments which anyone can reproduce: the results obtained using the scientific method are repeatable.”
The scientific method is the way we glean truth from lies and distortions. It involves an observation followed by a hypothesis consistent with the observation. We then utilized the hypothesis to make predictions that are tested. Based on the outcome we may further modify our hypothesis until we observe enough consistency that we may call it a theory. Rinse and repeat until there are no discrepancies between the theory and the observation.
So we must commence by opening a new observation. For example, cancer does not seem to spread in everyone. A hypothesis must follow – perhaps secondary cancers are new and sequential biological shocks? And, now a prediction is presented – each individual who manifests a secondary cancer has experienced a correlative shock. After testing, on three levels (Consciousness, cerebrum, organ) does the theory hold?
It’s a choice as to what you believe, don’t believe. Yet sans a new question, observation, choice – you’ll never know what is true for you. Be a skeptic, a naysayer or be a freethinker.
Skepticism as a form of logic was disproved centuries ago by philosophers like Plato & Socrates. The flaw in all skeptical critique is that skepticism is based upon a premise of disbelief. In other words they set about to prove their position of disbelief is correct. Why not start with the premise (like a scientist would) that you don’t know and use reason and observation to find the truth?
Test the 5 biological laws, take them for a spin! That’s what I did and almost ten years in I can emphatically state Dr. Hamer, god bless him, is categorically accurate (even when I insisted otherwise.)
Truth, your truth, my truth is what we see, taste, touch with our senses. Our very experience is what is real.
Personally, I can no longer turn my back and look away from what I have observed first hand.
It’s about breaking the “trance” so many are in. A trance that is only reinforced daily by powerful commercial interests and the establishment media.
I invite everyone to learn the basics of German New Medicine and then step back and observe, hypothesize, predict, test and theorize. Rinse and repeat.
Observe nature’s 5 biological laws in your family’s life. Begin to look at a timeline between the presentation of symptoms and what preceded them. Begin to look at tracks, patterns and correlations. It’s so easy.
So, if you wake up on Monday morning with a cold, ask yourself what was it that ‘stunk’ that you came to terms with on Sunday. If you develop eczema on the outer arms – ask yourself who you are wanting to push out of your life and separate from. If you wake up with a chest cold, what did you come to terms with relative to a territorial aggression on Sunday.
The connections you will soon see are so clear and beyond coincidental – as our individual truth is not conceptual but rather experiential.
In 2004, my parents were going through a less than amicable divorce. It had gotten to the point where one of them was going to have to move out of the house – yet neither of them would budge. This territorial stalemate went on for number of months.
My mothers attorney suggested that, through a court order, my father be physically removed from the house via the sheriff. The day the sheriff was to come to come, unannounced, to remove my father from his home – my mother called me in the morning telling me she could not sleep the night before and that she could not go through with it. She could not have my father forcibly removed from the house.
This territorial aggression was her dhs (conflict shock) – feeling aggressed towards or unsafe within her home, within her territory. That territorial stand-off was responsible for the bronchial program.
At the same, time the thought for my mother of having to leave the house, where would she go, how would she survive – was a concurrent biological conflict shock of heading into a dangerous situation. This was responsible for the branchial arch program (interpreted as lymph tissue.)
Finally, another concurrent biological conflict involved a territorial anger over who will remain in the house which initiated the bile duct program.
In my mom’s scenario a single life event was perceived by her psyche as three biological conflicts; a territorial aggression, heading into a dangerous situation and a territorial anger over property.
One-hundred percent of individuals that have a bronchial program will have experienced a biological conflict-shock (psyche) of an aggression within their territory. One-hundred percent will show a target ring configuration (brain) in the cerebral cortex. One-hundred percent of individuals will demonstrate this on the cellular level (organ) as a bronchial carcinoma or bronchitis. There are no exceptions.
One-hundred percent of right handed individuals that have a lymph node (pharyngeal duct) program will have experienced a biological conflict-shock (psyche) of heading into danger. One-hundred percent will show a target ring configuration (brain) in the cerebral cortex. One-hundred percent of individuals will demonstrate this on the cellular level (organ) as a non-hodgkins lymphoma or mediastinal involvement. There are no exceptions.
One-hundred percent of individuals that have a bile duct program will have experienced a biological conflict-shock (psyche) of an anger over property within their territory. One-hundred percent will show a target ring configuration (brain) in the post sensory cortex. One-hundred percent of individuals will demonstrate this on the cellular level (organ) as a bile duct swelling or occlusion. There are no exceptions.
“If there is one exception to a theory then the theory is invalid.” From Mankind’s First Scientist and Philosopher. The Journal of Theoretics, 2003.
It has been said, many times, many ways … Merry Christmas, oops that’s for my December blog ;’)
It has been said, many times, many ways … that all truth passes through three distinct stages. First, it is ridiculed. Next, it is violently opposed. If you read online, GNM is clearly at these two stages. Third, it is accepted as self-evident. (Arthur Schopener. German philosopher.)
This blog is an educational only blog. The information and services contained herein should not be construed as a diagnosis, treatment, prescription or cure for disease.Those seeking treatment for a specific disease should consult with their physician in order to determine the proper, correct and accepted treatment protocol before using anything that is disclosed on this page. Please visit our Legal page for more information.