Post Linear Participative Evolution and the Challenge of UAP-ET Disclosure

Post Linear Participative Evolution (and the Challenge of UAP-ET Disclosure)

By Giorgio Piacenza

23-01-2023

 

I suspect that most concepts about life, its evolution, and even "participative evolution" (active scientific technological intervention in one’s own evolution or that of other species) remain based on classical, linear, time-forward, ideas about progress. Under this stance, we would consider "older" civilizations" as possessing an exterior or extrinsically-based science (similar to ours),  but they would be more capable than “younger” civilizations...if their scientific progress continuously developed as it has for us for about 500 years. 

 

This expectation might be correct from a causally forward, deterministic, material perspective appropriate for how we normally experience "reality"... in terms of our classical experience. Here, the science of (aware of their awareness) intelligent entities experientially embedded in a material reality becomes a discovery of stable, objective, exterior patterns and a practical (but superficial) use of these patterns. As they engage in this, they will start modifying themselves and their environment. Those entities that have not lost too much of their direct conscious connection with non-physical levels of reality would probably not become excessively dependent on a materialist, determinist science based on exterior objects typically perceived as connected in a time-forward, causal manner. 

 

However, as physically-embedded intelligent life, in general, begins to discover ways to escape from the grip of their discomforting entrapment in physical matter by modifying its patterns intrinsically (rather than extrinsically)...by learning to connect with timeless and spaceless experiential possibilities, perhaps (in practical terms), by making conscious use of retrocausal influences and of more inclusive levels of reality (metaphysically prior to and more fundamental to physicality),  then "participative evolution" could consciously become post-linear in an expanded, post-materialist, scientific sense.

  

Instead of modifying already-established, stable physical patterns by using other already-established, stable physical patterns, they would start using (in an expanded scientific and engineerable way) the source that informs those patterns. And this source of meaningful information would also intrinsically be the source of physical energy itself.

  

At first, these people would realize that (normally non-easily perceived) retrocausality connects the actualization of meaningful non-physical possibilities in what we call our “present” experience because it also cancels out materialist determinism aligned in classical experience with time-forward causation.

 

 

Thus, “post linear participative evolution" may be a more powerful way to consciously actualize vaster possibilities than those contained by reshuffling already established physical patterns and, in this way, deterministically perceived patterns (even if understood as coinciding with future causes in actual experience) would become secondary. They would be able to add new possibilities to the mix of physically coherent patterns. 

  

In this sense, a completely new kind of science of participatory conscious beings would arise as a way to thread and actualize experiential possibilities or potentialities behind any coherent time and space frame (beyond secondary classifications of events such as "before" or "after"). This would include meaningfully - and non-linearly - threading together physical and non-physical reality levels…a deadly serious science of experiential ontological combinations requiring strict rules, protection mechanisms, and a higher developmental level of consciousness attempting to secure responsible participants. A completely different ball game. 

Is humanity ready to consider this science or to manage it responsibly when we still use exterior, regular, stable, physical patterns not just to free ourselves from impediments but also to abusively control each other?  

We have a truly unprecedented - absolutely necessary - worldwide conversation and coordination ahead of us if this idea of a "post-linear participative evolution" is correct and even necessary to acknowledge in order to approximate a better understanding of what non-human intelligences behind UAP may be up to, why they are as they are, with multiple agendas, semi-elusive, and so on. 

The challenge is even greater at a time when a post "nuts & bolts only," ET-multidimensional disclosure/confirmation is just beginning to be taken seriously by conventional cultural influencers especially when we are still gearing to weaponize DNA modification, AI, and any new weaponizable products that advanced conventional physical science can pump out amidst a fragmented and Democracy-challenged human landscape facing the convergence of mutually reinforcing and anthropocentrically-generated, global-scale "polycrises."  

 

Giorgio Piacenza