Predictions and Responsibility

By Nico Cost, for GlobalSouth.co

I am not the only one who makes predictions. There are quite a few NATO generals who have been making predictions for years. However, the impact of their predictions has quite a different character and result than the predictions I make.

Anyone can and does look into the future. We all have “a line with above”. The trick is to be able to receive the messages without wanting to influence them. The less you know about something, the more pure a message can be received. The less interested you are, the quieter your thoughts can be.

What you are looking at are the scenarios that can unfold. This is not about what you think, but what you “feel”. Not what you reason out, but what you “let come to you”. You can call it clairvoyance, but it’s not that special. Everyone is clairvoyant to some degree, just as we are all slightly autistic and can run. Some are naturally a little better at it than others, the talent. Some are more conscious and active about it than others, the practitioner.

What you predict is the most plausible scenario at hand. The scenarios come from the collective consciousness and our collective intentions are guiding this. Human beings have a certain creative power, so we may be careful what we wish for. When you are angry you create a different energy than when you are happy. And with many, we are very powerful.

However, the future is not fixed because everything is always in motion and we make conscious and unconscious choices that can change things. And because predictions can therefore not come true, we bear some responsibility for our judgments. Because there are plenty of people who blindly rely on predictions and then can come out quite deceived. This becomes serious when lives are at stake.

A lady once asked me if I would predict when she would leave this Earth. Aside from whether or not to believe I could make such a prediction correctly, answering such a question carries quite a responsibility. If the future is not fixed, then anything can still happen. What kind of a life would she have if, for example, she knew she had ten years to live? Will she plan her life accordingly? And then if it doesn’t pan out? Where the probability of a prediction not coming into fruition is relatively high, because scenarios become more widely divergent as time passes in our universe.

For the sake of my responsibility, I did not answer her question with a time frame. Instead I asked why she wanted to know. She was tired of life. So it was not about how long she lived, but about when she could leave. So that’s a whole different conversation. From forecaster to spiritual teacher. Rarely is it about predictions, always it is about “the meaning of life”.

And even in such a conversation, I have to be aware that we are different. I am not a shining example. I do not have all the wisdom. Everything that I think and feel is “right” belongs to me and not necessarily to the other person. All the messages I receive “from above” are primarily for me. And more importantly, I must realize that while the messages are pure, I as a transmitter am by no means. The messages have to be crammed through my personal filters, and you can bet that these filters cause clouding.

Edgar Cayce was called the sleeping prophet. He could diagnose the sick as a psychic medium and clairvoyant. Thousands of cases have been documented and there is ample evidence that he was good at this work. Cayce was also very religious, so all his predictions had to pass through this filter. When we are firmly convinced of something, our whole being will resist even a pure message. We will then try to capture that message in the construct of our thinking.

Thinking prevails in our current society. At least this is how I experience it in the West. However, thinking is always a construct that deviates from real life. If we could “feel” more, i.e. surrender to life, establish that “line with the above”, we could live a more pleasant life, together. In that sense, it would be good if everyone learned to predict a little more. Which means that everyone would be allowed to tune in more to “the upper world”.

This predicting is very different from what those NATO generals do. Very different from what politicians, journalists, scientists, managers and NGOs do. Because these folks predict things based on what they want to come out. They always have interests in the outcome, big interests. And because they make those predictions from their thinking, they usually don’t come true. Things always turn out slightly different anyway.

They don’t take responsibility for the consequences of their predictions. If such a NATO general predicts another success and again it does not come true, there is no one to call the general (how does such a figure get to such a position you wonder) to account. Because a wrong prediction from such a position soon costs thousands of lives.

The bigger the numbers, the more impersonal it becomes. Such a NATO general never physically sees the consequences of wrong predictions. At most, it costs his or her position, but just as much he or she is promoted up in the us-knows-us network. For them, it is like a computer simulation. As long as a glass of wine is served with the elaborate dinner.

A while back I spoke to a son of an acquaintance. He had gone into the military. I asked him if he had a choice if his leadership wanted to deploy him to a war zone. He didn’t have that choice, of course. He indicated that he also took the training courses for a reason; he did want to put them into practice. I kept my mouth shut, even though I saw the different scenarios before my eyes unfolding. Hopefully for him it won’t come to that. For all of us, actually.