Friday, March 14, 2014

Clif High - Focus Sessions

I immediately thought, "Well, this is going to be interesting..." (Considering how closely involved I have been with following the webbots forecasts and that I was also a positive catalyst for a review of the code and data output last year)

And it was... an analogy could be that this was like biting into a thick rich slice of mud cake and then reaching out with your teaspoon only to find that someone has just taken the side scoop of vanilla ice cream away from you and then the rest of the cake along with them.

Via Focus Sessions, 13 March 2014



2:00 PM
Q. Clif High of the Webbot technology believes he can forecast the future based on language of today. Can you see if this technology is true? 
A. I do see this as true.  The image I get is one of the the Internet and all of our connectedness (visually looks like a globe with a spiderweb surrounding it.)  As the spiderweb looks to grow and become more dense, it almost looks like it comes alive.  The enormous amount of communication that occurs creates some kind of "virtual" living entity.  I see it as an encrypted voice, and Clif High has learned how to decipher it.

Q. Is there an alien influence behind it? 
A.  I don't see it as an alien influences, but definitely a guiding force.. Let me explain... I see that Clif High had a vision for Webbot technology.  It started with a concept, and grew from there.  He definitely had challenges, but it was like something intervened.  When he didn't know where to go, he would get random inspiration.  It is coming through to me as some kind of intuition that he was able to tap into.  I also see that he had many "ah ha" moments along the way, where he couldn't even explain how he knew what to do, but he did.  (Possibly this was some higher alien influence, I just can't see an image to support to that.)

 I also get Clif High is very scientific, can support the way the things work with hard backing.  There is an element of being very open minded, which allows for higher thoughts and outside influences to work.

Q. Has it been corrupted by outside influences such as government?
A. I don't see it being corrupted by the government, but I keep getting the word "infiltrated" as if the government uses or has tapped into Webbot for their agenda and gathering information, and they don't want to taint it an deem it useless.  I get if they manipulated it there is no way to distinguish what was falsely [intentionally]  corrupted versus genuine inforamtion.

And that is all I have for now.  Thank you.  It is 2:15 PM. Link to Audio

6 comments:

Wherami said...

Good analogy Laron. I think cliff may actually already know this which is why he warns us. He does what he can and hopes for the black swan which takes the bots away. Now that time has been corrected we shall see it play out as it should I believe.

Wren Omatic said...

Very interesting, Laron. Did you ask the questions? :-)
The 'infiltration' is quite possible. I saw a few articles just today about this very thing. NSA 'uses' people like Cliff and the Drudge Report, infowars, etc. Rather than trying to explain it, I'll just give the links... http://www.infowars.com/foia-doc-homeland-security-monitors-drudge-report/
http://www.sott.net/article/275559-NSA-plans-to-infect-millions-of-computers-with-malware

Laron said...

A good question Wren, but no, on a personal level I feel no need to question the webbot as I have seen enough solid evidence around the accuracy of what it produces and I already know how these situations we get our selves into work, with relation to us having influences from the other side to direct our path.

I have also... connected into who Clif is, from an intuitive level, as there are two aspects to this, the person interpreting the data and the actual application it self. Both are very crucial to keep separated when analysing how this works, even though they are closely tied in to each other.

So the answers coming up within these questions seem very authentic to me which goes towards providing more validity and trust in the person producing these focus sessions.

I have never heard of the judge report and I think I read the first article ever from info wars the other day.

ruffletheteacher.com said...

He has said that the data coming out is massive, many things are looked at but not all can be due to the large amounts. Some of it catches his eye and some is repeated and interlinked. A personal 'taint' can be put on to how it is interpreted, but he tries to just relay it as is and let the people decided.
I believe his anti big gov'mint view corrupts some of his reports. Not that its bad, I kinda like it and have come to expect it. Like "Weather's gonna suck, war's gonna happen... and, oh yea... the dollar's gonna collapse and uncle sam is gonna go bat-shit-crazy. No, really... this time its gonna happen, honest!"
Small part of me hopes he's right every time he says it. But no matter what it make one pause and think about the events that would transpire if it were to happen.(sigh!)

krsanna said...

As Laron says, the data is one thing and the interpretation is another ballgame. Several different linguistic programs for digging into the collective conscious exists. Clif High's is one of several. I followed Clif High's data about global coastal event in 2013 very closely. The data he provided was all good and fine. The data was so good that I felt a duty to inform my subscribers about High's findings and conclusions, as a matter of conscience. If High was correct then I could not fail to let people know. On the other hand, I did not find the same scenario in the TimeStar and did not predict the events that High did. As it turned out, High's predictions did not work out as he thought they would. My TimeStar predictions ran very close to real events, using a different point of reference from High's perspective. Yet, I still find High's data were sound. This means that the data and analysis of them are different critters.

Laron said...

Thanks for your input Krsanna.