DWQA Questions › Tag: viral consciousness
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
A practitioner asks: “Would it be helpful to net all pathogens with white light to reduce their ability to trigger the immune system to fight back, causing ‘the collateral damage of many, many chronic illnesses and their symptoms,’ as described in the Divine Wisdom Database entry? Should/could the effects of viruses on the immune system be attenuated in a similar fashion to how dark spirit meddlers are addressed in the LHP? On page 5, ‘Have All Spirits, Pathogens, and Intruders Netted with a white Light (for any new arrivals),’ and on page 10, ‘Net all spirits, pathogens, and other intrusive energies within and around my clients following this session and hold them safely in place until they are removed by repeated protocol work.'” What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
49 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “This question is asked in reference to Karl’s previous channeling of Source Creator on 10-28-25. [A practitioner asks: “Could we, for example, ask via the LHP that whenever we take an antiviral supplement, for all the benefits it brings to be automatically applied to our other lives as well? Could we, by doing so, authorize the divine to do more for us through this and help to remove viruses more aggressively? Could we perhaps even ask for the same benefits to be applied to all other humans or beings in general whenever we take an antiviral supplement ourselves or apply another physical method that allows for more direct removal of viruses from our bodies? Or is there perhaps another method by which this could be achieved?” What is Creator’s perspective? “This can be requested to happen—the application of the benefits of antiviral supplements be transferred to everyone, everywhere, across all timelines—but this will not be uniformly effective because each individual situation, time, place, circumstance, and the people involved will have an energetic matrix that will govern the energetics of what is allowable with respect to divine intervention and all of the variables, such as levels of belief in the divine, belief in the self, and the inner barriers to change from corrupted beliefs about one’s physical makeup and circumstances. People believe in their illnesses and this is a barrier to divine healing. So this is a highly variable and uncertain undertaking but it can be requested for more to be done.” The above channeling, describing barriers to divine intervention for implementation of antiviral supplement benefits across timelines, seems unsurprising. The same restrictions apply quite variably, to potentially every request in both the LHP and DSMR protocols. Divine intervention is always uncertain as to the degree and effectiveness allowable, depending on individual circumstances and energies. Is there a workaround we are unaware of that would help this sharing of antiviral healing and protection be more uniformly potent? Knowing these barriers exist, can we simply request they be transmuted into welcoming and amplifying positive energies?” What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 weeks ago • 
44 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “In a recent channeling Creator has said that the divine can’t take viruses directly out of us because that would essentially amount to killing them, but that we can use physical measures such as antiviral supplements to get rid of viruses ourselves without accumulating karma from doing so. On the other hand, we have been told and know that Creator regularly removes viruses from food or beverages to be ingested if we use the daily prayers. I would like to understand why it seems to be possible for you to remove viruses from our food directly but not from our bodies? Isn’t it essentially the same as killing the viruses when removed from our food? What’s the difference? Is it because, in the case of food, the viruses haven’t come into contact with the consciousness of a host body yet and can therefore be removed more easily? Is it because they can be removed from food without killing them or something else entirely?” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
117 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “It was a bit disappointing to find out that remote healing via the LHP seems to be rather limited when it comes to removing viruses directly. Creator has stated that more than 85% of all chronic illnesses are viral in origin, so that seems to be quite a limitation for what remote healing is able to achieve if one of the main culprits that is responsible for most illnesses seems to be off-limits, at least in a direct and immediate sense. The fact that we can take measures into our own hands and use antiviral supplements or other physical methods to free ourselves from these viruses is all well and good but there are still massive limits in place that will hinder our progress. What about our other lives, for example?” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
105 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “So we may have been lucky enough to find out the truth about viruses and what to do against them in this life, thanks to Karl’s brilliant work, but what good is it if it comes to our many other lives where we don’t possess this knowledge, let alone the means to do anything about it? To me this seems like a rather big hole in the healing equation that needs to be addressed somehow. Is there any kind of “loophole” by which we could achieve more in this regard?” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
77 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “Could we, for example, ask via the LHP that whenever we take an antiviral supplement, for all the benefits it brings to be automatically applied to our other lives as well? Could we, by doing so, authorize the divine to do more for us through this and help to remove viruses more aggressively? Could we perhaps even ask for the same benefits to be applied to all other humans or beings in general whenever we take an antiviral supplement ourselves or apply another physical method that allows for more direct removal of viruses from our bodies? Or is there perhaps another method by which this could be achieved?” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
90 views0 answers0 votes
Scientists studying genetics of bacteria in marine plankton stumbled on a novel species of primitive organism they named Sukunaarchaeum mirabile, after a deity in Japanese mythology, renowned for its small size. Classified as belonging to the domain of Archaea, it lacks all recognizable metabolic pathways, primarily encoding machinery for its replication by a host organism, having less than half the DNA of the smallest archaeal. While some scientists believe viruses are not truly living, you have told us that is a false conclusion. Can this new, most primitive, virus-like entity be considered a life form?
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
182 views0 answers0 votes
Is this or other similar Archaeal species, perhaps undiscovered, pathogenic and contributing to the chronic disease burden of society?
ClosedNicola asked 4 months ago • 
194 views0 answers0 votes
Was this reporting in Scientific American accurate in its speculations: “Bird flu showed up on dairy farms and surprised everyone. How did bird flu jump to cows?” What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
129 views0 answers0 votes
One of the reasons an atheist might cite for why they don’t believe in God, or at the very least a “loving God,” is the huge number of noxious species of microbial, plant, and animal life on this planet. There are so many that it is practically impossible to catalog them all, and new ones are being discovered on literally a DAILY basis. Scientists estimate the average somewhere between 40-55 new species are discovered each day. Certainly, a percentage of those could be labeled “noxious,” in that they are harmful to humans in some way, either directly or indirectly, through attacking another plant or animal species that is beneficial to humans. Of the 40-55 new species discovered each day, what rough percentage are truly NEW-to-Earth species that have been introduced just in the last decade? How big is this problem, and how long has it been going on? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
379 views0 answers0 votes
The National Park Service website nps.gov had this to say about the American Chestnut Tree: “By the 1940s the blight had killed an estimated four billion American chestnut trees nationwide. Where before about a third of all trees in the Smoky Mountains were chestnuts, today even single spindly saplings are rare.” The chestnut blight fungus was supposedly introduced from Asia accidently. To give people an idea of just how tragic this massive loss was, here is a brief description found on forestpathology.org of the value of the chestnut tree: “If you could custom design the ideal tree species, you couldn’t come up with a better one than American chestnut. It was a huge, majestic tree, with a very straight stem. The wood was nearly ideal. As George Hepting has written, ‘Not only was baby’s crib likely made of chestnut, but chances were, so was the old man’s coffin.’ One of its good qualities was high durability. The heartwood could be used in situations where decay was a hazard. The tree was common. It made up about 50% of most eastern hardwood forests. It grew fast and would regenerate itself by root sprouts vigorously. The nuts were edible, not only by wildlife but also by humans. It was an important food source for all. ‘The farmer’s hogs were fattened on chestnuts, and, to no small degree, his children were also.’ Chestnut was also prized as a landscape tree.” If indeed the blight did come from Asia, how long had it been in Asia, and what was its true origin? What can Creator tell us about the tragic loss of the American Chestnut?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
357 views0 answers0 votes
The National Park Service website nps.gov had this to say about Zebra Mussels: “Zebra mussels are small, freshwater, bivalve shellfish that were likely brought to the U.S. as stowaways in the ballast water of ships. They are native to the Caspian and Black Seas south of Russia and Ukraine, and have since become widespread in both Europe and the U.S.” The zebra mussel is a problem because it is so prolific. Each female can release up to a million eggs a year. “Biofouling is [an ecological problem] … Zebra mussels will attach to native mussels much like they do docks, boats, and water and power plant intake pipes, and in large enough numbers can prevent the natives from moving, feeding, reproducing, or regulating water properly. The zebra mussels also outcompete the natives for food and space, and because of their fast reproduction can quickly overwhelm a water system. The feeding habits of zebra mussels can also have a drastic impact on an infested lake. Zebra mussels are filter feeders that siphon particles of plankton from the water. They are highly efficient at this, and a large population of mussels can quickly clear the water of almost all floating particles. This change can cause shifts in local food webs, both by robbing food from native species that feed on plankton and also by increasing water clarity and thus making it easier for visual predators to hunt.” The costs to control and clean up zebra mussel infestations is enormous. And the problem never goes away, it can only be managed. This species is so good at causing problems, it couldn’t have been a truly native creature in the Black Sea either. It seems tailor-made for another WORLD and doesn’t belong here at ALL. What is Creator’s perspective, and what kind of environment is a good fit for this creature?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
291 views0 answers0 votes
There have been reports of egg prices soon going as high as twenty dollars a dozen in some locations. This is presumably due to a bird flu epidemic and a government policy of killing entire flocks of egg-laying hens, some numbering in the millions of birds. What is the true origin of bird flu, and is this drastic approach to its management and prevention called for in any way that could be considered rational? What is actually the bigger cause of the egg shortage, the invasive bird flu virus, or possible mind control manipulation surrounding its management? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
370 views0 answers0 votes
Whether a species is invasive or not might depend on a number of factors. The European hare is considered a native species of Europe and a valuable one at that. But the same species imported into Australia has been disastrous. Google has this to say about the problem: “Rabbits are a serious environmental and agricultural pest in Australia. They were introduced for sport hunting in the late 18th century, but their rapid reproduction rate led to millions of rabbits. Rabbits cost the Australian economy over $200 million per year. They compete with livestock for food, damage crops, and destabilize the land. Rabbits overgraze, which can lead to soil erosion, the collapse of indigenous plants, and the decline of native animals. They may have also caused the extinction of several small ground dwelling mammals. Rabbits threaten the survival of more than 300 Australian native species, including 24 critically endangered species.” Are these rabbits truly native to Earth, or are they an interloper-introduced invasive species? If native, then is this a wholly human-created problem, or were the humans who brought them to Australia for “sport” influenced to do that by the interlopers? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
554 views0 answers0 votes
It seems with the advent of modern civilization, global media, and global travel, that the opportunity for the interlopers to introduce large land-based mammalian and reptilian creatures, like lions and crocodiles, has effectively expired. Such an introduction today would draw too much attention and be too much of an anomaly. Not so with anything aquatic or small, as in small insects and even birds. Same with any kind of plant life. So while we’re not being overrun globally with new mammoths and saber-toothed tigers, we are being overrun with almost every other kind of invasive species. Creator has previously commented on the “Beast of Gévaudan,” a very large and very vicious species of wolf. Was this the last time the interlopers tried to seriously introduce such a creature, and did they conclude that the opportunity to do this further had passed? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
333 views0 answers0 votes
123…5Next »
Ask Question