Author: Giorgio Piacenza

After a clear UFO sighting with multiple witnesses within 300 feet in the Peruvian coastal town of "Chilca" in 1975, I participated with the Mission Rahma contact group and befriended several contactees from this and other contact efforts. I also researched many aspects of the UFO phenomenon for several decades and feel inclined to contribute in the confluence of philosophical and scientific perspectives.

By Giorgio Piacenza Cabrera

Image Source: The Daily Galaxy blog

HELLO EXOPOLITICIANS! I agree with our great colleague Paola L. Harris that, unless more valiant politicians and exopoliticians (like the Honorable Hellyer) with evidence about the UFO/visitors reality are willing to come “out of the closet”, the “silence of the unwilling” will drown once again the valiant voices. I also concur that bringing up contactee experiences tends to make disclosure efforts less credible but, for me, the main issue is that the main blockage appears to arise from limiting human attitudes.  It is in us and awareness could perhaps liberate us as well. I think that there still are great opportunities through contactees (in spite of uncritical, non-analytical, “true believer” tendencies perhaps in most who also tend not to be in positions of respectable public power).

Contactees are also important, not just because of their candidness which can give us a gentler sense of the reality behind some of the contacts but because they can help us to re-connect with aspects of ourselves based on inherent goodness. Just as we may think that some of the “visitors” have “good reasons” why they are conducting abduction procedures (for our own good) (always?) we can think that they have “good reasons” why other prefer to contact nonacademic, non-powerful, non-analytical people that will often develop a “true believer,” missionary attitude. Perhaps this is a way to gently reach an average level of awareness in humanity allowing room to accept or not to accept that contacts are taking place.

We must understand that contactee, abductee, integrated contactee-abductee, accidental, channeling, historical and research ufological literature shows ever-increasing evidence there are varieties of ETS (not just Annunakis; not just lizards attempting to control us or greys with a variety of agendas, needs, agreements, timeline degrees of evolution; not just human-like benevolent space brothers and human-like and non-human-like negative Orions; not just future Essasani, art-loving Pleiadians, trans-dimensional Venusians, matter-of-fact scientists, inhabitants of Ganymede, semi-angelic beings and giants from Lyra ). The range is HUGE and we should neither fall in fear and disrepair nor ignore that -during some contacts- warnings about deceiving entities were also received. We are the ones that place limits.

Moreover, to understand how to think of “them” as “good or evil” and, simultaneously, not as “good or evil” we need to complexify our thinking. For instance, it’s not just that “if they were violent they would have conquered or wiped us out a long time ago.” If there are many groups of ETS with different agendas, needs and levels of development, there may be a control mechanism as to who is allowed to interact with us or not. There might be hierarchies between those that have transcended certain needs and those that have not. These hierarchies might not even be understood as between those ETS that are older or from particular far-flung futures (and thus more evolved) and those newer or closer to our present in terms of experience. We need to complexify our thinking in order to reach beyond the “adolescent stage” some of us may be in right now. We need to think in terms of Meta patterns reflecting a cosmic-level culture.

As researchers (and as non-integral humans in general) we tend to choose the aspect of Ufology that resonates more with us. This is a big problem. This is THE problem when facing a complex issue such as learning how to live in today’s world or learning how to relate with the ET presence. If we cannot handle a radical shift in our sense of reality and self-identity we (humans in general and not just researchers) will debunk even bona fide cases without learning from them or taking our time to carefully…research. Col. Corso’s case is a “case in point” as some researchers that contribute with other findings also invalidate this case…perhaps “unfairly.” This self-limiting attitude not only applies to government witnesses but to abductees, contactees, free energy researchers, and even amongst members of the UFO/ET research community. In fact, it applies to humanity in general as it stands now. As I’ll soon explain, we tend to invalidate each other too much, jumping onto the dissimilarities first rather than onto the similarities because our self-identities are limited because our three-vehicle instincts are disconnected.

There’s always someone with a great “piece of the puzzle” whose information we don’t FEEL as complementary but as dangerous to us. It is an irrational but effective attitude that which controls us in everything political we do. I think that we have three main types of instincts giving us a sense of exterior danger or of interior safety and that these instincts originate in our three main spiritual vehicles: The Physical, the Subtle and the Causal.  Each instinct is an adaptation to a primary cosmic environment reflecting the Body, Mind and Spirit aspects of being. This three-tiered partition of the Cosmos is present in many mystical-experiential disclosures such as in the philosophy of Vedanta. It behooves researchers to discover this.

If the instinct that controls us the most is physical we may always sense that what is most “real” is external stuff and think that the crux of ET interaction is in terms of technology, winning-losing, genetics and object manipulation and control. For this matter, benevolent contactee stories transmitting platitudes instead of technologies, or stories representing philosophical-humane understandings rather than, for instance, no-nonsense, physically manipulative genetic abductions, would also typically (and irrationally) feel to be much more “ludicrous” to most who think of themselves as “serious, objective researchers.” Then again, those that naturally sense a preponderance of instincts associated with the Subtle or the Causal spiritual vehicles may over-value inspiring platitudes. Enslaved by their preferred, non-integrated “instinct” researchers (and people in general attracted to the UFO-ET field) would focus on the mistakes of people whose main message represents other non-personally integrated instincts thus selecting out and dismissing parts of the genuine. Contactee reports and evidence (and along with that the invitations of ET groups willing to communicate more openly) are often summarily dismissed as genuine witnesses (however “credible,” “accredited” or not) they may be. They are simply non-instinctively detected. This happens irrationally if our “core sense of identity” and the “pieces of the puzzle” we hold on to EXCLUSIVISTICALLY (our personal “facts”) are challenged. The big problem we may not even be aware of is the non-integration of our three main instincts. When ideas and personal sense-making realizations reflect an imbalance between our three main instincts we violently sustain an incomplete self-sense boundary even to the point of endangering ourselves to sustain that boundary.

If we feel that (simplifying the situation) physically intervening ETS are more “real” that counsel-giving ETS we may ultimately prefer to contact the former than the latter. Still, I’d say that, between having a voluntary contact with more apparently communicative beings after a respectful invitation and exposing ourselves (however open-mindedly influenced by our current, cultural stage of post-modern relativism we may be) to anyone that comes along or to potentially abducting beings who (reasonably speaking, may or may not do it for ‘our own good’) and who may or may not be associated with “evil” controllers (we don’t really know if the word “evil” should be thrown out of our lexicon according to a universal ethics or to our religious ethics/biases normally decried as mistaken, limited and intolerant), it’s for me a ‘hands down’ choice for the first option. I think we can still gain much understanding and growth from ETS who are giving us opportunities to interact in a mutually respectful, friendly and kind way. By God, if there are opportunities to make an appointment for communicative contact with apparently kinder ETS why are we broadly preferring to hold on to a chance for contact through abducting ETS? Why do we hold on to a third person (often mutually undermining) research approach “after the facts” instead of finding out directly for ourselves? Why don’t we see past their pseudo-religious mistakes and attempt direct contact right away?

I think that, just as there was inhumane abusive intolerance in socially organized expressions of religious dogmatism in pre-modern religious and in biased-rational-modern (Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, right wing or left wing) absolutistic eras, we can also be blinded by the “relativism” of the current, more culturally advanced, post-modern era and ethos. BOTH the pre post-modern and the post-modern ideological positions are exclusivist and reductionist. The latter one is more difficult to detect but is radically flattening of differences and of a positive sense of hierarchy which, (according to integral and complexity thinkers) are natural facts of all forms of organization, regardless of level of development.

I think that, to start relating more intelligently with cosmic ‘cultures’ (culturally situated at least a couple of ‘notches’ beyond us) we need to develop our identities, ways of thinking, not just past the bigotry of pre-modern and modern but also past the post-modern ethos. Those of us willing to promote or lead toward a form of disclosure or to personally establish direct contact with ETS should conceptually and identitarily grow past post-modern (even if the self-identity of most people in the world seems still attached to pre-modern and modern ethos!): We must perceive more than equally valid, “horizontal” patterns; we must get a sense of the pattern that relates patterns. We must learn to think and to feel not only “systemically” (as in postmodernity) but “trans-systemically” the pattern behind patterned levels of complexity. Moving forward in “exopolitics” is not just about having pre-modern, clear-cut values; about modern-rational, effective pragmatism; about infinite egalitarian tolerance or about holistically including the best of all previous characteristics. It is about acquiring a non-monological initial degree of “cosmic understanding” (cosmic understanding “101”), the ABC’s of a common cosmic language (of the whole and the part) allowing us to share understandings to communicate with all varieties of “cosmic-faring” ETS more intelligently. Perhaps these ETS (regardless of their particular distinctions and inclinations are capable of simultaneously integrating exclusivist, relational and transcendental logics simultaneously.

 

By Giorgio Piacenza Cabrera

Artist depiction of Billy Meier meeting Semjase from the Pleiades/Plejares and Beamship

Recognizing the contribution of voluntary, conscious, willing contactees and how well they represented how we as Earth-humans are capable of interacting with cosmic-faring beings is still of paramount importance. I do truly agree that most ETS and -especially- the ones from the 1950’s early-phase of contacteeism did provide a great opportunity for humanity to embark upon an easier path of change. Then, what could be called the “intercontinental contactee wave” of the 1970’s (Eduard Meir, Castillo Rincón, Sixto Paz, etc) probably represented a second phase of possible contacts with another sub-group (of the originally overtly friendly “space brother” group). It materialized in other countries while, yes, debunking, was occurring in the U.S. and extended news about abduction kinds of contacts was about to increase mostly focused in that country. This 1970’s wave of friendly and information-volunteering contacts could probably be called the “second part of Plan A” or the “second part of the original contactee phase.”  I must admit that the 1980’s and 1990’s also saw new contactee cases (for instance with the cases Pablo E. Hawnser from Mexico and of Ricardo Gonzalez from Peru) which could belong to these friendlier, “Plan A.” Then (focused mostly in the U.S., in Puerto Rico, and perhaps similarly, but less intensely, in a few other places in the globe, like, perhaps, Brazil and Mexico) the increase in grey-related abductions was probably like a “Plan B” or second tier phase: A protocol of contacts that are more free will-limiting but also (broadly-speaking) consciousness-motivating in another karmically-allowed way to assist humanity to grow beyond its island-Earth parochialism and become more aware and participatory in cosmic functioning. In other words, if the first kind of contacts didn’t flourish, the second kind was allowed along with the possibility of the human adventure partially continuing in a hybridized form.

These other kinds of ET beings from “Plan B” probably had other kinds of karmic ties and needs that humans could complement with and satisfy so that a shared interactive and creative ‘space’ (a ‘Tinkuy’) was also possible. In a way is as Virgil Armstrong says: “They need us; we don’t need them” but in, another sense, we both come from a position of “need” and complement each other. So, instead of the greater hierarchy allowing for the wanton destruction of the human project and the Earth’s ecological systems and biota, due to our stubbornness, another kind of (not normally voluntary and conscious) contacts are allowed.  Nevertheless, I think that these other kinds of beings also have to follow some strict general “rules of engagement” or interaction. I think that they are allowed to act but that they are also supervised. Some of them were probably on Earth before what has been called the “Quarantine” was placed in effect. Some of them apparently crashed in Rowell (perhaps due to high intensity radars in conjunction with the forced linking of timelines), offered technological assistance and semi-official, semi-legal agreements were made. The original military purpose would have been to have means to defend the nation and Earth against the ET unknowns, not really trusting the alien presences, regardless of origin. Other purposes would have been to gain secret military advantages during the Cold War and not to destabilize society (thus acting as a social “Super Ego” in the Freudian sense). The agreements may not have been well honored on the Earth side as psychological attachment to effective ways to wield power would continue in a military society closed to outside civilian supervision.

I seriously doubt that humanity is seriously in danger to be under attack or to be conquered. The human experiment has to be respected and degrees of engagement have to follow a strict protocol. Moreover, if there were any groups willing to attack en force, they would have been contained by the great majority respecting the rules. “They” are not one entity that would have acted unanimously and would have already invaded us if had been its intent. According to some contactees like Ricardo Gonzalez we are being protected from the few rogues. I’d say that these rogues would lie outside of the First and Second Phase of contacts. Nevertheless, there may be others “behind the lines” of the Second Phase waiting for a right to intervene. Some varieties of reptiles and reptile hybrids and perhaps a subgroup of beings from an area in Orion may be part of these. I don’t know but, then again, there may still be others of a much higher physical-extra dimensional frequency holding
on to a self-serving polarization as suggested in the Ra Material. If we went to a large behind-the-Moon, orbiting space base as some contactees claimed to have been taken, we would probably observe a variety of human-looking and non-human-looking ETS, including varieties of greys.

Even today, after all the hoopla and credibility given to greys and reptiles, I am a proponent of seeking to work with bona fide contactees of the Daniel Fry, Truman Bethurum, George Adamski kind in order to strengthen voluntary, direct physical contacts with “First Phase” ETS of a more friendly, conscious will-respecting nature. This doesn’t mean that I think that grey abductions are for the most part just “negative.” They may be the second choice if we are not willing to grow up consciously from spiritual principle, from the heart. Once again, I insist that I’m trying not to think too biasedly and simplistically because, with very few exceptions, this not a black and white situation. The issue requires more complex definitions.

Apparently (according to many researcher, contactee and abductee reports), there are many varieties of greys and ET-Earth-human interaction is allowed by a higher cosmic hierarchy that possesses deeper ways of assessing what is adequate or not (for instance, according to karma, mutual needs, historical-genetic connections, cultural connections, past interventions, future concordances and free will).  There may even be varieties of supervisors of greys from different timelines and some types of greys may be independent and some under the hierarchical control of more powerful beings. The problem to understand more of the whole picture seems to be exclusivism in preference, choice and thinking.

Different outcomes may materialize as different possibilities related with soul choice allow different Earth-humans to interact with different ET beings pursuing the resolution of different needs and possible outcomes. The 1950’s and 1970’s “space people” needs seemed to be more spiritual. They wanted to serve us (their partial genetic descendants) to evolve: Eventually learning from Earth-humans to go beyond their own high level of development in which they were apparently stuck. Nevertheless, we could say that both, First Tier, ‘space brother’-type ET beings and Second Tier (technically speaking also ‘space brothers’), more “technically–intrusive” beings (so to speak) broadly want humankind to grow up and to become more interactive and aware of what could be called the “Cosmic Mind” and its principles. Some may even submit the principle of a “Cosmic Mind” to that of a “Cosmic Heart” and seek to serve more than to be served by the awakening and participation of humanity.

I think that externally forced hybridization is allowed for those beings that may benefit from it in case Earth-humans do not voluntarily choose to evolve beyond current conflict-generating mindsets. It is a dispassionate “Plan B” developing right now (and including, for instance, the abduction-hybridization programs) after the “Plan A” voluntary growth offers of open contact and collaboration were officially rejected.  Nevertheless, “Plan A” events implemented by beings with other tendencies more respectful of CONSCIOUS human choice didn’t just continue in the 1970’s inter-continental contactee wave but are quietly ongoing now as well.  While the abductions in general are mostly not as respectful of the Earth-human species as the contacts within “Plan A,” we must also carefully recognize that they are neither as grotesque and as clearly evil as usually depicted. Those abduction reports that are not the result of negative propaganda to scare people against all contact and those reports that originate in secret Earth-military-personnel-only operations I consider them genuine and part of a “second phase of contacts” or attempt to “approach” humanity, an attempt in which there are karmic bonds that also allow to resolve common needs (genetic interbreeding is part of this). In my view, all ETS (for instance, space brother types and greys) as nice as an Aura Rhanes or Titinac a woman from “Siris” or Venus (from a case in Bolivia) or (pushing it a little) greys that operate children without anesthesia are allowed to interact to some degree on Earth and are expected to respect the same rules of engagement. Those most aggressive or least developed (like perhaps some varieties of greys from a timeline-relative, more primitive past amongst their species) are sometimes closely supervised. Those very few not abiding by the “rules of engagement” are filtered out.  Some contactee friends in Latin America do speak of a filtering out protection mechanism even though in the beginning they didn’t want to know or to admit that a few (just a few) ET beings were not of the same ‘intentional altitude’ (so to speak) than the highly respectful and love inspiring ETS they had contacted.

People having traumatic abductions tend to have a hard time letting go of their negative assessment and those having highly kind and respectful, voluntary contacts after invitations also tend not to believe in other kinds of -at first- traumatic contacts or contacts which could be assessed as “negative.”  Sometimes just mentioning one explanation that SEEMS to oppose a personally preferred one generates an “either-or” discomfort leading to a rejection not allowing us to consider all possible angles to a complex situation. And the whole UFO-ET situation is complex; for the most part definitely not an “either-or” scenario suitable to personal preferences. Moreover, (for exopolitical purposes) all of it -if sufficiently verified as genuine- needs to be considered and validated for an integral, mature and useful exopolitical working assessment. Just like there are good internationalists capable of a multi-faceted, broad view of factors in the international political scene we need to develop more extensive analytical skills in exopolitics.

Once again (without condemning most “Plan B” interventions), I still think that we would greatly benefit if more of us re-connected more directly with ET representatives of “Plan A” (still here on Earth well), representatives that (whether they look human or not) allow more “space” for human choice, voluntary evolution and –more likely than not- greater ultimate freedom. Increasing the dynamism of “Plan A” would be my first choice. These beings coordinate more closely with very kind and wise, Earth-based spiritual teachers but…that’s information for another essay.

Statement: In this general overview I focused upon two well-known (yet broad) categories of aliens, not on the whole range of
witnessed entities which, for instance, may include momentary observers or passers-by, briefly intervening scientific types, those that are neither-human nor grey or reptilian looking, the amorphous, the very animal-like, the robotic, some insectoid varieties, the extremely exotic, etc.

(The video allegedly depicts a peaceful, simple, voluntary participation with “Plan A” human allies near a dimensional door of light or “Xendra” in Uruguay).

MARDORX, an ET “guide” from Xilox. Photo taken in Marcahuasi, Peru in 1982.

 

According to information from Mision Rahma, “Xilox” is a planet associated in a large Confederation under the guidance of the 24 elders of the (Milky Way) Galaxy. These 24 elders participate in “The Council of Nine” located in the Andromeda Galaxy, thus forming a total of 33 members who represent “The Great White Brotherhood of the Star.” These beings are spiritual masters that represent evolution itself and Earth’s Great White Brotherhood is associated to them. The Council of Nine, is the governing body of our Local Group of 9 galaxies.  The “Elohim” are genetic engineers and seeders of life conditions. Intervening evolving hominid primates humans were genetically seeded from many cosmic sources and posses the enormous combined potential of all of them.  There’s great expectation for humanity to give an example that will inspire the seeding civilizations giving them a way to move beyond their own stages of development. Humans were seeded in a very active and risky planetary environment. Other similar experiments in the local cosmos suffered self-destruction or a catastrophic environmental end. The “Guardians” and “Watchers” are the “right arm” of  the “Confederation” directly linked to the White Brotherhood of the Star and are in charge to protect worlds in evolution such as Earth. They prevent the intromission of extraterrestrial civilizations with warlike or colonizing intentions or with the intention to conduct scientific studies without authorization from the “Confederation.” The Guardians and Watchers possess orbital bases close to planets under observation and-or under “quarantine.” For Earth there is a space station called “Celea” which is located  behind the Moon. It is inhabited by beings from different origins and different aspects.

 

 

How Far Advanced are “They”?
“Where” can we Meet?

 

By

 

Giorgio Piacenza Cabrera

I think that thinking that many ETs are “millions of years”
ahead of us, is a relative concept. I think that this can be conceivably true,
perhaps even in an Einstenian, General Relativistic “spacetime.” Nevertheless,
I also think that as far as “they” (various ET groups) have a need to interact
with us (however distinct from human perspective ‘needs’), we already have a shared meeting point, “level,” “area of encounter” or “potentially shared experiential space.” This means that we may also have a shared ‘level’ of evolution in at least one, but probably many more aspects. I think that this potentially allows for us to meet both complementing each other in harmony (as in the Inca principle of “YANANTIN“) and also as equal companions sharing common levels (as in the Inca principle of “MASINTIN“).

“Evolution” (which also involves change and adaptation) doesn’t always mean “steady progress.” That is one aspect that doesn’t always manifest. It may also take the form of an overall increase in complexity (even while previous stages remain stable and frequently sustaining subsequent levels of complexity) but it may not always be as ‘steady’ and forward marching as our technological, political, cultural development has been through the West’s historical influence in the last 500 years or so. Stagnation and even “involution” are also part of “evolution” which, in a general, more complete sense, mostly means “change”. In other words, I think that ETs can also stagnate and linear time difference (even if we shared the same space) may be quite a relative thing. I think that the simple fact that we are already sustaining some degree of interaction means that our “experiential spaces” are allowed to meet because of degrees of awareness, experience and information qualities sharing similar characteristics. Moreover, I think that what we sometimes consider as “less evolved” may not always be so. Case in point, it seems that sometimes it’s easier for some ETs to communicate with traditional Native Americans than with hyper modern or post-modern, biased New Yorkers. Just as sometimes we may hear friendly stories of ETs intersecting their realities more openly with Native North Americans (for instance in the Star Knowledge gatherings held by chief White Eagle-Standing Elk) I’ve also hear similar accounts taking place in remote rural areas in the mountains of Peru.

I think that, in some important ways already recognized by ET as understandable
within their “philosophy,” Native Americans can be more ‘advanced’ than modern and postmodern academicians and otherwise sophisticated “social-lites.” The fact that there also are degrees of contact with non-Native Americans might mean that those other people sustaining them are also capable of co-creating or co-holding a contact “space.” In other words, even if ETs coming to Earth are more technologically advanced, for instance in terms of consciousness-activated trans-dimensional effectiveness and in several other ways, they may also share with us some ‘levels’ of “evolution” and common or also complementary ‘needs’. Through these common ‘levels’ or ‘potentially concurring spaces’, perhaps even allowing for the meeting of TIMELINES (which expanding on a concept from physicists A. Sorli and D. Fiscaletti)1 may be defined by the mathematical programming of
the rate of change in space) we may be able not just to ‘converse’ and to
briefly meet ‘here and there’ in our experiential space with little collective
consequence, but also to build a new creative, experiential and more
communicative convergence.

What kind of wisdom can we discover in Native Americans to enhance our probabilities of open contacts? Let me build up upon some very specific ideas still in Inca-Andean-Quechua spiritual
thinking2: If we share some need levels with theirs we can also interact
and create a new world by exchanging our energies and identities with theirs. This can be cooperative or competitive. We would simply less “alien” to each other becoming more than the give and take of the exchange. Our partly matching evolutionary ‘levels’ would also complement each other actualizing a new and creatively-interesting
space enhancing our mutual experience. From the perspective of an Andean “Cosmovision,” we would perhaps call this event a “TINKUY with YANANTIN preeminence” and, in
the “relation” (a paramount concept in Andean thinking) we would also learn to recognize each other as co-equal parts of a larger, living whole continuously sustained by “KAWSAY” or “Camakin,” the universal, living energy.

In the Inka and pre-Inka “Tawa Chakana” (four-sided stair-bridge) we find that a world of experience is given living energy and actualized through the central opening of awareness when a rational and an instinctive principle meet. This new actual world is the middle step in each of the four sides of this “Andean Cross.”  The main vertical
principles are called “Jawa” or “Hanan” and “Uku” or “Urin” and, in relation to the actual (or ‘present’) world of “Kay Pacha,” represent infinite potential
worlds. The upper world of “Jawa”or “Hanan” is considered like that which is already given and the lower world of “Uku” or “Urin” is considered like that which hides and gestates the future. In a sense, the upper world is order and the lower is chaos and instinct.

The three zigzagging steps in a Tawa Chakana (see figure above and-or go to http://www.google.com.pe/search?q=Tawa+Chakana&hl=es-419&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=MQrUT9KhKKz26gGD2v2AAw&ved=0CGMQsAQ&biw=786&bih=330)

form a stair or crossing bridge (chakana) and circulate like a snake up and down and all around the whole figure. Can we also consider it a “star-crossing” bridge? Besides the central empty hole, there’s a square enclosing an inner circle (representing “Uku”) and, in turn, this square is circumscribed by an outer circle (representing “Jawa” or “Hanan”). All three figures are surrounded by the stairs going around the entire figure. Every “Tinkuy” or tensional encounter between two different entities in a necessarily ‘tense’ relation with each other generates a shared and a new experiential space. Entire universes can be created through this process. When the encounter between the higher and the lower principles is based on loving, mutual need the, so called, “Yanantin” principle manifests and the relation can be horizontal and based upon equality, connecting the left and right sides of the “Tawa Chakana.” When this “Yanantin” predominates, the Non Dual Mystery that permits relations to occur between dissimilar pairs of things manifests. Then the “Tawa Chakana” along with its fifth, central direction can be considered a model of Totality.

Sources

1.  http://www.spacelife.si/

2.  Giorgio Piacenza C. (2012). “A Brief Inca Andean Quechua Cosmovision Glossary.” http://incaandeanquechua.blogspot.com/2012/06/inca-cosmovision-glossary.html

 

 

 

Copyright © 2018 Exopolitics Institute News Service. All Rights Reserved.