“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

The same curious mixture of nonpredictable and predictable activity operates in genetic patterning also, in which the genetic systems are largely set up to achieve the retention of specific characteristics, and yet can also demonstrate behavior that seems (underlined) to be genetically unfaithful, distorted, or to introduce alterations that might appear to be travesties upon genetic integrity.

[...] The predictable and nonpredictable serve, then, to form the boundaries of physical experience.

It is instead, of course, quite possible that your predictable world exists not in spite of but because of those surprising, unpredictable, unofficial occurrences. [...]

[...] In most of these Seth has dealt with John’s connection with Searle to at least some degree, making the type of predictions he makes in this session. To sort out the rather complicated pattern of these predictions would require a study of the above sessions. [...]

However, the fact that it is so set up does not change the earlier predictions which I have made. [...]

[...] Also, there are some variables which cannot be adequately predicted because of conditions that will change drastically the attitudes of two men within the organization, and also a death which will occur in the higher organizational realm.

[...] The activity of the ions, only slightly outside of the expected, will nevertheless make it plain that the scientists do not have predicted activity. Their predictions were based upon hypotheses that were not checked because it was not possible to check them under real conditions until this flight.

(Note that on page 107 of the 442nd session, Seth also predicted a considerable improvement soon in Jane’s physical condition. [...]

[...] In their terms it will seem that molecular activity is less predictable than they imagined.

[...] At microscopic levels, in fact, no one fits any norm, and there is no way to predict with complete certainty the development of any genetic element. You can make group predictions, and overall make certain judgments, but other elements are involved, so that any particular genetic element cannot be pinned down in terms of its development. [...]

(At least, I told Jane tonight after I’d remembered that I’d forgotten to clip the article for my predictions file, we know where the article is on file, where it can be located if necessary: at the newspaper office. I speculated about the reactions of public personalities when their predictions don’t work out. [...] Jane hasn’t tried to predict similar events. For some of Jane’s predictions see Appendix A.

[...] Then I realized I’d goofed: Last Saturday, our local paper had carried a short article to the effect that a psychic we’d heard of had predicted recently that Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia would obtain the Democratic nomination for president, after a deadlock between Carter and Kennedy developed at the convention. [...] Thus the psychic is wrong in the prediction, which evidently obtained national circulation.

[...] It was also not consciously expected on my part, although checking over my predictions for Friday and today, I discovered that I had unwittingly made several correct notes concerning it. These correct predictions were quite specific, and included such words as “cave” and “long swim.”

[...] I am not predicting necessarily that they will be found, and I advise caution in any case. [...]

[...] The physical signs that he recognizes are definite indications of the body’s excellent response, and predictive of future ability. [...]

The “prediction” I gave concerning Ruburt’s health still stands. [...]

[...] This information is used together with all other data from the body, and a prediction made.

(9:21.) This body prediction is then assessed, and on more levels than it is possible for me to explain. [...]

This predictive picture is then set against two models. [...]

(There followed, here, two predictions related to Jane’s forthcoming book, The Seth Material. [...]

[...] Before the session I asked if Seth would discuss the Time Magazine cover story about Richard Bach in the November 13th issue, published November 6; and the various predictions made re sales, etc., in the recent deleted sessions.)

[...] However, the future event predicted was bound up with a series of events that would have had to occur within that two-day period. Some of these events would have been trivial, but all would have led him toward that predicted big win. [...]

(This material concerns a certain horse race in late August; Ferd had predicted Steve would win a bet on this race.)

(See the 348th session for this prediction, given on June 21, as Jane was making preparations for her ESP classes.)

[...] Seth gave us this prediction perhaps two years ago.) Unfortunate expectations and various projections operated here however, but the intuitive background was enough to wipe these out within an instant of your first meeting. [...]

[...] More bitter weather is predicted for the weekend.

I am most pleased with the chapter that Ruburt has written to open our book, [How To Develop Your ESP Power], and as you shall soon discover, events will work out as I predicted they would in the late summer.

Ruburt’s attempt at predictions is an excellent idea and should be continued. [...]

[...] In his daily predictions he has begun to notice that one phrase seems to stand for more than one event in some cases.

[...] The appearance of this in Ruburt’s predictions represents a first glimpse of real progress.

[...] On November 2nd, Howard did win the election though of course there is a fifty-fifty chance that guessing could produce the same prediction.

[...] There is still of course much more to be done before we can operate with a predictable accuracy.

Inspiration, however, is not predictable. The fact that these sessions are predictable says much, however, for the longstanding nature of such unpredictable events.

(Then, as we talked, Jane said Seth wanted to return—something, she said, about the effect predictions would have on us:

(Seth’s statement at the end of dictation for the 815th session, “I will try to begin work on our book in a more predictable fashion,” reflected his good intent, but things didn’t turn out that way. [...]

[...] Is the disaster the result of God’s vengeance?” A scientist might ask instead: “With better technology and information, could we somehow have predicted the disaster, and saved many lives?” He might try to dissociate himself from emotion, and to see the disaster simply as the result of a nonpersonal nature that did not know or care what lay in its path.