Credibility Analysis and Decision-Making – Part 1/2 – Steve Beckow @ Golden Age of Gaia


Art : Don Perino


Credibility Analysis and Decision-Making – Part 1/2

There are so many people claiming to be incarnations of the Divine Mother or Jesus that I feel the tug to review the bases of credibility analysis and decision-making.

How are we to judge the credibility of people claiming to be avatars and Prime Creator and what else have you?

My approach to credibility was taught to me by very competent instructors – the legal advisers and trainers at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada – prior to my being permitted to sit on refugee claims.

Any errors are mine.

We as readers are tasked with sorting the credible from the non-credible channeled messages. What criteria can we borrow from places like the IRB that can help us?

I won’t be able to supply you with the criteria for psy ops misinformation and disinformation and how psy-ops agents work their woe. Perhaps another commentator can help us there.

But the relatively straightforward case of an individual making a claim for themselves?

The awkward truth is, as I learned in hearing refugee cases, we may never know the truth about their claims. The only thing we can have help with is in detecting what’s probably not the truth.

What criteria do we use to help us sort the truth from the untruth?

Before we turn to those, I have to say that the very best radar set, antennae, early warning system is your own still, small voice. Call it conscience, our Higher Self, the heart, our guides, or whatever name you wish, it signals us when we’re in the presence of something amiss.

If I’m sitting on a refugee claim, I either listen to testimony in the hearing room or read something in my office until the early warning system goes off and then I stop. And then I begin to look for material that might have set it off in the following areas:

(1) Is what is being said possible? Admittedly more is β€œbecoming” possible as we learn more about the universe our belief systems have shut us down to – the existence of angels, extraterrestrials, folks inside the Earth, etc. But the evidence still needs to satisfy my criteria for the possible if I’m to view it as credible.

(2) Is it plausible? Does it make sense from the trend of credible information we already have? We’ve got ourselves a baseline of credible information already from informants like the Divine Mother, Archangel Michael, Sanat Kumara, and their colleagues. (2) How does this information compare with that?

(3) Is it probable? Does it seem likely? Given our experience of similar matters, are the claims made here more likely than not to eventuate?

(4) Are there inconsistencies? Did the β€œDivine Mother” just reveal she has an ego? (Ooops.) Did Jesus really just use the F-word? (Yes, β€œhe” did.)

(5) Are there contradictions? Did something the source just say contradict something she said last week? Did Jesus just mangle the meaning of a Biblical passage he should know about, contradicting the words of the historical Jesus, without an explanation? (1)

Discovering which of these indications of a lack of credibility were in play here may address that alarm bell. Then read on till the next bell goes off.

At the end of it all, look at the errors you’ve identified. Does their number pass the threshold of non-credibility for you? Does the seriousness of the errors push the piece below the threshold of credibility for you, even if the errors are few in number? Is there any one that’s a game-changer?

In some cases, a person may have to formalize the process of decision-making. The decision-makers of the Michaelangelo Fund, for instance, who’ll be considering grant applications, will follow a full or expedited version of a more formal decision-making process. Allow me to cover that process tomorrow.

(Continued in Part 2.)


(1) I know. Much of the Bible has been corrupted. Matthew Ward (St. Matthew) has demonstrated to us that he could not have recorded the Sermon on the Mount because he did not meet up with Jesus until much later, as the gospels show.

(2) If you need a baseline of credible information on who’s who in the universe, perhaps try First Contact at Look particularly at what is said in β€œPersonae,” at



Art : Don Perino

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.