This leopard is about to speak to an animal communicator and he’s got a lot on his mind. This is AMAZING!


This totally remarkable and touching video is understandably going viral. It has a special impact for me regarding synchronicity. On 29th January this year, an animal came into my current novel and began to communicate with the protagonists. This section began:
“He concentrated, and sensations of being spoken to grew stronger. It wasn’t in words, though – and yet, if he translated it into words, it started being able to make sense.
When he tried this technique, the words which came faintly into his mind amounted to, *You called. I have come.*
‘Where are you?’ Hugh asked, and the others gaped at him. Then he said it again, but this time while thinking of getting the message across to whatever he was getting the message across to.
*Tree … branch …* came to him. That was enough. In an instant, he knew exactly what he was talking to, and also where it was.
‘Leopard outside – says we called him,’ he gabbled.”
Until I saw a TV presentation on Carte Blanche on 9th March, and was then also jolted by this post on 14th March, I had never even heard of Diablo (Spirit), and I thought I had something really novel in my novel. Now, who is ever going to believe that t wasn’t inspired by Anna and her skill? Isn’t it extraoridinary that the animal I chose to ‘speak’ to them in this way should also have been a leopard?

Spiritbath

View original post

Advertisements

About colonialist

Active septic geranium who plays with words writing fantasy novels and professionally editing, with notes writing classical music, and with riding a mountain bike, horses and dinghies.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to This leopard is about to speak to an animal communicator and he’s got a lot on his mind. This is AMAZING!

  1. equinoxio21 says:

    Hi, “Colonialist”. Thanks for following Equinoxio. Stay tuned.
    Tot ziens
    Brian

    Like

  2. I became aware of this talent when I consulted with a well-known animal psychic on the telephone about the behavior of my two cats. All I told her was that I wanted to know the reason why they were not getting along and what I could do to alleviate the situation. She was not looking at them, she had no information about their personalities, and yet she gave me a spot-on rundown about each of them , how they viewed me and my daughter, and what they wanted from us. She also gives classes in this art of communication. I have not taken them, although I participated in a free telephone guidance from her to six of us as a group in practicing communicating with a couple of animals. The main component is not to force any attempt, to just carefully listen to what the animal is trying to tell you. It takes practice, practice, practice, but it can be done.

    Like

  3. adeeyoyo says:

    I adored this video, Col. And I do believe it is possible to communicate with ‘some’ animals, ie if they want to communicate with us. Some are simply not interested and some appear to have ADD, lol!

    Like

  4. Arkenaten says:

    This was quite a profound video.
    But what troubles me is she does not explain how she communicates, or more importantly to my mind, how the leopard communicates with her and how she understands.; especially the part about the cubs.
    This was , no doubt, the Wow moment for me of the whole film, but after detaching myself from the
    ( very) emotional content I tried to think clearly.

    Before our last dog passed away the missus was given some homeopathic medicine she was assured would cure Brunel. It didn’t. She had cancer. I did not interfere or object as it would have seemed equally as cruel and my missus leans toward this sort of thing.

    So, while I am readily acknowledge some people have a greater affinity with animals than others, and maybe this affinity or ”energy alignment” is responsible for the animals becoming calm. it does not explain inter-species communication in the least and this issue is what people such as Anna need to clarify for skeptics.
    Maybe her video does just that. ?

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      As far as I have had time to research, she does not really understand it either, and has often doubted it herself. She has had enough success, though, to have become accepting of it and so do those who take her courses and find results.
      I have personally had animals where telepathy has been by far the least preposterous and outlandish of the explanations one is able to offer for their behaviour.

      Like

  5. That is incredible, Col. What a stunning animal, and how amazing that it was possible to help him turn his life around with the right communication. Thank you so much for sharing this.

    Like

  6. It’s a fascinating and wonderful video. I saw that some viewers were very skeptical though. I agree with Miss Whiplash’s comment. 🙂

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      I think a lot of the sketicism arises from the fact that people find it an idea which makes them uncomfortable. Easiest way to deal with that is to dismiss it. Like so many folk still do with the concept of evolution.

      Like

  7. Wat een prachtig dier! I love black leopards, Col, and am thrilled you wrote about one in your novel. Their grace, strength and beauty are stunning. Such a coincidence when you saw Diablo/Spirit. I have watched the film and whether Anne really can communicate or not, fact is that Spirit went outside for the first time in six months and is now at ease. Wonderful.

    Like

  8. Pussycat44 says:

    Wow, that is so wonderful.

    Like

  9. nrhatch says:

    Very cool, Col ~ both the video and the timing of it. And uber cool that you had a leopard communicating with your protagonist.

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      I do think the video is wonderful, and am boggled at the coincidence that I reflected communication with it – and no other animals or creatures in the book – in the ‘mind-picture-speech’ way that Anna describes her own communication.

      Like

  10. disperser says:

    OK . . . are you saying Anna is actually communicating with the Leopard? Or are you remarking on the coincidence this made the news at the same time as your writing.

    Like

    • colonialist says:

      I am amazed at the communication on the one hand – the implications are profound.
      On the other hand, I am struck by the coincidence of my having written about ‘telepathic’ communciation with a leopard well before the actual event made any news I was aware of.

      Like

      • disperser says:

        Facilitated communication is not new, and thoroughly shown to not work between humans (a ‘facilitator’ and autistic children, for instance) which are at least of the same species.

        From her site:
        >>>>> Whilst the actual mechanism for this is unknown, various investigative sciences (e.g. new physics) attribute it to an aspect of the energy that animates all matter. Thoughts and emotions, too, have a very real electromagnetic energetic consequence that can be perceived. In practice, the key to receptivity lies in intention – which is as much a matter of the heart as it is of the mind. As interspecies communication is a telepathic/energetic phenomenon, it occurs regardless of the physical proximity of the conversing parties. It is a form of remote or distant communication that does not require being in each other’s presence. <<<>>>She speaks of our energy, of quantum view-points and of tuning into frequencies. Later into the documentary, various indigenous people share their understanding of the ancient experience of animal communication and connection. Later still, we are introduced to Anna’s friend Jon Young, another inter-species communicator. She describes to him how learning to soften her body and her mind allowed for a more intuitive experience to develop – whilst Jon speaks of the first time he saw a line of silver energy along the earth, guiding him to a deer he was seeking. Jon himself is a renowned tracker, experienced in wilderness awareness.<<<<

        You can read (or could) read similar things in John Edward's site, or the thankfully departed Sylvia Brown.

        I respect animals much more than I respect the vast majority of humans, and that's why until Anna can prove her "skill" in controlled conditions (they always claim disruption to the 'energy' when they fail), I regard her as no more than any other charlatan milking money from people (which she is). Of course, I don't know . . . it could be she is sincere in her delusion.

        Like

      • disperser says:

        (Reposted with different delimiters; the ones I was using messed up the formatting and hid some of the text)

        Facilitated communication is not new, and thoroughly shown to not work between humans (a ‘facilitator’ and autistic children, for instance) which are at least of the same species.

        From her site:
        ( Whilst the actual mechanism for this is unknown, various investigative sciences (e.g. new physics) attribute it to an aspect of the energy that animates all matter. Thoughts and emotions, too, have a very real electromagnetic energetic consequence that can be perceived. In practice, the key to receptivity lies in intention – which is as much a matter of the heart as it is of the mind. As interspecies communication is a telepathic/energetic phenomenon, it occurs regardless of the physical proximity of the conversing parties. It is a form of remote or distant communication that does not require being in each other’s presence.)

        Wow . . . ‘new physics’. Also, the typical ‘various investigative sciences’ is offered without any links. And let me see . . . ‘attribute’ . . . is that like ‘make up’?

        Also from her site:
        (She speaks of our energy, of quantum view-points and of tuning into frequencies. Later into the documentary, various indigenous people share their understanding of the ancient experience of animal communication and connection. Later still, we are introduced to Anna’s friend Jon Young, another inter-species communicator. She describes to him how learning to soften her body and her mind allowed for a more intuitive experience to develop – whilst Jon speaks of the first time he saw a line of silver energy along the earth, guiding him to a deer he was seeking. Jon himself is a renowned tracker, experienced in wilderness awareness.)

        You can read (or could) read similar things in John Edward’s site, or the thankfully departed Sylvia Brown.

        I respect animals much more than I respect the vast majority of humans, and that’s why until Anna can prove her “skill” in controlled conditions (they always claim disruption to the ‘energy’ when they fail), I regard her as no more than any other charlatan milking money from people (which she is). Of course, I don’t know . . . it could be she is sincere in her delusion.

        Like

        • colonialist says:

          A rationale I always find laughable among the ‘scientific’ community is one which takes something as complex as thought or behaviour and expects it to react uniformly under ‘contolled’ conditions.
          It is akin to saying, ‘This horse won’t respond every time I offer leg-aids; therefore it doesn’t respond to leg-aids.’ Or, ‘This has been proven to be an illusion; therefore all similar ones must be the same.’
          Also, the double back-flips that community tends to do to ‘explain’ or dismiss phenomena which take them outside a narrow zone of comfort.

          Like

        • disperser says:

          If that were the case, we would still be banging rocks in caves. Our knowledge progresses with inquiry; there is not a scientist who does not dream of discovering something that will immortalize their name in history.

          However, I agree with part of what you say. We have a great affinity for dogs (and vice versa) but we know little about how they think (until recently – first brain scan MRI on dogs trained not to move indicates interesting similarities in emotional states).

          And that’s the thing . . . yes, animals have emotions; yes, animals communicate their emotions; yes, animals respond to how they are approached and handled. Yes to all that.

          No to someone claiming actual communication. We see one video, edited, with a narrative. Could it have happened? Sure. I don’t think they faked the video. But I do think she had as many ‘failures’ to communicate as successes.

          You say one of the fault of skeptics is saying:
          ‘This has been proven to be an illusion; therefore all similar ones must be the same.’

          There is a similar fault in believers . . . they claim a given effect is real, but when it doesn’t work they rationalize all sorts of stuff to explain the failure, never questioning that perhaps they are wrong, and that there are other explanations.

          There are people who are very good at “communicating” with animals based on responding to their needs and interacting in a way that fits the animal’s programming. The show “The Dog Whisperer” is an excellent example of that, and the results are amazing. Watch any video of rescue animals, and the transformation in animals are amazing (and heart warming). But there are no claims of actual telepathic connection.

          That leopard had been used to handlers who treated it a wild and dangerous beast (which it is). Response to certain visual and behavioral clues is a conditioned response. Come at me with a bat or knife, and I will have a different response than if you approach me with candy and flowers (actually, I will likely have the same response, but that’s just me).

          Humans are very good at ‘wanting to believe’. Millions of people believe some people can speak to the dead, tell the future, heal with touch, do remote viewings. Heck, there are literally thousands of videos showing gurus performing miracles their followers say cannot, or could not have been faked. And yes, in there there is the claim of telepathic connections . . . do you know how it’s ‘proven’? It’s not. It never is. And even questioning it literally brings the ire of those who believe.

          It’s a wonderful thing to imagine we have certain abilities, the easy way to solve problems, the knowledge of the universe within our grasp . . . I too wish for it. But I need more than a staged demonstration. I suppose others don’t.

          Like

          • colonialist says:

            I am biased in a way, because I have personally had, or have been privy to the accounts from close, trusted and disbelieving relations or friends of, experiences which either prove some form of telepathy or require explanations which are far more wildly implausible.
            I have thus developed a distrust of ‘scientific method” as a means of establishing whether certain forces exist or not in certain connections where the nature of them is subject to too many variables. My view is that they exist, and that they are not going to respond in the same way every time within controlled circumstances – as will gravity or the like. If they exist, then there is a scientific explanation. The fact that this has not yet been provided does not invalidate them.
            The fact that my disbelief has been suspended in regard to this one phenomenon makes me reluctant to dismiss other frequently reported ones out of hand.

            Like

            • disperser says:

              Fair enough. We each seek to explain our experiences to our satisfaction.

              However, there is a big difference between saying “I don’t know” and making a claim of, for example, telepathy. Why not magic? Why not alternate dimension? Why not alien intervention? (actually, all those are currently claimed by different people and even groups for all sorts of unexplained things) For that matter, my not chance?

              My replies are directed at getting individuals to realize when they themselves are accepting an explanation for no other reason than that’s what they can imagine. You might be distrustful of the scientific method, but what if you are wrong, and the refusal to look elsewhere, to establish whether something is a real phenomenon or not keeps you from discovering something that could indeed help humanity?

              There is also my distrust of stuff that looks like an advertisement for anyone who claims special abilities, and for those abilities to be offered for profit.

              It strikes me odd, for instance, the majority of psychics, telepaths, healers, do what they do for donations, financial help, etc. To me it’s akin to some churches offering blessings for a fee. Really?

              . . . because, I have to tell you, if I had such a gift, it would be offered for free.

              Like

              • colonialist says:

                Now, that is a SERIOUS misconception. Say you have a brilliant gift for swatting balls into small holes. Nobody takes it amiss that you make lots of money out of it. You have a gift for slicing naughty bits out of brains. Your fabulous fees don’t raise an eyebrow. Why, then, should one not cash in on any other abilities, be they in the direction of the psychic, or religion, or whatever, or not?

                Like

                • disperser says:

                  Getting paid for either of those is not directly from individuals. Also, in both those cases there is demonstrable abilities that can be quantified and measured.

                  Let’s put it like this . . . I equate psychics charging for their services the same way as Batman or Superman asking for fees to help. Come to think of it, churches also ask believers for cash donations for their “services” so I suppose it’s not unheard of.

                  Like

                  • disperser says:

                    Sorry, there are individuals who charge the patients themselves for their healing services because what they offer does not work, and often results in harm to the patient. . . . I’m hoping the FDA closes the worst of those offenders soon, before another kid dies.

                    The only plus I see in this is that hopefully no animals will be harmed.

                    Like

                  • colonialist says:

                    No, the logic here fails. Why shouldn’t Batman and Superman charge? After all, it is what they do.
                    This is similar to the attitude that social workers or charity workers or animal benefits should be working for free, Why?
                    And, you tell me that the efforts of most psychologists can be quantified and measured. A lot of that is pure piffle, but if people are prepared to pay for it, good luck to them.

                    Like

                    • colonialist says:

                      As for the healing services – now there is a new ball game. Some of our sangomas do the most ridiculous superstitious stuff, yet actually get results, probably from activating self-healing – or, who knows? There are numerous documented cases of alternative healing working where conventional means have failed hopelessly. There again, I speak from knowing such people personally.

                      Like

                    • disperser says:

                      We won’t agree here. I’ll keep my opinion it’s at best wishful thinking, and at worse outright deception.

                      Time will tell.

                      Like

  11. misswhiplash says:

    Wonderful…animal communication is something we do every time we approach or speak to an animal. It does not always need words..a hand or look does just as well. Maybe a leopard is slightly different but its still a sorta cat just a bit bigger than kitty

    Like

  12. Synchronicity is the strangest thing, but it really does happen.

    Like

You have the right to remain silent - but please don't!

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s