I hate to give you a more complex puzzle here, but. . .
Interesting Question #1: Can you tell me which government introduced the world's first anti-smoking propaganda campaign?
A: The Nazi Party.
Interesting Question #2. . . With the number of smokers decreasing in the West, why is it that the number of cases of lung cancer is higher than ever before? (That figure includes people who have never smoked.)
Interesting Question #3. . . Which are the only two drugs which actively increase an individual's level of alertness and perception without compromising judgment?
A: Caffeine and Nicotine.
Interesting Question #4. . . Of all the tobacco growers in the world, which country most ardently refuses to use genetically modified tobacco plants, chemical fertilizers, additives, (toxic or otherwise), in their smoking products, --and which also has a life-long trade embargo imposed upon it by the U.S.?
A: Cuba.
Tobacco is used in Indian ceremonies to open aspects of the brain to levels of spiritual awareness which result in access to knowledge and energetic awareness. These are things which are in direct conflict with the "Go Back To Sleep, Citizen" mentality encouraged by the Government.
Interesting Question #4. . . How many, (often truly toxic), additives are the corporate cigarette manufacturers allowed to put into their products which have been shown to make people sick?
A: 464.
Consider: Virtually EVERY message sent to us by the government is a lie or manipulation designed to keep us in shackles. Why on earth would a multi-billion dollar push to stop us from smoking be any different? Indeed, the level of force with which the push has been implemented should be an indicator of the fear the Government holds for the simple power of the Tobacco leaf.
It is considered by some, myself included, that smoke from clean, un-adultered Tobacco leaf is NOT harmful. I know a couple of guys in their 80's who grow their own tobacco for personal use, make their own pipe tobacco and cigars. They are very fit for men in their 80's. There are many stories of such people. The psychology programmed into us through the media which has us associating burning things with cancer is very effective. I consider the result to be a type of nasty-placebo effect. Some smoke isn't good for you; it depends on the content. Marijuana smoke feels raw and makes one cough. It IS toxic. Tobacco smoke is smooth and doesn't make you cough. The body knows.
Human lungs are designed to intake air and everything in the air; this includes tonnes of particles which are not just oxygen and inert gases. Human lungs are well equipped to handle a reasonable amount of smoke.
After thirty-some years of not smoking, based on everything I'd read, I wanted to give it a try and have found the results quite amazing.
I recommend you stop trying to quit. --Your body and soul knows what it needs. Getting cravings weeks after quitting has nothing to do with chemical addiction; it doesn't take that long for the nicotine and resultant chemicals to leave your system. Cravings which occur weeks and months after quitting suggests that your body is trying to re-balance and seek a substance it feels is required for a desired level of functionality. If your system is clean of nicotine and still craves tobacco, perhaps it is a good idea to listen to your body. Tobacco is not crack. Crack doesn't improve memory. Crack users don't get Alzheimer's less frequently than non-crack users. The same cannot be said of tobacco, which actually does seem to prevent Alzheimer's disease and various other degenerative brain illnesses.
I know this is all completely broken-sounding thinking which runs counter to the state message, but instead of seeking nicorette gum, I would recommend you seek clean Cuban leaf or some of Natural American Spirit's organically grown leaf. Or grow your own in clean earth with no chemical fertilizers.
At last count, I had just shy of 500 megabytes worth of saved websites and various documents scooped from the collective world news services since around the year 2000. I don't even know where to start. It's like asking me to find a source to prove that water is wet. Nobody says such a thing directly. You have to infer it through cross examination and through the use of your mental faculties. In this case, anybody with eyes, a brain and an hour of time each day to scan the news is capable of learning the nature of the world.
Define genocide, and cite your source.
Genocide: "Killing everybody who isn't a Jew who occupies the land Israel wants to take for its own."
Yeah, they're being slow and methodical about it, but "Bulldozing Houses" just doesn't inspire that Geneva Convention feeling.
My source, again, is the collective world news since around September 2001, when Israel stepped up its campaign against Palestine under the guise of 'combating terror'. If you honestly need sources from me to validate this, you need more help than I can personally provide.
If you have been following, you'll also note that Israel has expanded their war recently. Hundreds of dead in Lebanon, and about a half million refugees in just over a week. Nice job!
Which goes back to my original post that there certainly are people who contest whether acupuncture works.
Okay. I'll grant you that. I mistakenly believed that people weren't so willingly ignorant given the number of agencies and tests which purport positive results. --The AMA's quote you provide denunciating Acupuncture despite all the evidence is particularly embarrassing, though not terribly surprising as they are a union of doctors schooled in Western medicine, (20 of the 21 board members are white Americans), who are naturally going to have a massive bias against anything which threatens to upset their pool of knowledge which they each spent a significant number of years committing their lives to learning and identifying themselves with.
No, not really. Fruits making money selling acupuncture, reflexology, and sugar pills certainly do take away from the profit of large drug companies, but if it became standard practice, some of the less scrupulous ones would just dive in as well. For a more plausible conspiracy theory dealing with the power structure of the West, see the movie "The Constant Gardener."
You are not seeing the big picture. Here are just a few points. ..
1. Stem Cell research is based on the idea that cells cannot de-differentiate and that you need stem cells in order to re-grow parts of the body. It has been demonstrated that normal cells can dedifferentiate, and indeed do, and that it is controlled by the body through micro DC currents. This means that most of today's cancer research and indeed, massive portions of the billion-dollar medical industry is needlessly misdirected into the pockets of many hundreds of thousands of doctors, researchers and pharmaceutical and medical equipment company employees who all want their paychecks and are more than willing to look the other way when new ideas come along which might upset the gravy train. And that's the small potatoes.
2. If the idea that cells can be manipulated with electromagnetics is accepted as fact, then following from that is the notion that the human brain and mind can also be so manipulated. It can be and is. The idea that humans can be controled through relatively simple means is simply not talked about. People walk around believing that they are not constantly subject to mood control and behavior modification. The public, however, has been programmed to deny this with automatic knee-jerk force. Those who do the research, however, (all of which is available enough), will eventually see how the whole game works. --Just because most people don't bother to read the data does not mean that the data ceases to exist.
3. Chi, which is linked to all of this, is indeed understood to some degree by Western science, particularly military science. Denying its existence removes it from the public tool set, and thus limits individuals in their search for their own power; keeps them locked down and easier to control.
Granted, you didn't mention magnets, but, since usually acupuncture and magnets go together, I thought I'd head it off at the cuff. As far as definitive sources on the state of reality, stage performers make their living with trickery. The ones I referenced happen to ADMIT that it's trickery, rather than trying to pass it off as some mystical bullshit. Please do some basic research on them before dismissing them merely as people looking to protect their egos. Whatever flaws they have as messengers doesn't negate the honesty of their respective messages.
I've actually done quite a lot of research on these people. I've studied with a professional stage magician, and I know a fair bit about the craft, and believe me, James Randi in particular is a certifiable egomaniac. Magicians have a most peculiar version of tunnel vision; because they know first-hand how easy it is to trick human perceptions, they automatically fall into the belief that ALL human perceptions are faulty with regard to any observation which falls outside the parameters o
So a U.S. Government body gave control of a portion of the internet to a U.S. Corporation. Gee whiz.
All that need happen is the U.S. to generate some excuse to clamp down with martial law and have all those executive orders passed into law by a compliant congress, the U.S. corporations become arms of the U.S. government and all the ambassadors and foreign representatives will cower in their hotel rooms.
This move to give power to the ICANN is nothing but superficial public perception sculpting.
Nobody that believes in woo-woo contests it, you mean? Those pesky scientists with their logic and methods and critical thinking, on the other hand, actually do tend to be slightly skeptical about acupuncture.
First of all, James Randi doesn't actually say that acupuncture doesn't work in the article you linked to. And he'd be a fool to, because even the National Institute of Health agrees that it does. --They don't know how, but that's hardly the issue. From the Wikipedia article on acupuncture. . .
The NIH consensus statement said that, "the data in support of acupuncture are as strong as those for many accepted Western medical therapies" and added that "there is clear evidence that needle acupuncture is efficacious for adult postoperative and chemotherapy nausea and vomiting and probably for the nausea of pregnancy... There is reasonable evidence of efficacy for postoperative dental pain... reasonable studies (although sometimes only single studies) showing relief of pain with acupuncture on diverse pain conditions such as menstrual cramps, tennis elbow, and fibromyalgia..."
It works. Simple as that. And that should be enough to raise questions. The problem is that the answers are very upsetting to the power structure of the West.
Penn & Teller did an episode on using magnets for healing. I bet you can get free shipping on the DVD...
Penn & Teller may have done an episode on using magnets for healing, but this is hardly relevant since I made no mention of using magnets for healing. Further, I find it curious that you quote performers as definitive sources on the state of reality. Penn & Teller, and James Randi, as clever as they are, are not scientists. They are stage magicians with tunnel vision and egos to protect.
I call BS. And adding a condescending remark about people who disagree with you doesn't mean you are immune to criticism.
Using popular phrases like, "I call BS", is indicative of somebody who falls prey to group-think, and since group-think is most often the product of media manipulation, I am not terribly surprised that your post is so contaminated with muddy logic and over-generalized rationalization.
--Now the above comment, you should note, might more reasonably be labeled a 'condescending remark', although it is not intended as such. --And what I wrote at the end of my original post was very much not. Seriously, it is important to question where one's knee jerk reactions come from.
1) "Nobody disagrees with this" -- Nobody, except the scientific community and the National Institute of Health. It does have some positive effects though, but nobody can consistently say what or why.
You are saying two conflicting things here. You are saying that the scientific community doesn't believe acupuncture works, but that acupuncture has some positive effects. So which is it? --The problem is that acupuncture does work. The National Institute of Health was quoted several times in the very article you linked to as saying that they recognize that acupuncture does indeed have a measurable effect. They certainly don't like having to admit it, but so what? --It's certainly enough to make my original point.
2) Pseudoscience: "...the needle cuts through the Earth's magnetic field creating a micro-current..."
This is not pseudoscience. It's basic high school science which every kid in North America is supposed to learn. Conductors when they pass through a magnetic field ALWAYS create an electrical current, whether it is the Earth's or the magnets in an electric generator. Much of human technology would stop cold if this basic principal of physics didn't function as described.
Now, let's click on your user name and see if you are a known troll... YUP! You post 20 times a day and never receive a score above a 2. Phew! It's not just me who thinks you are full of it.
This is simply not accurate; you should look through my posting history with your eyes open. Further, I find it telling that you find relief in believing that you are nestled up tightly with the herd thinking. Guess what? You are not a cow. You are an individual with your own powers of thought and observation. Who cares what everybody else thinks? Unfortunately, there are many, many people like you who have had their egos crushed and reformed to respond with fear and anxiety should they step outside the bounds of consensus thought patterns, and since those thought patterns are usually driven by the crap the TeeVee tells them is true, many, many people are hopelessly ignorant and easily manipulated into fearing their own capacity to learn and express themselves.
Yes, micro-current DC electricity can be used to affect the way cells function in the human body; they can signal cells to start or stop normal biological processes in healing and growth and a multitude of other functions. Robert O. Becker has written extensively on his studies into this area. If you have not read his books, order one and read it. For under $5 dollars and shipping, (less than a movie and popcorn), what have you got to lose? His work is highly informed and challenges modern medicine in significant ways.
Some notes of interest. . .
Acupuncture works. Nobody contests this. --The theory is that by inserting a metal needle and setting it to lightly rotate, the needle cuts through the Earth's magnetic field creating a micro-current which then affects the body in a variety of different ways.
Electromagnetic fields similarly are able to stimulate cells to react in similar ways; this is probably the basis of all concerns regarding Cell Phone radiation.
How can EM fields affect humans? --It is understood by some that EM fields can be used to affect emotions and states of awareness. With specific application to the primary visual cortex, they can even be used to cause temporary blindness. (Read article half-way down.)
The HAARP Array, supposedly used for research, is also suggested by some to be a means of mind-control; that is, beams of specific EM can be reflected from the sky onto terrestrial targets. The science is not contested, just the intent.
In a world where the U.S. secret services admit to having run extensive (and fairly gruesome) mind-control experiments, where secrecy and paranoia run rampant through the government, where Israel is allowed to commit genocide in the Middle East without the media blinking an eye, and where Bush is allowed to build a police state, all to the drums of Christian-Cult Apocalypse insanity, the idea of population control through manipulation of EM fields is not so very far fetched, now is it?
Disagree? Before responding, ask yourself in all honestly why you disagree and where the impulse stems from.
Not true (well yes, he was a 1th century monk), Occam's razor cannot be used to prove any point you like depending on your starting belief.
Actually, it really can. Belief is all powerful in this regard. --That is, if you happen to believe in God, like old William did, and if you don't happen to believe in evolution and big bangs, etc., then you are not breaking the rules of the razor. This is not contested; Occam wasn't breaking his own rule when he 'proved' the existence of God. And today there are lots of people who still don't believe in evolution or big bangs, and nobody can provide total proof of anything, evolution or otherwise; (re: 'the brain floating in the tank', example), so any accepted points are done so entirely based on what people believe. Occam's razor is simply not an objective comparison method; it merely reflects the subject's prior beliefs. Luckily, Occam didn't mention "Burden of Proof." That's an additional piece people tack on, I believe, due to our cultural programming via the oft televised court-room drama.
If you have two possible explanations for a given phenomenon (your visual disturbances) and one of them involves physiological processes and another involves physiological processes + psychic phenomenon, which is more likely to be correct?
Your logic is fine. But it's that word 'Likely' which I take exception to. It's entirely subjective.
Example: Back when the invention of the telephone was announced, the world went into an uproar, and many respected people of science scoffed in disbelief. One newspaper ran a full page explanation provided with extensive research illustrating the impossibility of a telephone device. --They showed using the best maths and physics known at the time that sound simply could not travel any appreciable distance down thin wire tubes. (Like those 'talking-tubes' found in old ships.)
Bell's sceptics posited that either A), Bell had discovered a way to cheat the laws of physics regarding sound waves, or B) He was lying. Based on what the sceptics knew and believed, according to Occam, they were correct in making the assumption that Bell was most probably a liar.
The point of the matter is that unexpected things do happen, and the logical host of possible explanations we currently have available to make sense of our reality, no matter how good they sound or how cleverly they are arranged, are only correct if they are really correct.
But if we must use Occam to some good, let's try it this way. ..
Matter, I think we can agree, doesn't really exist as it appears. --As I understand it, one of the more popular theories in physics today tells us that matter is reducible to a series of sub particles, the bottom layer of which are made up from what are theorized to be little string-like standing wave forms, which finally are not particles but behave as though they were. --What medium exactly these little wave forms vibrate in seems to be up for debate, but the point is that there is no matter; there is only energy.
This makes our perceived reality much like an illusion or holographic projection of sorts. We are made up of nothing but little wave forms in an energetic medium. --Now according to the current state of my belief system, this fundamental energetic medium is good for more than just playing host to little standing waves which make up atoms; it can transmit waves which are not involved in the maintaining of all the sub-particles of atomic matter. It is, I believe, the medium through which fundamental 'energy' may be transmitted.
Now, let's say that the little standing waves from which all atoms are constructed are not alone. I think it is reasonable to assume, given the nature of mediums, that there might exist other little wave forms of a different frequency. And like waves on an ocean which are observable from a ship, microwaves being transmitted through the same ocean water would be able to co-exist in the medium but w
Oh, no such thing! I read what you wrote about your mystical journey toward your belief in telepathy. It was plain as day. You admitted having absolutely no empirical evidence for the experience you perceived that led you to believe in magical mind powers.
Plain as day? Nonsense. You're still making the basic assumption that I am wrong based only on your interpretation of what I wrote, and you believe yourself to be right. And this does indeed require faith, so please get off that high horse.
I stand by that statement. In the history of earth, there is absolutely no evidence for telepathy. Just as there is no evidence for the existence of ghosts, UFOs or God. There is only belief and faith, based on anectotes and human fallability.
Aside from the fact that you are completely wrong on every point, I don't understand how can you make a statement like the above with a straight face. The history of Earth? Come on. Were you in attendance for the history of the Earth? No? Then you cannot make a statement like the one you just made. Simple as that.
And you accuse me of muddy thinking. Sheesh.
If Randi uses thinking as 'clear' and 'rational' as yours, (and from all evidence, he he does), then nobody will collecting a dime from that fool any time soon.
You are presenting anecdotes as evidence in order to convince other people of something. However, anecdotes are not a valid form of evidence. They are the tools of hucksters and charlatans. If you want to convince someone that a particular phenomenon is real, then you must present valid, empirical evidence.
Stories are also the tools of entire civilizations for effectively communicating ideas. Should I just shut up and never share any experiences which might prove enlightening to somebody simply because I can only provide myself as a footnote? That's rather limiting. In any case, it hasn't stopped us from having an interesting discussion, has it now?
1) It's more likely to be an odd form of floaters that deviates more from the norm than actual psychic phenomenon. Application of Occam's razor says that if there is a simple, plausible explanation that doesn't require confabulation or the multiplication of entities, it is more likely to be correct.
Occam was a 12th century monk who came up with his logical razor to prove the existence of God. His logical argument is useful for proving any point whatsoever depending on the starting belief about what is and is not more likely to be possible. It is therefore a broken argument which perhaps serves best as a rule of thumb. --Particularly as the description of 'floater' still doesn't match what I described, AND because 'energy' as I accept it is a fundamental element of reality, therefore quite common. Given those starting parameters, which way would Occam spin, (in his grave)?
) You carefully avoided the question of whether or not it could be a migraine headache. Now that I think about it, it seems more likely that you are experiencing painless migraines than floaters, but Occam's razor still applies. Migraines are more likely than psychic phenomenon. Here's a comparison from your description and descriptions of migraine "auras" on wikipedia:
Carefully avoided? How about I didn't disagree in the first place. Unlike bits of gunk floating around inside my eyeball, it IS entirely possible that my brain was reacting on a physiological level. So what? Nobody understands what causes migraines to happen. Why not energetic knots? Energy and physicality are directly linked. That's why things like acupuncture work.
As for the placebo effect. . . Since it does indeed appear to relieve some degree of pain in some migraine sufferers, then what does that tell us about the nature of our physiological selves? That is. . , since the mind, awareness and energy are interdependent, how does a successful placebo effect negate the possibility of energy being linked to the change of state?
Yes, I know, that's somewhat pedantic; the change of state was linked in my case to the actions of the energy practitioner, and this is what you are taking exception to. All I can offer is that it worked.
Now, perhaps I was being fooled in that case. Perhaps it was an elaborate ruse. Perhaps the practitioner just randomly chose that moment to say, "Wow. What's that around your head?" on the off-chance that it might link up to something I was actually experiencing. --Even though he'd never done anything like that before, no random fishing trips typical of the cold-reader; (a system of false divination I've had the chance to study up close from the bookshelf of a professional stage magician I know.)
But I must admit, it IS possible. It's also possible that I am watching you right now through a telescope and that certain facets of your life are deliberate constructs which you cannot see through. It's also possible that you are a brain floating in a tank experiencing the world as an elaborate simulation. --My point being that at some point one must decide which parts of the world to take on faith as real. I admit that the idea of energy practice to those who have had little or no direct conscious experience in that realm seems impossible enough to invoke the idea that it could all be a big act. For my part, I ha
Your focus has become cross-eyed. Seriously dude, drugs are bad, 'kay? Maybe you oughtta take one of those homeopathic detoxifying concoctions. Your chi obviously needs a recharge, you were born under the sign of the fish weren't you? Fish are highly susceptible to heavy metal poisoning. Cut out the drugs and the metallica. Then swing by for a free personality test, 'cuz I think you have some bad thetans in there.
Wow. For somebody who is convinced that they hold the superior and more rational view point, your arguments are amazingly rude, immature and void of logic. --Further, rather than deal with the points offered, you instead fall back on cheap ridicule and highly biased dogma.
It's interesting that you use irrational behavior to make the case for your rationality.
Did they laugh at you a lot during school? Bad experiences with women while growing up? Was the only real acceptance you ever had found in high test scores and pats on the head during high school science class?
I'm guessing you have a lot of internal work to do, and it's not getting done by using emotional arguments to lose debates on Slashdot.
Great, you've just described a reliable, repeatable form of telepathy. Does it magically disappear when it is being tested? If not, please have your friend apply to be tested. There's a million dollars in it for her, and a profound leap forward in our understanding of the human mind to be made for all mankind.
No, it doesn't magically disappear when tested.
However, she's not nearly dumb enough to fall for the Randi trap. --Please keep in mind that Randi is a stage magician. That means, unless he is different that most people who get into performing, he has a giant ego. People with giant egos don't put up with being made into fools. Nor is he in the business of having his career squashed, or having to write million dollar checks. Honestly! Think about it.
Beyond this, my friend is also connected to high level politics and has seen first hand what happens to people who try to rock the boat by challenging orthodox power structures. The Chinese government didn't wipe out all those hundreds of martial arts temples for no reason.
The world is much more dangerous and amazing than most people will realize in this lifetime. It doesn't mean you can't learn, though. Knowledge is open to anybody who makes the choice to seek. Your focus really does determine your reality.
I've had exactly what you describe. Happens every few years. It's happened to me, it's happened to at least one other person I went to school with, and it's happened to you, so I'm going to guess it's probably not a rare spiritual phenomenon. Next time you see a doctor you should ask about it. You will get a answer more meaningful than 'energetic reality which doesn't fit with the standard reality.' I'll ask my doctor the next time I see him too.
But will the doctor be able to make a diagnosis the instant I walk in the door without me having to open my mouth, and then wave his hands and make it go away?
I find it ironic that we're talking about vision problems and the first two people who have responded to my post seemed to have had trouble seeing the full text!
You have conflated your lack of understanding of events around you into a faith that telepathy exists.
Well now. That's quite the assumption. You do realize that to make and believe in such a bold statement about me requires faith, don't you? (Unless, of course, you have some impirical evidence for your theory about the events transpiring around me.)
To date, despite decades of research, there is not a scintilla of evidence for telepathy.
Really now? Is that taken on faith as well, or can you back that up? Actually, I know you can't. Heck, my own experiments offer several 'scintillas', so you're already wrong before I even start pulling books off the shelf. --Or did you only mean 'experiments' which you saw on the TeeVee? Perhaps you ought to do some of your own research on the subject sometime rather than trust in stage magicians with careers and huge egos (and a million dollars) to protect. I somehow suspect you won't. And what does that say about you?
You fit the stereotype, I'm afraid. Time and again, those who are most afraid to look generally commit the very offenses they charge others with.
Sorry, but personal anecdotes don't count as empirical evidence.
Well, since I am the only one I need to convince in order to further my own understanding of the universe, it hardly matters. Of course, my experiences are just stories to anybody but me; I can only share them in hopes that they might prove useful to others who are also seeking.
It sounds like you have "floaters" in your vitreous humour, or possibly migraine headaches (due the nausea).
Actually, I read your link and it doesn't sound like 'floaters' even a tiny bit. Please re-read both descriptions and then do a comparison. Sheesh. Next thing you'll tell me is that I was seeing Venus!
If I were you, I'd go to the doctor and get it checked out.
Thankfully, you are not me. --And as I explained, the phenomenon promptly vanished with the application of a little energy manipulation. Try to read more carefully in the future.
Statistical analysis is interesting and powerful, and the idea that people are great pattern recognizers is also interesting, but to suggest that these alone can account for all the weird stuff I've experienced and seen doesn't cut it. There are other forces like intent and intuition, and the general feeling of something being right or wrong, (for lack of a better means of describing it).
Case in point. . .
I was in love with this girl who was quite powerful in these matters. She didn't love me back. I saw her maybe once a week. One time, in the middle of my work day, I decided to try to write a poem about her, and through this found myself thinking about her very, very intensely. I was overcome with feelings of love so powerful that my head was swimming; I had never emoted with so much amor regarding her before that time. As my soaring affections were reaching their mile-high crescendo, the phone rang. It was her, calling from across town. She never called me, so I was totally surprised.
"Wow. Hi! I was just-"
"I KNOW! What the heck are you doing?!"
"What?"
"I'm trying to write an essay and you're screwing up my concentration. You think your thoughts are quiet? Holy shit! Your thoughts are usually obnoxiously loud, but this is just ridiculous! Listen to me; you have GOT to start training yourself in this area. I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but you have GOT to learn how to reign in your energy. You Westerners are so totally ignorant about this stuff! In China people have the common decency to keep their energy from getting so sloppy."
Ouch. (This was a particularly hard part of my life; a period of two and a half years where I had to really deal with the fact that thoughts are not private to everybody.)
Now was this a hit among a sea of misses? Was this a matter of statistics? Hardly. This was like getting kicked in the head, and it was far from the first time. This sort of thing manifested regularly in many different ways, involving several different people. I can tell many more (and far weirder) stories all which suggest similar conclusions; that the world is far more interesting than the orthodox scientists would have us believe.
I can understand, though, if people use the tools available, (ie, statistics, etc.) to explain things which they have not experienced. Extended perception only arrives to those who are either A) wired for it from birth, or B) who are ready spiritually and who deliberately ask to start learning in those directions.
While your idea more than likely has some degree of truth to it, it doesn't account for any of the experiences I've had in the realm of extended perceptions.
Here's a case in point which suggests a medium through which ESP communication might function. . .
I sometimes experience an odd phenomenon; I will be walking about during my day and then notice in the center of my vision a strange visual distortion. --It looks like a piece of clear crystal with a crack in it and the light being refracted in odd ways. The distortion pulsates and objects on the other side of it are obscured. The phenomenon will start out small and then grow, filling more and more of my vision. (This is usually accompanied by a feeling of nausea.) Then after a while, a clear spot will appear in the center of this big pulsating crystalline chaos. The distortion at this point will start to look like a big fat doughnut. The ring of distortion will grow until it reaches the edges of my peripheral vision, and then eventually vanish off to the sides, whereupon my vision return to normal. The whole process takes about an hour or two, and by the end, I'm usually flat on my back hoping I don't die.
This happens to me once or twice every few years. Not a regular thing by any means. I often wondered if I was about to have a brain hemorrhage or something, but once it passes I generally forget about it.
Okay. That's the background.
So one time I was on my way to visit a friend of mine who teaches Kung Fu and who is very energy aware, and on the bus ride ride over, the weird phenomenon starts up again. When I arrived at the apartment, my friend blinked at me.
"What is that?" he asked, looking at a spot about three feet to the left of my head as I entered.
"You're aware of this?" I asked, incredulous, vaguely indicating the space in front of my eyes.
"Wow. That's really weird. I've never seen anything like that before. One of your threads has a knot in it. Hold on."
He reached out to the spot he was looking at and tugged and brushed lightly at the air. Almost instantly the distortion vanished and my vision cleared up. The nausea was gone and I felt clear and normal again. The whole change took place in less than ten seconds.
I can tell you a dozen stories like that one, and they all point to an energetic reality which doesn't fit with the standard reality as posited by orthodox science.
I have witnessed and have experienced many instances of telepathy and various other so-called 'supernatural' phenomenon over the years. They have often been unexpected and have been entirely self-evident to those who are appropriately involved in the experience. Curiously, none of my experiences have the qualities which would be nicely pinned down or called upon for sceptical examination by the James Randis of the world.
--Further, and perhaps more importantly, none of the participants I've ever met care to prove to the world the existence of forces which exist beyond the bounds of orthodox science. Their own experiences are enough for themselves, and it was for them that they are meant. Other people's belief and knowledge structures are the domain of each individual and should not be abridged or forced upon. The search and growth of the soul is a personal journey, and the recognizing of such forces and energies as are linked to telepathy are signposts upon that personal journey. In simple terms, not everybody is ready at the same time. When you are ready, when you ask and seek in earnest and without fear, you will be shown. James Randi and his ilk are not seeking; they are erecting walls of safety against things which frighten them.
I remember reading the first book when I was fifteen. It had a nice cover and the story was engaging enough. Nothing spectacular, but worth the cover price I suppose.
I tried reading the next one in the series, but I just sort of stopped caring about half way through. "The writers actually recorded their own play sessions? Really? No, seriously. --They write these books from their game notes? Really? You're joking, right?"
I just couldn't get past this aspect, and I don't know if my response was entirely fair. Just because my D&D games happened to be dumb didn't mean that a group-created novel would necessarily stink. --And it didn't stink. It just wasn't particularly brilliant. There were no big ideas or grand vision to be found in the Dragonlance series. --Though I'm told that as the books progress, the story becomes filled with Mormon imagery to reflect the writer's religious bias, but that's hardly a selling point. Otherwise, it's just a fun swords and sorcery yarn. Innocent Popcorn; good hearted but ultimately meaningless. Kind of like Salt Lake City.
Whatever the case, I just couldn't manage to get into the series. --Although writing a book series based on a D&D game was also perhaps one of the most clever marketing tactics I've seen in publishing. I mean, they still keep those books in print after all these years! Not many pulp fantasy novels can make that claim.
Never forget that pastimes that allow you to channel your anger at something else than another person is always A Good Thing.
Channeling anger away from real action is a solution of sorts, but not the best one in the long run. Channeling always widens the channel. Anger, I think, is best used as an emotional red light indicating that something is wrong which one should then seek to fix by altering the conditions which create the anger. --Either by changing the external world or by dealing with internal baggage, whichever is more appropriate. Bitter acceptance and channeling anger through a pass-time is indicative of one who does not have the knowledge or courage to change their world. While there are some lives which cannot be easily altered, these are far less common, especially in the West, than one might think.
I do see many games as direct mind-programming. --There's a new one coming out which brings the charade of population conditioning to a whole new level; funded by none other than U2's Bono, the game depicts the overthrow of the democratically elected Hugo Chavez, the so-called 'criminal' leader of Venezuela who had the audacity to throw out oil trade agreements made with American companies made through corrupt strong-arm politics before he managed to come to power, and to actually benefit his own people with the resulting money which now stays in Venezuela.
American media, which includes games, is largely designed to turn people into morally re-wired psychopaths with false concepts of reality.
Interestingly, I also began learning about this kind of thing while playing a Star Wars title; the first 'Jedi Knight', where depending on how you directed your blaster fire and your choice of force powers collected, your character went dark or light. I played through on both sides to get my money's worth, and found the experience troubling to the point where I started asking questions. The answers I began to dig up made me blink.
And now that you're beyond your first time, how easy will it be when you are called upon to be psychotic in real life?
Careful which direction you allow your neurons to fire in. The pathways in your brain grow wider and more permanent with use. --And they don't differentiate between virtual and real. That's why computer simulators are used by flight schools and the military. They work.
I switched an entire friend-group because I got to see how people really functioned on the inside.
Torturing creatures in game is like the adult version of watching kids pull the legs off grasshoppers. Unsettling and infuriating, and it made sense of much of their normal social behavior which I'd always found somewhat baffling and painful to be around.
No more an never again.
As for video games. . . If it disturbs me in the wrong way, I quit playing. I don't like a computer being able to direct my choice path into dark areas. I will not allow a computer, or more precisely, a screwed up programmer with psychological issues to affect the direction in which my neuron pathways strengthen.
Uh oh, someone else has been listening to bullshit again. Iraq is safer than Atlanta and many other US cities now, as well as many other countries like Jamaica. If you want to be pissed at Bush, be pissed that he's been more successful decreasing violence in Iraq than at home.
I don't even know where to start. How about. . .
"Does your definition of 'Safe' include people with brown skin?"
Or maybe, "When was the last time you had your door kicked in by storm troopers?"
Or perhaps, "When you say 'violence' do you only mean the kind which doesn't wear the mark of authority and carry an automatic weapon?"
Or maybe I should just point to ancillary items and say things like, "Shrapnel and bullets aside, I wasn't aware that Atlanta had been infused with a fine spray of depleted uranium dust."
But maybe I'll instead just ask. . .
"Source Please."
And then wait indefinitely while you realize your link was scripted by the DOD or some similar body with conflicting interests not consistent with actual journalism.
I just see you as one of the handfull of people that will turn their cheek to those that strap bombs to the backs then blow up people drinking coffee or riding on a train however have a fit when a bomb falls on a families house tat has terrorist hiding in it behind the women and children.
This is a very emotionally charged argument. --Which is exactly why the Israeli secret services like to fan resistance movements into being, drug small boys, strap bombs to them and send them into IDF lines, (with the media conveniently alerted beforehand so that they could be waiting to capture the whole thing on film.) Do you remember that fiasco three years back? There have been numerous slip-ups since then; stories of deliberate false-flag bombing maneuvers designed to get everybody on both sides all worked up and thinking emotionally rather than rationally. --And once the ball is rolling, you can let the anger on both sides play its course with just a few pushes here and there to keep things boiling. --Make no mistake; there are forces at work which are deliberate in creating conditions conducive to endless war, and they are not in the places the uninitiated might first expect to find them.
So no, I certainly do not like stories of people being killed in coffee shops. But I can also see clearly enough to recognize who the real monsters are and who the dupes and pawns are.
The London Train Bombings last year were another example of the time-tested false-flag maneuver. --There is a ton of evidence which screams to the fact that the 'terrorists' did not do as they were described as doing by the British law officials and the media. --Bomb damage on the trains indicates that explosives were pre-planted under the trains, and were not in duffel bags aboard the trains. --Cameras recording the 'terrorists' could not have been correct as the train arrival and departure times don't match up with the events. There were several key flaws within the official explanation; essentially, the story was a fabrication with real bombs. --And if the British are willing to bomb their own people in order to promote war and hatred of Muslims, then we can certainly expect the U.S. and Israelis to be capable of the same kinds of activity. --Administrations in all three countries are filled with proven liars. This behavior should be expected because it is very effective in securing the agendas people like Bush, Sharon and Blair have stated on and off official record.
Again, I am not saying that there are no terrorists. I am saying that they were largely created and pushed along by the very countries claiming to be at war with them.
The real question is, "Why?"
And the answers are, as I pointed out in my parent post, 1) Money, 2) Power 3) Cultic theories regarding the Apocalypse. There are other reasons, but they are more complex.
The world is just not as simple as the media would like us to think. --And what I am saying is entirely verifiable. You can see for yourself if you look. All it takes is a clear mind, and the desire to stop being made a fool by the authorities. If you really care about people dying, then you have a conscience. That means you are also intelligent and capable of seeing through the lies if you choose to do so.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting Question #1: Can you tell me which government introduced the world's first anti-smoking propaganda campaign?
A: The Nazi Party.
Interesting Question #2. . . With the number of smokers decreasing in the West, why is it that the number of cases of lung cancer is higher than ever before? (That figure includes people who have never smoked.)
Interesting Question #3. . . Which are the only two drugs which actively increase an individual's level of alertness and perception without compromising judgment?
A: Caffeine and Nicotine.
Interesting Question #4. . . Of all the tobacco growers in the world, which country most ardently refuses to use genetically modified tobacco plants, chemical fertilizers, additives, (toxic or otherwise), in their smoking products, --and which also has a life-long trade embargo imposed upon it by the U.S.?
A: Cuba.
Tobacco is used in Indian ceremonies to open aspects of the brain to levels of spiritual awareness which result in access to knowledge and energetic awareness. These are things which are in direct conflict with the "Go Back To Sleep, Citizen" mentality encouraged by the Government.
Interesting Question #4. . . How many, (often truly toxic), additives are the corporate cigarette manufacturers allowed to put into their products which have been shown to make people sick?
A: 464.
Consider: Virtually EVERY message sent to us by the government is a lie or manipulation designed to keep us in shackles. Why on earth would a multi-billion dollar push to stop us from smoking be any different? Indeed, the level of force with which the push has been implemented should be an indicator of the fear the Government holds for the simple power of the Tobacco leaf.
It is considered by some, myself included, that smoke from clean, un-adultered Tobacco leaf is NOT harmful. I know a couple of guys in their 80's who grow their own tobacco for personal use, make their own pipe tobacco and cigars. They are very fit for men in their 80's. There are many stories of such people. The psychology programmed into us through the media which has us associating burning things with cancer is very effective. I consider the result to be a type of nasty-placebo effect. Some smoke isn't good for you; it depends on the content. Marijuana smoke feels raw and makes one cough. It IS toxic. Tobacco smoke is smooth and doesn't make you cough. The body knows.
Human lungs are designed to intake air and everything in the air; this includes tonnes of particles which are not just oxygen and inert gases. Human lungs are well equipped to handle a reasonable amount of smoke.
After thirty-some years of not smoking, based on everything I'd read, I wanted to give it a try and have found the results quite amazing.
I recommend you stop trying to quit. --Your body and soul knows what it needs. Getting cravings weeks after quitting has nothing to do with chemical addiction; it doesn't take that long for the nicotine and resultant chemicals to leave your system. Cravings which occur weeks and months after quitting suggests that your body is trying to re-balance and seek a substance it feels is required for a desired level of functionality. If your system is clean of nicotine and still craves tobacco, perhaps it is a good idea to listen to your body. Tobacco is not crack. Crack doesn't improve memory. Crack users don't get Alzheimer's less frequently than non-crack users. The same cannot be said of tobacco, which actually does seem to prevent Alzheimer's disease and various other degenerative brain illnesses.
I know this is all completely broken-sounding thinking which runs counter to the state message, but instead of seeking nicorette gum, I would recommend you seek clean Cuban leaf or some of Natural American Spirit's organically grown leaf. Or grow your own in clean earth with no chemical fertilizers.
I hope that helps.
-FL
At last count, I had just shy of 500 megabytes worth of saved websites and various documents scooped from the collective world news services since around the year 2000. I don't even know where to start. It's like asking me to find a source to prove that water is wet. Nobody says such a thing directly. You have to infer it through cross examination and through the use of your mental faculties. In this case, anybody with eyes, a brain and an hour of time each day to scan the news is capable of learning the nature of the world.
Define genocide, and cite your source.
Genocide: "Killing everybody who isn't a Jew who occupies the land Israel wants to take for its own."
Yeah, they're being slow and methodical about it, but "Bulldozing Houses" just doesn't inspire that Geneva Convention feeling.
My source, again, is the collective world news since around September 2001, when Israel stepped up its campaign against Palestine under the guise of 'combating terror'. If you honestly need sources from me to validate this, you need more help than I can personally provide.
If you have been following, you'll also note that Israel has expanded their war recently. Hundreds of dead in Lebanon, and about a half million refugees in just over a week. Nice job!
-FL
Which goes back to my original post that there certainly are people who contest whether acupuncture works.
.
Okay. I'll grant you that. I mistakenly believed that people weren't so willingly ignorant given the number of agencies and tests which purport positive results. --The AMA's quote you provide denunciating Acupuncture despite all the evidence is particularly embarrassing, though not terribly surprising as they are a union of doctors schooled in Western medicine, (20 of the 21 board members are white Americans), who are naturally going to have a massive bias against anything which threatens to upset their pool of knowledge which they each spent a significant number of years committing their lives to learning and identifying themselves with.
No, not really. Fruits making money selling acupuncture, reflexology, and sugar pills certainly do take away from the profit of large drug companies, but if it became standard practice, some of the less scrupulous ones would just dive in as well. For a more plausible conspiracy theory dealing with the power structure of the West, see the movie "The Constant Gardener."
You are not seeing the big picture. Here are just a few points. .
1. Stem Cell research is based on the idea that cells cannot de-differentiate and that you need stem cells in order to re-grow parts of the body. It has been demonstrated that normal cells can dedifferentiate, and indeed do, and that it is controlled by the body through micro DC currents. This means that most of today's cancer research and indeed, massive portions of the billion-dollar medical industry is needlessly misdirected into the pockets of many hundreds of thousands of doctors, researchers and pharmaceutical and medical equipment company employees who all want their paychecks and are more than willing to look the other way when new ideas come along which might upset the gravy train. And that's the small potatoes.
2. If the idea that cells can be manipulated with electromagnetics is accepted as fact, then following from that is the notion that the human brain and mind can also be so manipulated. It can be and is. The idea that humans can be controled through relatively simple means is simply not talked about. People walk around believing that they are not constantly subject to mood control and behavior modification. The public, however, has been programmed to deny this with automatic knee-jerk force. Those who do the research, however, (all of which is available enough), will eventually see how the whole game works. --Just because most people don't bother to read the data does not mean that the data ceases to exist.
3. Chi, which is linked to all of this, is indeed understood to some degree by Western science, particularly military science. Denying its existence removes it from the public tool set, and thus limits individuals in their search for their own power; keeps them locked down and easier to control.
Granted, you didn't mention magnets, but, since usually acupuncture and magnets go together, I thought I'd head it off at the cuff. As far as definitive sources on the state of reality, stage performers make their living with trickery. The ones I referenced happen to ADMIT that it's trickery, rather than trying to pass it off as some mystical bullshit. Please do some basic research on them before dismissing them merely as people looking to protect their egos. Whatever flaws they have as messengers doesn't negate the honesty of their respective messages.
I've actually done quite a lot of research on these people. I've studied with a professional stage magician, and I know a fair bit about the craft, and believe me, James Randi in particular is a certifiable egomaniac. Magicians have a most peculiar version of tunnel vision; because they know first-hand how easy it is to trick human perceptions, they automatically fall into the belief that ALL human perceptions are faulty with regard to any observation which falls outside the parameters o
All that need happen is the U.S. to generate some excuse to clamp down with martial law and have all those executive orders passed into law by a compliant congress, the U.S. corporations become arms of the U.S. government and all the ambassadors and foreign representatives will cower in their hotel rooms.
This move to give power to the ICANN is nothing but superficial public perception sculpting.
-FL
First of all, James Randi doesn't actually say that acupuncture doesn't work in the article you linked to. And he'd be a fool to, because even the National Institute of Health agrees that it does. --They don't know how, but that's hardly the issue. From the Wikipedia article on acupuncture. . .
It works. Simple as that. And that should be enough to raise questions. The problem is that the answers are very upsetting to the power structure of the West.
Penn & Teller did an episode on using magnets for healing. I bet you can get free shipping on the DVD...
Penn & Teller may have done an episode on using magnets for healing, but this is hardly relevant since I made no mention of using magnets for healing. Further, I find it curious that you quote performers as definitive sources on the state of reality. Penn & Teller, and James Randi, as clever as they are, are not scientists. They are stage magicians with tunnel vision and egos to protect.
-FL
Using popular phrases like, "I call BS", is indicative of somebody who falls prey to group-think, and since group-think is most often the product of media manipulation, I am not terribly surprised that your post is so contaminated with muddy logic and over-generalized rationalization.
--Now the above comment, you should note, might more reasonably be labeled a 'condescending remark', although it is not intended as such. --And what I wrote at the end of my original post was very much not. Seriously, it is important to question where one's knee jerk reactions come from.
1) "Nobody disagrees with this" -- Nobody, except the scientific community and the National Institute of Health. It does have some positive effects though, but nobody can consistently say what or why.
You are saying two conflicting things here. You are saying that the scientific community doesn't believe acupuncture works, but that acupuncture has some positive effects. So which is it? --The problem is that acupuncture does work. The National Institute of Health was quoted several times in the very article you linked to as saying that they recognize that acupuncture does indeed have a measurable effect. They certainly don't like having to admit it, but so what? --It's certainly enough to make my original point.
2) Pseudoscience: "...the needle cuts through the Earth's magnetic field creating a micro-current..."
This is not pseudoscience. It's basic high school science which every kid in North America is supposed to learn. Conductors when they pass through a magnetic field ALWAYS create an electrical current, whether it is the Earth's or the magnets in an electric generator. Much of human technology would stop cold if this basic principal of physics didn't function as described.
Now, let's click on your user name and see if you are a known troll... YUP! You post 20 times a day and never receive a score above a 2. Phew! It's not just me who thinks you are full of it.
This is simply not accurate; you should look through my posting history with your eyes open. Further, I find it telling that you find relief in believing that you are nestled up tightly with the herd thinking. Guess what? You are not a cow. You are an individual with your own powers of thought and observation. Who cares what everybody else thinks? Unfortunately, there are many, many people like you who have had their egos crushed and reformed to respond with fear and anxiety should they step outside the bounds of consensus thought patterns, and since those thought patterns are usually driven by the crap the TeeVee tells them is true, many, many people are hopelessly ignorant and easily manipulated into fearing their own capacity to learn and express themselves.
-FL
Some notes of interest. . .
Acupuncture works. Nobody contests this. --The theory is that by inserting a metal needle and setting it to lightly rotate, the needle cuts through the Earth's magnetic field creating a micro-current which then affects the body in a variety of different ways.
Electromagnetic fields similarly are able to stimulate cells to react in similar ways; this is probably the basis of all concerns regarding Cell Phone radiation.
How can EM fields affect humans? --It is understood by some that EM fields can be used to affect emotions and states of awareness. With specific application to the primary visual cortex, they can even be used to cause temporary blindness. (Read article half-way down.)
The HAARP Array, supposedly used for research, is also suggested by some to be a means of mind-control; that is, beams of specific EM can be reflected from the sky onto terrestrial targets. The science is not contested, just the intent.
In a world where the U.S. secret services admit to having run extensive (and fairly gruesome) mind-control experiments, where secrecy and paranoia run rampant through the government, where Israel is allowed to commit genocide in the Middle East without the media blinking an eye, and where Bush is allowed to build a police state, all to the drums of Christian-Cult Apocalypse insanity, the idea of population control through manipulation of EM fields is not so very far fetched, now is it?
Disagree? Before responding, ask yourself in all honestly why you disagree and where the impulse stems from.
-FL
Not true (well yes, he was a 1th century monk), Occam's razor cannot be used to prove any point you like depending on your starting belief.
.
Actually, it really can. Belief is all powerful in this regard. --That is, if you happen to believe in God, like old William did, and if you don't happen to believe in evolution and big bangs, etc., then you are not breaking the rules of the razor. This is not contested; Occam wasn't breaking his own rule when he 'proved' the existence of God. And today there are lots of people who still don't believe in evolution or big bangs, and nobody can provide total proof of anything, evolution or otherwise; (re: 'the brain floating in the tank', example), so any accepted points are done so entirely based on what people believe. Occam's razor is simply not an objective comparison method; it merely reflects the subject's prior beliefs. Luckily, Occam didn't mention "Burden of Proof." That's an additional piece people tack on, I believe, due to our cultural programming via the oft televised court-room drama.
If you have two possible explanations for a given phenomenon (your visual disturbances) and one of them involves physiological processes and another involves physiological processes + psychic phenomenon, which is more likely to be correct?
Your logic is fine. But it's that word 'Likely' which I take exception to. It's entirely subjective.
Example: Back when the invention of the telephone was announced, the world went into an uproar, and many respected people of science scoffed in disbelief. One newspaper ran a full page explanation provided with extensive research illustrating the impossibility of a telephone device. --They showed using the best maths and physics known at the time that sound simply could not travel any appreciable distance down thin wire tubes. (Like those 'talking-tubes' found in old ships.)
Bell's sceptics posited that either A), Bell had discovered a way to cheat the laws of physics regarding sound waves, or B) He was lying. Based on what the sceptics knew and believed, according to Occam, they were correct in making the assumption that Bell was most probably a liar.
The point of the matter is that unexpected things do happen, and the logical host of possible explanations we currently have available to make sense of our reality, no matter how good they sound or how cleverly they are arranged, are only correct if they are really correct.
But if we must use Occam to some good, let's try it this way. .
Matter, I think we can agree, doesn't really exist as it appears. --As I understand it, one of the more popular theories in physics today tells us that matter is reducible to a series of sub particles, the bottom layer of which are made up from what are theorized to be little string-like standing wave forms, which finally are not particles but behave as though they were. --What medium exactly these little wave forms vibrate in seems to be up for debate, but the point is that there is no matter; there is only energy.
This makes our perceived reality much like an illusion or holographic projection of sorts. We are made up of nothing but little wave forms in an energetic medium. --Now according to the current state of my belief system, this fundamental energetic medium is good for more than just playing host to little standing waves which make up atoms; it can transmit waves which are not involved in the maintaining of all the sub-particles of atomic matter. It is, I believe, the medium through which fundamental 'energy' may be transmitted.
Now, let's say that the little standing waves from which all atoms are constructed are not alone. I think it is reasonable to assume, given the nature of mediums, that there might exist other little wave forms of a different frequency. And like waves on an ocean which are observable from a ship, microwaves being transmitted through the same ocean water would be able to co-exist in the medium but w
Plain as day? Nonsense. You're still making the basic assumption that I am wrong based only on your interpretation of what I wrote, and you believe yourself to be right. And this does indeed require faith, so please get off that high horse.
I stand by that statement. In the history of earth, there is absolutely no evidence for telepathy. Just as there is no evidence for the existence of ghosts, UFOs or God. There is only belief and faith, based on anectotes and human fallability.
Aside from the fact that you are completely wrong on every point, I don't understand how can you make a statement like the above with a straight face. The history of Earth? Come on. Were you in attendance for the history of the Earth? No? Then you cannot make a statement like the one you just made. Simple as that.
And you accuse me of muddy thinking. Sheesh.
If Randi uses thinking as 'clear' and 'rational' as yours, (and from all evidence, he he does), then nobody will collecting a dime from that fool any time soon.
-FL
You are presenting anecdotes as evidence in order to convince other people of something. However, anecdotes are not a valid form of evidence. They are the tools of hucksters and charlatans. If you want to convince someone that a particular phenomenon is real, then you must present valid, empirical evidence.
Stories are also the tools of entire civilizations for effectively communicating ideas. Should I just shut up and never share any experiences which might prove enlightening to somebody simply because I can only provide myself as a footnote? That's rather limiting. In any case, it hasn't stopped us from having an interesting discussion, has it now?
1) It's more likely to be an odd form of floaters that deviates more from the norm than actual psychic phenomenon. Application of Occam's razor says that if there is a simple, plausible explanation that doesn't require confabulation or the multiplication of entities, it is more likely to be correct.
Occam was a 12th century monk who came up with his logical razor to prove the existence of God. His logical argument is useful for proving any point whatsoever depending on the starting belief about what is and is not more likely to be possible. It is therefore a broken argument which perhaps serves best as a rule of thumb. --Particularly as the description of 'floater' still doesn't match what I described, AND because 'energy' as I accept it is a fundamental element of reality, therefore quite common. Given those starting parameters, which way would Occam spin, (in his grave)?
) You carefully avoided the question of whether or not it could be a migraine headache. Now that I think about it, it seems more likely that you are experiencing painless migraines than floaters, but Occam's razor still applies. Migraines are more likely than psychic phenomenon. Here's a comparison from your description and descriptions of migraine "auras" on wikipedia:
Carefully avoided? How about I didn't disagree in the first place. Unlike bits of gunk floating around inside my eyeball, it IS entirely possible that my brain was reacting on a physiological level. So what? Nobody understands what causes migraines to happen. Why not energetic knots? Energy and physicality are directly linked. That's why things like acupuncture work.
As for the placebo effect. . . Since it does indeed appear to relieve some degree of pain in some migraine sufferers, then what does that tell us about the nature of our physiological selves? That is. . , since the mind, awareness and energy are interdependent, how does a successful placebo effect negate the possibility of energy being linked to the change of state?
Yes, I know, that's somewhat pedantic; the change of state was linked in my case to the actions of the energy practitioner, and this is what you are taking exception to. All I can offer is that it worked.
Now, perhaps I was being fooled in that case. Perhaps it was an elaborate ruse. Perhaps the practitioner just randomly chose that moment to say, "Wow. What's that around your head?" on the off-chance that it might link up to something I was actually experiencing. --Even though he'd never done anything like that before, no random fishing trips typical of the cold-reader; (a system of false divination I've had the chance to study up close from the bookshelf of a professional stage magician I know.)
But I must admit, it IS possible. It's also possible that I am watching you right now through a telescope and that certain facets of your life are deliberate constructs which you cannot see through. It's also possible that you are a brain floating in a tank experiencing the world as an elaborate simulation. --My point being that at some point one must decide which parts of the world to take on faith as real. I admit that the idea of energy practice to those who have had little or no direct conscious experience in that realm seems impossible enough to invoke the idea that it could all be a big act. For my part, I ha
Wow. For somebody who is convinced that they hold the superior and more rational view point, your arguments are amazingly rude, immature and void of logic. --Further, rather than deal with the points offered, you instead fall back on cheap ridicule and highly biased dogma.
It's interesting that you use irrational behavior to make the case for your rationality.
Did they laugh at you a lot during school? Bad experiences with women while growing up? Was the only real acceptance you ever had found in high test scores and pats on the head during high school science class?
I'm guessing you have a lot of internal work to do, and it's not getting done by using emotional arguments to lose debates on Slashdot.
Good luck.
-FL
No, it doesn't magically disappear when tested.
However, she's not nearly dumb enough to fall for the Randi trap. --Please keep in mind that Randi is a stage magician. That means, unless he is different that most people who get into performing, he has a giant ego. People with giant egos don't put up with being made into fools. Nor is he in the business of having his career squashed, or having to write million dollar checks. Honestly! Think about it.
Beyond this, my friend is also connected to high level politics and has seen first hand what happens to people who try to rock the boat by challenging orthodox power structures. The Chinese government didn't wipe out all those hundreds of martial arts temples for no reason.
The world is much more dangerous and amazing than most people will realize in this lifetime. It doesn't mean you can't learn, though. Knowledge is open to anybody who makes the choice to seek. Your focus really does determine your reality.
-FL
But will the doctor be able to make a diagnosis the instant I walk in the door without me having to open my mouth, and then wave his hands and make it go away?
I find it ironic that we're talking about vision problems and the first two people who have responded to my post seemed to have had trouble seeing the full text!
-FL
Well now. That's quite the assumption. You do realize that to make and believe in such a bold statement about me requires faith, don't you? (Unless, of course, you have some impirical evidence for your theory about the events transpiring around me.)
To date, despite decades of research, there is not a scintilla of evidence for telepathy.
Really now? Is that taken on faith as well, or can you back that up? Actually, I know you can't. Heck, my own experiments offer several 'scintillas', so you're already wrong before I even start pulling books off the shelf. --Or did you only mean 'experiments' which you saw on the TeeVee? Perhaps you ought to do some of your own research on the subject sometime rather than trust in stage magicians with careers and huge egos (and a million dollars) to protect. I somehow suspect you won't. And what does that say about you?
You fit the stereotype, I'm afraid. Time and again, those who are most afraid to look generally commit the very offenses they charge others with.
-FL
Well, since I am the only one I need to convince in order to further my own understanding of the universe, it hardly matters. Of course, my experiences are just stories to anybody but me; I can only share them in hopes that they might prove useful to others who are also seeking.
It sounds like you have "floaters" in your vitreous humour, or possibly migraine headaches (due the nausea).
Actually, I read your link and it doesn't sound like 'floaters' even a tiny bit. Please re-read both descriptions and then do a comparison. Sheesh. Next thing you'll tell me is that I was seeing Venus!
If I were you, I'd go to the doctor and get it checked out.
Thankfully, you are not me. --And as I explained, the phenomenon promptly vanished with the application of a little energy manipulation. Try to read more carefully in the future.
-FL
True science is not biased, and Randi is about as biased, (and downright rude), as you can get.
-FL
Case in point. . .
I was in love with this girl who was quite powerful in these matters. She didn't love me back. I saw her maybe once a week. One time, in the middle of my work day, I decided to try to write a poem about her, and through this found myself thinking about her very, very intensely. I was overcome with feelings of love so powerful that my head was swimming; I had never emoted with so much amor regarding her before that time. As my soaring affections were reaching their mile-high crescendo, the phone rang. It was her, calling from across town. She never called me, so I was totally surprised.
"Wow. Hi! I was just-"
"I KNOW! What the heck are you doing?!"
"What?"
"I'm trying to write an essay and you're screwing up my concentration. You think your thoughts are quiet? Holy shit! Your thoughts are usually obnoxiously loud, but this is just ridiculous! Listen to me; you have GOT to start training yourself in this area. I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but you have GOT to learn how to reign in your energy. You Westerners are so totally ignorant about this stuff! In China people have the common decency to keep their energy from getting so sloppy."
Ouch. (This was a particularly hard part of my life; a period of two and a half years where I had to really deal with the fact that thoughts are not private to everybody.)
Now was this a hit among a sea of misses? Was this a matter of statistics? Hardly. This was like getting kicked in the head, and it was far from the first time. This sort of thing manifested regularly in many different ways, involving several different people. I can tell many more (and far weirder) stories all which suggest similar conclusions; that the world is far more interesting than the orthodox scientists would have us believe.
I can understand, though, if people use the tools available, (ie, statistics, etc.) to explain things which they have not experienced. Extended perception only arrives to those who are either A) wired for it from birth, or B) who are ready spiritually and who deliberately ask to start learning in those directions.
You get exactly what you ask for in life.
-FL
Here's a case in point which suggests a medium through which ESP communication might function. . .
I sometimes experience an odd phenomenon; I will be walking about during my day and then notice in the center of my vision a strange visual distortion. --It looks like a piece of clear crystal with a crack in it and the light being refracted in odd ways. The distortion pulsates and objects on the other side of it are obscured. The phenomenon will start out small and then grow, filling more and more of my vision. (This is usually accompanied by a feeling of nausea.) Then after a while, a clear spot will appear in the center of this big pulsating crystalline chaos. The distortion at this point will start to look like a big fat doughnut. The ring of distortion will grow until it reaches the edges of my peripheral vision, and then eventually vanish off to the sides, whereupon my vision return to normal. The whole process takes about an hour or two, and by the end, I'm usually flat on my back hoping I don't die.
This happens to me once or twice every few years. Not a regular thing by any means. I often wondered if I was about to have a brain hemorrhage or something, but once it passes I generally forget about it.
Okay. That's the background.
So one time I was on my way to visit a friend of mine who teaches Kung Fu and who is very energy aware, and on the bus ride ride over, the weird phenomenon starts up again. When I arrived at the apartment, my friend blinked at me.
"What is that?" he asked, looking at a spot about three feet to the left of my head as I entered.
"You're aware of this?" I asked, incredulous, vaguely indicating the space in front of my eyes.
"Wow. That's really weird. I've never seen anything like that before. One of your threads has a knot in it. Hold on."
He reached out to the spot he was looking at and tugged and brushed lightly at the air. Almost instantly the distortion vanished and my vision cleared up. The nausea was gone and I felt clear and normal again. The whole change took place in less than ten seconds.
I can tell you a dozen stories like that one, and they all point to an energetic reality which doesn't fit with the standard reality as posited by orthodox science.
-FL
--Further, and perhaps more importantly, none of the participants I've ever met care to prove to the world the existence of forces which exist beyond the bounds of orthodox science. Their own experiences are enough for themselves, and it was for them that they are meant. Other people's belief and knowledge structures are the domain of each individual and should not be abridged or forced upon. The search and growth of the soul is a personal journey, and the recognizing of such forces and energies as are linked to telepathy are signposts upon that personal journey. In simple terms, not everybody is ready at the same time. When you are ready, when you ask and seek in earnest and without fear, you will be shown. James Randi and his ilk are not seeking; they are erecting walls of safety against things which frighten them.
That's my take on it, anyway.
I tried reading the next one in the series, but I just sort of stopped caring about half way through. "The writers actually recorded their own play sessions? Really? No, seriously. --They write these books from their game notes? Really? You're joking, right?"
I just couldn't get past this aspect, and I don't know if my response was entirely fair. Just because my D&D games happened to be dumb didn't mean that a group-created novel would necessarily stink. --And it didn't stink. It just wasn't particularly brilliant. There were no big ideas or grand vision to be found in the Dragonlance series. --Though I'm told that as the books progress, the story becomes filled with Mormon imagery to reflect the writer's religious bias, but that's hardly a selling point. Otherwise, it's just a fun swords and sorcery yarn. Innocent Popcorn; good hearted but ultimately meaningless. Kind of like Salt Lake City.
Whatever the case, I just couldn't manage to get into the series. --Although writing a book series based on a D&D game was also perhaps one of the most clever marketing tactics I've seen in publishing. I mean, they still keep those books in print after all these years! Not many pulp fantasy novels can make that claim.
-FL
Channeling anger away from real action is a solution of sorts, but not the best one in the long run. Channeling always widens the channel. Anger, I think, is best used as an emotional red light indicating that something is wrong which one should then seek to fix by altering the conditions which create the anger. --Either by changing the external world or by dealing with internal baggage, whichever is more appropriate. Bitter acceptance and channeling anger through a pass-time is indicative of one who does not have the knowledge or courage to change their world. While there are some lives which cannot be easily altered, these are far less common, especially in the West, than one might think.
I do see many games as direct mind-programming. --There's a new one coming out which brings the charade of population conditioning to a whole new level; funded by none other than U2's Bono, the game depicts the overthrow of the democratically elected Hugo Chavez, the so-called 'criminal' leader of Venezuela who had the audacity to throw out oil trade agreements made with American companies made through corrupt strong-arm politics before he managed to come to power, and to actually benefit his own people with the resulting money which now stays in Venezuela.
American media, which includes games, is largely designed to turn people into morally re-wired psychopaths with false concepts of reality.
Interestingly, I also began learning about this kind of thing while playing a Star Wars title; the first 'Jedi Knight', where depending on how you directed your blaster fire and your choice of force powers collected, your character went dark or light. I played through on both sides to get my money's worth, and found the experience troubling to the point where I started asking questions. The answers I began to dig up made me blink.
-FL
And now that you're beyond your first time, how easy will it be when you are called upon to be psychotic in real life?
Careful which direction you allow your neurons to fire in. The pathways in your brain grow wider and more permanent with use. --And they don't differentiate between virtual and real. That's why computer simulators are used by flight schools and the military. They work.
-FL
I switched an entire friend-group because I got to see how people really functioned on the inside.
Torturing creatures in game is like the adult version of watching kids pull the legs off grasshoppers. Unsettling and infuriating, and it made sense of much of their normal social behavior which I'd always found somewhat baffling and painful to be around.
No more an never again.
As for video games. . . If it disturbs me in the wrong way, I quit playing. I don't like a computer being able to direct my choice path into dark areas. I will not allow a computer, or more precisely, a screwed up programmer with psychological issues to affect the direction in which my neuron pathways strengthen.
-FL
I don't even know where to start. How about. . .
"Does your definition of 'Safe' include people with brown skin?"
Or maybe, "When was the last time you had your door kicked in by storm troopers?"
Or perhaps, "When you say 'violence' do you only mean the kind which doesn't wear the mark of authority and carry an automatic weapon?"
Or maybe I should just point to ancillary items and say things like, "Shrapnel and bullets aside, I wasn't aware that Atlanta had been infused with a fine spray of depleted uranium dust."
But maybe I'll instead just ask. . .
"Source Please."
And then wait indefinitely while you realize your link was scripted by the DOD or some similar body with conflicting interests not consistent with actual journalism.
-FL
This is a very emotionally charged argument. --Which is exactly why the Israeli secret services like to fan resistance movements into being, drug small boys, strap bombs to them and send them into IDF lines, (with the media conveniently alerted beforehand so that they could be waiting to capture the whole thing on film.) Do you remember that fiasco three years back? There have been numerous slip-ups since then; stories of deliberate false-flag bombing maneuvers designed to get everybody on both sides all worked up and thinking emotionally rather than rationally. --And once the ball is rolling, you can let the anger on both sides play its course with just a few pushes here and there to keep things boiling. --Make no mistake; there are forces at work which are deliberate in creating conditions conducive to endless war, and they are not in the places the uninitiated might first expect to find them.
So no, I certainly do not like stories of people being killed in coffee shops. But I can also see clearly enough to recognize who the real monsters are and who the dupes and pawns are.
The London Train Bombings last year were another example of the time-tested false-flag maneuver. --There is a ton of evidence which screams to the fact that the 'terrorists' did not do as they were described as doing by the British law officials and the media. --Bomb damage on the trains indicates that explosives were pre-planted under the trains, and were not in duffel bags aboard the trains. --Cameras recording the 'terrorists' could not have been correct as the train arrival and departure times don't match up with the events. There were several key flaws within the official explanation; essentially, the story was a fabrication with real bombs. --And if the British are willing to bomb their own people in order to promote war and hatred of Muslims, then we can certainly expect the U.S. and Israelis to be capable of the same kinds of activity. --Administrations in all three countries are filled with proven liars. This behavior should be expected because it is very effective in securing the agendas people like Bush, Sharon and Blair have stated on and off official record.
Again, I am not saying that there are no terrorists. I am saying that they were largely created and pushed along by the very countries claiming to be at war with them.
The real question is, "Why?"
And the answers are, as I pointed out in my parent post, 1) Money, 2) Power 3) Cultic theories regarding the Apocalypse. There are other reasons, but they are more complex.
The world is just not as simple as the media would like us to think. --And what I am saying is entirely verifiable. You can see for yourself if you look. All it takes is a clear mind, and the desire to stop being made a fool by the authorities. If you really care about people dying, then you have a conscience. That means you are also intelligent and capable of seeing through the lies if you choose to do so.
-FL