New Age religions don't make you happy

[six7s]

If the claimed access to such alternate universes was through a rigorous discipline, including much sitting in silence, then how would it be possible to demonstrate said other realms unless the observer was there too? It wouldn't be something one person could prove to skeptic, unless the skeptic was willing to do the whole song and dance.

If the claim is simply access, without supplementary claims that doing so will realise any tangible benefit, who is interested enough to spend time and effort practicing the technique(s)?

Not me

My initial interest is in what a wooist can do

Asking the how question will come after any claim makes it through the preliminary debunking phase... if there ever is an after...

 

[six7s]

...The assemblage point is what shamans say is the cause of this; since it is through the assemblage point that each person assembles their reality. This knocks science on it's A** though, because it leaves them with no physical evidence to build a theory from, only personal experience.

When you say science , do you mean the scientific method and/or specific scientific disciplines (e.g chemistry, psychiatry, etc.)?

If the latter, please provide an example of a "science on its a**"

If the former, please describe where the method falls down... other than by reinforcing the strawman that states 'physical evidence is the basis of any/all theorising'

 

[quarky]

If the claim is simply access, without supplementary claims that doing so will realise any tangible benefit, who is interested enough to spend time and effort practicing the technique(s)?

Not me

My initial interest is in what a wooist can do

Asking the how question will come after any claim makes it through the preliminary debunking phase... if there ever is an after...

"Tangible" benefit is where woo and anti-woo meet. It all gets a bit philosophical in the realm of "tangible benefit". I'm not sure what the tangible benefit is in all sorts of scientific advancements. I'm no luddite, but its arguable that an uber-pragmatic approach to the world leaves a vacancy in lots of people...which is filled through irrational gestures and a secret inner life...sometimes including the possibility that our dreams can become lucid.

Lucid dreaming would be a hoot, if possible. Science isn't really needed in a lucid dream, should they exist. In a dream, the laws governing our waking state are inadequate. Lucid dreaming is the 'tangible' benefit of mysticism, should one be required. For those drawn to such possibilities or fantasies, a new set of parameters is essential. These parameters could closely mimic scientific parameters, in many ways. Yet, they aren't science.

Its ironic, that in Castanada's tips for lucid dreaming, skepticism and sober-minded scrutiny are a must. Its not a realm for sloppiness.

I can well imagine that the idea of lucid dreaming doesn't fare well at JREF.
People that claim to have a modicum of control in their dreams are in the unpleasant position of trying to prove it in the realm of wakefullness...to those that doubt the possibility. That could suck for both parties.

I'm claiming nothing. I'm stuck in a paper bag of my own making, and lack the strength to break out.

 

[dannagain]

"Tangible" benefit is where woo and anti-woo meet. It all gets a bit philosophical in the realm of "tangible benefit". I'm not sure what the tangible benefit is in all sorts of scientific advancements. I'm no luddite, but its arguable that an uber-pragmatic approach to the world leaves a vacancy in lots of people...which is filled through irrational gestures and a secret inner life...sometimes including the possibility that our dreams can become lucid.

Lucid dreaming would be a hoot, if possible. Science isn't really needed in a lucid dream, should they exist. In a dream, the laws governing our waking state are inadequate. Lucid dreaming is the 'tangible' benefit of mysticism, should one be required. For those drawn to such possibilities or fantasies, a new set of parameters is essential. These parameters could closely mimic scientific parameters, in many ways. Yet, they aren't science.

Its ironic, that in Castanada's tips for lucid dreaming, skepticism and sober-minded scrutiny are a must. Its not a realm for sloppiness.

I can well imagine that the idea of lucid dreaming doesn't fare well at JREF.
People that claim to have a modicum of control in their dreams are in the unpleasant position of trying to prove it in the realm of wakefullness...to those that doubt the possibility. That could suck for both parties.

I'm claiming nothing. I'm stuck in a paper bag of my own making, and lack the strength to break out.

There is NOTHING paranormal about lucid dreaming.

It is perfectly explainable in the context of current scientific understanding. If you came back from a lucid dream with knowledge that it would be paranormal for you to know then that is another matter. But no one ever does. When you lucid dream or 'astrally project' etc you don't GO anywhere. You simply slip into a different state of conciousness but there is nothing paranormal about altered states of conciousness.

 

[CFLarsen]

I guess you have either a rather large bookshelf or a rather cluttered house!

Oh, that's only a fraction. Fortunately, some are in digital form - which saves space, and makes them searcheable. But, yeah, books do take up quite a lot of space in my humble quarters. I'm currently typing this with my nose, since my finger movements are constricted by the amount of books threatening to cave in on me.

[Ludo mode]"Books...friends!"[/Ludo mode]

Quite the opposite! I feel as if I am the ignoramus. You are very articulate.

I would like to compliment you on your library. If you have read even half of those, you are more well-read in Crowley than I am! Good job sir.

Thank you. Now, can you cut this "Oh, you aren't as well-read on my beliefs as I am" crap? It is usually a very bad idea to pull that one on me. I take great pains to know things. I study. I check. I find evidence.

OK?

We're talking in a forum, and I'm not submitting myself to the MDC; the predictions of the future will be a testable, verifiable example of my "paranormal powers."

Which makes you an applicant for the MDC.

Yeah. There are consequences if you claim anything verifiable. You can't make claims like that and dance away, thinking there are no consequences.

Agree to disagree.

Oh, no, no, no. You can't chalk this definition of "science" to mere disagreement. We don't invent our own definition of "science", after which all definitions are equally valid.

If you would learn to shift your assemblage point, all that reading would finally pay off becuase your search for verifiable evidence of paranormal activity would find its conclusion.

Bull. Either you can show it, or you can't. It's that simple.

So verified is something that you can do, and I can not do? I have verified my experiences on my own, in ways more complicated than you have even suggested. In short, I ALWAYS get what I want for Christmas and my birthday, and I never actually tell anyone what it is that I want. How is it not "verified," if I do the experiment myself? My woo does not get in the way of my own critical thinking, regardless of how new-age I seem to you.

It isn't verified, because other people haven't verified it. That's possibly the most important lesson to be learned about science: Independent verification.

Take a moment to read the story about Blondlot. Tell me what the lesson is.

Perhaps. How would YOU verify something like that? In my case, I went to Abraham personally and asked some questions. The answers I received verified TO ME that Abraham is indeed a spiritual teacher being channelled through Esther Hicks. Did you start talking to spirits since the last time we spoke?

Do you really equate personal, non-independent "verification" of the kind you describe here with independent verification?

Think really hard about this, before you answer.

When does it become "knowledge" in your book? If interdimensional travel appears as nothing more than a person meditating in this world, what evidence can I give you to prove that I have been to another dimension?

Independent verification.

This is a concept you really need to understand the value of.

Yes.

Prove it.

Your missing my point about the assemblage point, and our discussion is circling around the assemblage point and how it effects what we "see." Since you want to "see" verification of paranormal activity, then I am telling you what you need to do in order to see it.

And you need to tell me how I can distinguish between fraud and a real phenomenon.

Can you do that, yes or no?

Look around you.

What kind of glib answer is that?

What all do you want me to show you again? I can't move objects with my mind yet, but I'm practicing.

Just show me.

The same way that I verified my experiences with shamanism - by jumping in. Science needs to dig deeper into the claims of shamans, and test their abilities directly. I'm new to this, but there are master shamans all around the world. Amazingly enough, despite their regional differences, most shamans say the same things about interdimensional travel and how it is to be achieved, and what you will see when you get there. Aside from hallucination, how would you explain that?

Why should I choose any other explanation than hallucination? Or any other natural explanation?

I don't want followers. I want you to be able to do this on your own, because it seems silly to me that you can not.

Oh, you want followers alright. When you demand that people drop their skepticism and simply believe in you, you want followers.

You don't want to get into this conversation, and I don't want to continually defend my point of view on the matter. The answer to this question is YES, they did choose it. But, how could I prove it to you anyways, right? This is just my spiritual belief, I apologize if the my ideas offend anyone.

But I do want to get into this conversation. And yes, you do have to defend your point of view on the matter. Because what you are proposing is a complete abandonment of empathy: We should not concern ourselves with the sufferings of other people, because they chose their suffering. And it would be baaad karma if we interfered.

So, yeah: Do let us get into that conversation. How can you possibly defend such an inhumane position?

Perhaps, but this is an opportunity for good karma as well. The reason that the MDC is an opportunity for BAD KARMA is because it is forbidden to show those that do not understand magick that magick is real, because that knowledge is power. Those that do not understand will then have the verification of magick being real, and will use that to do harm upon others. It is for this same reason that alchemist always encoded their work, hiding the true techniques in symbolism, so that anyone who stumbled on the writings would not be able to just make gold. We're not talking about something small, we're talking about magick; think of how the world would change if suddenly it wasn't "paranormal," but "NORMAL." I would be responsible, in karma, for all the good & BAD that occured because of my action(s). I'm not willing to do that.

Then, you do not have the courage of your convictions. To be blunt, you are an intellectual coward.

In closure, our posts are getting LONG and way off topic. Let's concise this down to the essentials.

Original point: Shamanism & Taoism make ME happy.

Because you don't help people in need, yes.

Because he has no idea what he is talking about. His ethical stance on feeding starving people speaks for itself.

Thoth this whole idea of it being the fault of people starving to death that they are starving to death is simply selfishness masquerading as a 'higher understanding'.

....ayup. It is a recipe for justifying incredible selfishness.

 

[quarky]

There is NOTHING paranormal about lucid dreaming.

It is perfectly explainable in the context of current scientific understanding. If you came back from a lucid dream with knowledge that it would be paranormal for you to know then that is another matter. But no one ever does. When you lucid dream or 'astrally project' etc you don't GO anywhere. You simply slip into a different state of conciousness but there is nothing paranormal about altered states of conciousness.

As i understand it, the claim lucid dreamers make is that there are alternate universes to percieve; that they can be explored by some part of us that doesn't include the meat and bones.
There is nothing to bring back from these journeys, if they are real, except a description of a different world, and perhaps some advice on how to deal with the locals.

In dreaming, one's mind is not in this world. The assembledge point has shifted, to borrow Castanada's metaphor. There is no money to bring back; no winning lottery numbers; no spying on this world. No scientificly verifiable evidence can occur. Although, according to the wooish theory, 2 very advanced scientists could manage to do a lucid dream together, and verify certain perceptions; come back (wake up) and bring a consensual memory.

We don't often consider how ephemeral our 'real' world is.
Mostly empty space.

 

[Jimbo07]

As i understand it, the claim lucid dreamers make is that there are alternate universes to percieve;

Consistent universes?

that they can be explored by some part of us that doesn't include the meat and bones.

Prove that there's anything other than meat-and-bones to begin with...

There is nothing to bring back from these journeys, if they are real, except a description of a different world, and perhaps some advice on how to deal with the locals.

Consistent descriptions?

In dreaming, one's mind is not in this world.

Where is it, exactly? Define mind. Etc.

The assembledge point has shifted, to borrow Castanada's metaphor. There is no money to bring back; no winning lottery numbers; no spying on this world. No scientificly verifiable evidence can occur.

Is there any sort of evidence at all, other than stories? Anything to suggest the stories are anything other than imagination?

Although, according to the wooish theory, 2 very advanced scientists could manage to do a lucid dream together, and verify certain perceptions; come back (wake up) and bring a consensual memory.

You could almost certainly test this, by giving scientist #1 a secret message to pass to scientist #2.

We don't often consider how ephemeral our 'real' world is.
Mostly empty space.

... who do you suppose has provided this knowledge? Mystics or particle physicists?

 

[thoth108]

Thank you. Now, can you cut this "Oh, you aren't as well-read on my beliefs as I am" crap? It is usually a very bad idea to pull that one on me. I take great pains to know things. I study. I check. I find evidence.

OK?

No insult intended, I just wanted to be sure that we were on the same page.

Which makes you an applicant for the MDC.

Darn, I got caught in the fine print, didn't I?! Well, if it must be...

Yeah. There are consequences if you claim anything verifiable. You can't make claims like that and dance away, thinking there are no consequences.

What consequences? (you don't have to answer that). You don't know where I live, DO YOU???

Oh, no, no, no. You can't chalk this definition of "science" to mere disagreement. We don't invent our own definition of "science", after which all definitions are equally valid.

Science is pursuing things in a logical manner, working with verifiable results, with those results being reproduceable following the same practices again and again, in an effort to acquire knowledge. Close enough to your definition?

Bull. Either you can show it, or you can't. It's that simple.

You are so well read on this topic, and yet this one last step is something you won't indulge in to really see for yourself. Very well then, I'll work around your decision to not work on your own perception.

It isn't verified, because other people haven't verified it. That's possibly the most important lesson to be learned about science: Independent verification.

I see. You want someone to watch what I do, and be independent of the process. I agree.

Take a moment to read the story about Blondlot. Tell me what the lesson is.

Very nice story. The lesson is that even under strict conditions we are subject to the illusive nature of our own thoughts and assumptions, therefore verification is important. Let's do some reading on the shaman forums all over the internet, shall we, and we'll see if there's something to what I'm saying.

Do you really equate personal, non-independent "verification" of the kind you describe here with independent verification?

Think really hard about this, before you answer.

As for my discussion with Abraham, YES I do think this was verification; and I base this upon what Abraham and I talked about. The knowledge I gained from that conversation was immense. In order to have independent verification we will need others who are capable of communicating with spiritual entities. I'm willing to share in that experiment, so if anyone else reading this is accomplished at channelling, or journeying to the other side, please chime in.

Independent verification.

This is a concept you really need to understand the value of.

I do understand the value of it, which is why I'm here talking with you. I've done a LOT of reading about shamanism on the internet, and in books, on top of my own personal experiments.

Prove it.

I'm not an accomplished alchemist, nor do I claim to be. I won't be making diamonds anytime soon, and if I did I would tell no one about it. If you want proof that he's come to talk with the Temple of the Presence, we can get into that discussion; there is evidence in their beliefs that will show the occult-wise person that they have access to a wealth of knowledge about the soul.

And you need to tell me how I can distinguish between fraud and a real phenomenon.

Can you do that, yes or no?

Yes. It's in the results. If we're talking about interdimensional travel using shamanic journey techniques, then the person journeying should come back with predictable results. Let's say that the dimension they travel to looks like Hawaii; everyone that goes there should come back with a similar description, right? Consciousness is the traveller, so consciousness is where we will find our verification.

In the case of shamanic journeys there is an ample body of shamanic-experiementers all over the internet sharing their experiences right now.

What kind of glib answer is that?

What you call, "God," is everything that exists. Logically, what else could, "God," be? The answer may be glib, but it is honest.

When I first reached a point of enlightenment, I became aware that I was AWARE of everything, from everywhere, through the eyes of everything. I do not claim to be a Buddha, just to be clear, because I have never reached complete enlightenment. The closest that I've come always results in this experience of being everything. Enlightenment is connection with God, or Source, and realization that everything, everywhere, is all the same entity expressing itself in a myriad of forms.

Just show me.

Hillary Clinton will be our next president. I'm taking one more dive into the near future to verify that, which I'll be doing this weekend; but I'm 99% positive of that result.

Why should I choose any other explanation than hallucination? Or any other natural explanation?

You won't think its a hallucination when you experience it. Shifting your assemblage point is an illuminating experience. The verification you want will be right in front of you, and all that I've said will become clear.

Oh, you want followers alright. When you demand that people drop their skepticism and simply believe in you, you want followers.

I do not want followers. I also don't want you to drop your skepticism, I want you to apply it to the techniques that I'm talking about with you. I'm not asking for belief, and if it appears that way in my writing then I apologize for the misunderstanding. My point to you all is that shifting your asseblage point using the techniques outlined by shamans will show you a world that you are denying; your denial of this world is based on your lack of experiencing it directly, which can only be done by you. This is about conscious experience.

But I do want to get into this conversation. And yes, you do have to defend your point of view on the matter. Because what you are proposing is a complete abandonment of empathy: We should not concern ourselves with the sufferings of other people, because they chose their suffering. And it would be baaad karma if we interfered.

You write a script for your entire life. "God" helps you do this. You come to Earth and incarnate into a living thing. During the early years of your life you are learning how to exist in that body, and the knowledge you once had (prebirth) is forgotten beneath all the new knowledge you are acquiring. This puts you into a state of mind where you will experience your life-script as if you don't remember it. (The script is written in symbolic language, and is not accessible to normal ways of thinking). Thus, people do not generally recall that everything they're doing has been planned - when they do remember something this is deja-vu. We do this so that we can experience. If there were not the infinite experiences of the infinite sentient beings of the universe, then God would not exist, for there would be nothing to verify to itself that God Is. (Thus the Temple of the Presence motto: "I AM"). We are spiritual entities, that are using material bodies on the material plane, to gain experience with the processes of the Natural Laws that govern everything, to prepare us for journeys into the higher planes. What we learn here and now will become our abilities to survive (instincts) in the next life.

I'm not being cold, selfish, or anything of the sort when I proclaim this to you. I have compassion and Love for all living things, everywhere. You're ideas of cold and selfish are part of a system of dualities that do not apply to the universe at large. When one thing dies, it is the food for another - what perfect system of morality will deny one sentient being food, for the benefit of another? HUMANITY is not the only important thing in the Universe.

So, yeah: Do let us get into that conversation. How can you possibly defend such an inhumane position?

It is an inhumane position, I will not deny that; for I do not put HUMANITY above all other things. What makes humans the center of the universe? (other than their own arrogance, and need for self preservation). We are not the only ones here, and our desires are not in alignment with the desires of all the other sentient beings.

Besides, death is only a doorway into another life, and another life, and another life - on into infinity. Consider reincarnation as you consider my morals here, and you will see that my Compassion and Love is actually for the continuing growth and evolution of the human spirit, which doesn't complete the task in a mere life time but over an infinite number of lifetimes.

So I do not see death as a "bad" thing, because often there is much good that comes of any death if an objective observation of the situation is made. Furthermore, I don't regard the physical body of man as his actual being - it is the eternal soul within man. The physcial body is only a vehicle which is abandoned when it's story is complete on that plane of exisitence; it's material being recycled into the environment from which it was made.

Then, you do not have the courage of your convictions. To be blunt, you are an intellectual coward.

Perhaps, but your assertion that I am a coward is something that I take very lightly. Moreover I feel like I have failed you, because I am unable to communicate to you effectively enough to bring you to a new understanding. I understand that you require physical verification of what I'm talking about before you will accept it into your beliefs, however I have already experienced the verification, and do not doubt any longer.

Because you don't help people in need, yes.

Perhaps our definitions of "need" and "help" are at odds, and thus incompatible.

....ayup. It is a recipe for justifying incredible selfishness.

This is why you are all questioning the existence of God; because you seem to think that if there is a God that he should rescue you from your problems; that's a flawed philosophy if I've ever seen one. If there is a God behind everything that is happening, and this is the Universe that God created, then who are you to assert that something isn't right about his creation? People starve because God put them in that position, and it's not a cruel thing - even though its an experience that we may not like. We grow from our experiences, and you must keep that in mind, WE GROW FROM OUR EXPERIENCES. What would we grow into if all of our experiences were comfortable, pleasant, peaceful, and without any disagreeable condition?

Can you not see the silver lining to every terrible thing that has ever occurred to you?

If there is some experience which you have had where you cannot find the silver lining, then I will take a guess that the experience still haunts you, and occupies your thoughts; thus you are still needing to grow from that experience in order to reap the benefit of it. This is the journey of the soul through the many lifetimes, the purpose of which being EXPERIENCE. Our desires drive us to have experiences, which result in our spirtual evolution.(On a side note, compare this with Buddhism and the path to enlightenment - where one abandons the desires of the ego in order to exit the cycle of rebirth on the material plane. Do you get it now?)

Like I said, I have compassion and love for the human spirit, which is an evolving consciousness that lives life time after life time. Your moral systems are based on your desires, and your human condition. Nothing more. To validate this, I bet that none of you consider the ants, worms, beetles, and other insects which may be starving to death in your yards right now. My moral system is compassionate to ALL sentient beings, everywhere. In our system of morality, there is the phrase, "ALL IS WELL."

 

[dannagain]

Very nice story. The lesson is that even under strict conditions we are subject to the illusive nature of our own thoughts and assumptions, therefore verification is important.

Ok.... but then:

Let's do some reading on the shaman forums all over the internet, shall we, and we'll see if there's something to what I'm saying.

D'oh! Reading the tales of other delusionals does not constitute evidence. You obviously didnt understand the story.

As for my discussion with Abraham, YES I do think this was verification; and I base this upon what Abraham and I talked about. The knowledge I gained from that conversation was immense.

Can Abraham tell you what my mother's father's nickname was?

I do understand the value of it, which is why I'm here talking with you. I've done a LOT of reading about shamanism on the internet, and in books, on top of my own personal experiments. .

Again reading about fairy tales does not constitute evidence for the existence of fairy tales.

Yes. It's in the results. If we're talking about interdimensional travel using shamanic journey techniques, then the person journeying should come back with predictable results. Let's say that the dimension they travel to looks like Hawaii; everyone that goes there should come back with a similar description, right? Consciousness is the traveller, so consciousness is where we will find our verification.

Two people tripping and both independently experiencing a magical land filled with ruby covered trees and purple skies does not constitute evidence for the reality of that magical land. It just means they have similar brains. In cultures where precious stones have no value, the magical lands are always described as having amazing buildings and objects made of fruits and flowers rather than precious stones. What does that tell you?

What you call, "God," is everything that exists. Logically, what else could, "God," be? The answer may be glib, but it is honest.

Ah my stupid atheist but when I say God I mean chocolate! You don't mean to tell me you don't believe in chocolate do you? What more evidence for the existence of chocolate could you need? (with thanks to aumeye)

Hillary Clinton will be our next president. I'm taking one more dive into the near future to verify that, which I'll be doing this weekend; but I'm 99% positive of that result..

OMGZ YOUZ RILLY R SIDEKICK!1111!!11

You won't think its a hallucination when you experience it. Shifting your assemblage point is an illuminating experience. The verification you want will be right in front of you, and all that I've said will become clear.

If you don't think that a hallucination is a halluciantion then that is some dangerous ground you're on. That's when you can go crazy. As long as you recognise that all these mystical experiences are hallucinations it's not too harmful. Thinking they're real though.. .

It is an inhumane position, I will not deny that; for I do not put HUMANITY above all other things. What makes humans the center of the universe? (other than their own arrogance, and need for self preservation). We are not the only ones here, and our desires are not in alignment with the desires of all the other sentient beings.

ok so do the challenge and donate the money to the WWF or PETA or something then.

Besides, death is only a doorway into another life, and another life, and another life - on into infinity. Consider reincarnation as you consider my morals here, and you will see that my Compassion and Love is actually for the continuing growth and evolution of the human spirit, which doesn't complete the task in a mere life time but over an infinite number of lifetimes..

Since you nor anyone else has any evidence for this what so ever, it's safe to say you're just making this up.

So I do not see death as a "bad" thing, ...

Sure you do, you're terrified of death. That's why you've created this elaborate fantasy about what happens after you die. The thought that when you die that's it, nothing else, fini. This thought terrifies you and other woos so you create fantasies about what will happen afterwards to temporaily avoid the unavoidable.

On a side note, compare this with Buddhism and the path to enlightenment - where one abandons the desires of the ego in order to exit the cycle of rebirth on the material plane. Do you get it now?)

Like I said, I have compassion and love for the human spirit, which is an evolving consciousness that lives life time after life time. Your moral systems are based on your desires, and your human condition. Nothing more. To validate this, I bet that none of you consider the ants, worms, beetles, and other insects which may be starving to death in your yards right now. My moral system is compassionate to ALL sentient beings, everywhere. In our system of morality, there is the phrase, "ALL IS WELL."

Right then like i said, use the prize money to donate to the WWF or greenpeace or something.

 

[CFLarsen]

No insult intended, I just wanted to be sure that we were on the same page.

You are not insulting me. You are shooting yourself in the foot by purporting to have a deeper knowledge of things.

Darn, I got caught in the fine print, didn't I?! Well, if it must be...

Don't think you can get away with anything here. The onus is on you.

What consequences? (you don't have to answer that). You don't know where I live, DO YOU???

The consequence is that you will be asked for evidence of your claims. Did you really expect otherwise?

Science is pursuing things in a logical manner, working with verifiable results, with those results being reproduceable following the same practices again and again, in an effort to acquire knowledge. Close enough to your definition?

You understand what "verifiable" means?

You are so well read on this topic, and yet this one last step is something you won't indulge in to really see for yourself. Very well then, I'll work around your decision to not work on your own perception.

But that's the problem: You can't tell me when I am hallucinating and when I am seeing the light.

I see. You want someone to watch what I do, and be independent of the process. I agree.

Exactly.

Very nice story. The lesson is that even under strict conditions we are subject to the illusive nature of our own thoughts and assumptions, therefore verification is important. Let's do some reading on the shaman forums all over the internet, shall we, and we'll see if there's something to what I'm saying.

As for my discussion with Abraham, YES I do think this was verification; and I base this upon what Abraham and I talked about. The knowledge I gained from that conversation was immense. In order to have independent verification we will need others who are capable of communicating with spiritual entities. I'm willing to share in that experiment, so if anyone else reading this is accomplished at channelling, or journeying to the other side, please chime in.

No, no, no. You still miss the point. You can't read your way out of this. You can't point to other people's writings. You can't point to others who share your delusion. That's not independent verification.

Read the article about Blondlot again:

Wood suspected that N-rays were a delusion. To demonstrate such, he removed the prism from the N-ray detection device, unbeknownst to Blondlot or his assistant. Without the prism, the machine couldn't work. Yet, when Blondlot's assistant conducted the next experiment he found N-rays. Wood then tried to surreptitiously replace the prism but the assistant saw him and thought he was removing the prism. The next time he tried the experiment, the assistant swore he could not see any N-rays.

Why did the assistant think the lines were gone?

I do understand the value of it, which is why I'm here talking with you. I've done a LOT of reading about shamanism on the internet, and in books, on top of my own personal experiments.

No, you do not understand the value of it. That much is clear.

I'm not an accomplished alchemist, nor do I claim to be. I won't be making diamonds anytime soon, and if I did I would tell no one about it. If you want proof that he's come to talk with the Temple of the Presence, we can get into that discussion; there is evidence in their beliefs that will show the occult-wise person that they have access to a wealth of knowledge about the soul.

Again, you are slinking away from the evidence with your lame excuses.

Yes. It's in the results. If we're talking about interdimensional travel using shamanic journey techniques, then the person journeying should come back with predictable results. Let's say that the dimension they travel to looks like Hawaii; everyone that goes there should come back with a similar description, right? Consciousness is the traveller, so consciousness is where we will find our verification.

They shouldn't come back with similar descriptions, they should come back with the same description.

What about those who come back with wildly different descriptions? Do you discard those as fake?

In the case of shamanic journeys there is an ample body of shamanic-experiementers all over the internet sharing their experiences right now.

There is also an ample body of alien abductees all over the internet sharing their experiences right now. Yet, you dismiss those.

What you call, "God," is everything that exists. Logically, what else could, "God," be? The answer may be glib, but it is honest.

When I first reached a point of enlightenment, I became aware that I was AWARE of everything, from everywhere, through the eyes of everything. I do not claim to be a Buddha, just to be clear, because I have never reached complete enlightenment. The closest that I've come always results in this experience of being everything. Enlightenment is connection with God, or Source, and realization that everything, everywhere, is all the same entity expressing itself in a myriad of forms.

This is no different than what other New Agers can deliver of fatuous drivel.

Hillary Clinton will be our next president. I'm taking one more dive into the near future to verify that, which I'll be doing this weekend; but I'm 99% positive of that result.

Oh, come on! How about something that isn't all too obvious? Name 10 gold medal winners at the Beijing Olympics.

You won't think its a hallucination when you experience it. Shifting your assemblage point is an illuminating experience. The verification you want will be right in front of you, and all that I've said will become clear.

That's what all those who hallucinate things say: It is as real to them as the real world.

I do not want followers. I also don't want you to drop your skepticism, I want you to apply it to the techniques that I'm talking about with you. I'm not asking for belief, and if it appears that way in my writing then I apologize for the misunderstanding. My point to you all is that shifting your asseblage point using the techniques outlined by shamans will show you a world that you are denying; your denial of this world is based on your lack of experiencing it directly, which can only be done by you. This is about conscious experience.

When you can't point to evidence, but still accept your fantasies, you do want me to drop my skepticism.

You write a script for your entire life. "God" helps you do this. You come to Earth and incarnate into a living thing. During the early years of your life you are learning how to exist in that body, and the knowledge you once had (prebirth) is forgotten beneath all the new knowledge you are acquiring. This puts you into a state of mind where you will experience your life-script as if you don't remember it. (The script is written in symbolic language, and is not accessible to normal ways of thinking). Thus, people do not generally recall that everything they're doing has been planned - when they do remember something this is deja-vu. We do this so that we can experience. If there were not the infinite experiences of the infinite sentient beings of the universe, then God would not exist, for there would be nothing to verify to itself that God Is. (Thus the Temple of the Presence motto: "I AM"). We are spiritual entities, that are using material bodies on the material plane, to gain experience with the processes of the Natural Laws that govern everything, to prepare us for journeys into the higher planes. What we learn here and now will become our abilities to survive (instincts) in the next life.

I'm not being cold, selfish, or anything of the sort when I proclaim this to you. I have compassion and Love for all living things, everywhere. You're ideas of cold and selfish are part of a system of dualities that do not apply to the universe at large. When one thing dies, it is the food for another - what perfect system of morality will deny one sentient being food, for the benefit of another? HUMANITY is not the only important thing in the Universe.

More self-absorbed drivel.

It is an inhumane position, I will not deny that; for I do not put HUMANITY above all other things. What makes humans the center of the universe? (other than their own arrogance, and need for self preservation). We are not the only ones here, and our desires are not in alignment with the desires of all the other sentient beings.

Besides, death is only a doorway into another life, and another life, and another life - on into infinity. Consider reincarnation as you consider my morals here, and you will see that my Compassion and Love is actually for the continuing growth and evolution of the human spirit, which doesn't complete the task in a mere life time but over an infinite number of lifetimes.

So I do not see death as a "bad" thing, because often there is much good that comes of any death if an objective observation of the situation is made. Furthermore, I don't regard the physical body of man as his actual being - it is the eternal soul within man. The physcial body is only a vehicle which is abandoned when it's story is complete on that plane of exisitence; it's material being recycled into the environment from which it was made.

What "good" came out of 3,000 people being pulverized and burnt to cinders on 9/11?

Perhaps, but your assertion that I am a coward is something that I take very lightly. Moreover I feel like I have failed you, because I am unable to communicate to you effectively enough to bring you to a new understanding. I understand that you require physical verification of what I'm talking about before you will accept it into your beliefs, however I have already experienced the verification, and do not doubt any longer.

What a bunch of hooey.

Perhaps our definitions of "need" and "help" are at odds, and thus incompatible.

But you will help a drowning child. Do you do that for the child, or for yourself?

This is why you are all questioning the existence of God; because you seem to think that if there is a God that he should rescue you from your problems; that's a flawed philosophy if I've ever seen one. If there is a God behind everything that is happening, and this is the Universe that God created, then who are you to assert that something isn't right about his creation? People starve because God put them in that position, and it's not a cruel thing - even though its an experience that we may not like. We grow from our experiences, and you must keep that in mind, WE GROW FROM OUR EXPERIENCES. What would we grow into if all of our experiences were comfortable, pleasant, peaceful, and without any disagreeable condition?

Can you not see the silver lining to every terrible thing that has ever occurred to you?

If there is some experience which you have had where you cannot find the silver lining, then I will take a guess that the experience still haunts you, and occupies your thoughts; thus you are still needing to grow from that experience in order to reap the benefit of it. This is the journey of the soul through the many lifetimes, the purpose of which being EXPERIENCE. Our desires drive us to have experiences, which result in our spirtual evolution.(On a side note, compare this with Buddhism and the path to enlightenment - where one abandons the desires of the ego in order to exit the cycle of rebirth on the material plane. Do you get it now?)

Like I said, I have compassion and love for the human spirit, which is an evolving consciousness that lives life time after life time. Your moral systems are based on your desires, and your human condition. Nothing more. To validate this, I bet that none of you consider the ants, worms, beetles, and other insects which may be starving to death in your yards right now. My moral system is compassionate to ALL sentient beings, everywhere. In our system of morality, there is the phrase, "ALL IS WELL."

Tell me something: What will it take for you to admit that you are wrong? These hallucinations of yours (which you call "verified"), is there anything that will convince you that they were hallucinations?

Can Abraham tell you what my mother's father's nickname was?

"Mud"?

 

[quarky]

Consistent universes?

according to some 'dreamers', we are perceivers. What we perceive is a description; a consensus. That includes the 'real' world as well.

Prove that there's anything other than meat-and-bones to begin with...

meat and bones, in a dream, seem as solid as meat and bones in the waking realm, because the perceiver of the dream is composed of the same stuff that is being perceived. energy.

Consistent descriptions?

so they say

Where is it, exactly? Define mind. Etc.

If I had to make a guess as to where alternate universes reside, if they do, it would be right here...these same energy fields, rearranged to express something different. Sub-atomic particles, for instance, might have multible potentialities. They might be expressing as an atom of lead in one perception; but also might express something different, using the same particles.
According to some mystical types, these alternate potentialities are hinged on our perceptual bias.

Is there any sort of evidence at all, other than stories? Anything to suggest the stories are anything other than imagination?

Probably not. Yet, one might claim that there is nothing particularly real about our meat and bones perceptions; that it too is imagination, bolstered by endless consensus of description.

You could almost certainly test this, by giving scientist #1 a secret message to pass to scientist #2.

They would have to be exceptionaly trained scientists; trained in something that isn't science; hence, unlikely. Plus, there's always the irritating implication that having a petty intent in a mystical journey will derail the journey. Emotional baggage, of any sort, will flavor the dream-scape with one's particular nuerosis, and the result will be a normal, bizarre dream, wherein the dreamer has no control.

... who do you suppose has provided this knowledge? Mystics or particle physicists?

Mystics have long been drawn to understanding the underlying reality of consciousness. Physicists have a similar compulsion, and lots of new toys.
Both have discovered that there is only energy and space.
Particle physicists are the mystics of this single reality...although, they too frequently speak of parrellel universes; multible unseen dimensions; particles that thus far are only postulations of particles.

Mysticism and science are not incompatible. But they needn't be forced into alignment. So far, we (scientists) can't disprove much about certain approaches to consciousness...and mystics can't prove anything.

I don't think they should try, actually. It craps up both camps.
Which isn't to say that scientists shouldn't meditate; nor that mystics shouldn't learn all they can of science.

In the Castanada stories, all the apprentices were encouraged to get advanced degrees from real universities. They needed to be exceptionaly well grounded in this reality to be able to handle anything beyond this reality.

It doesn't really matter if its pure fantasy. Shamanism has no business with science; nor vica/versa. Either way, there is still much to be learned about the nature of consciousness and perception.

 

[thoth108]

Ok.... but then:



D'oh! Reading the tales of other delusionals does not constitute evidence. You obviously didnt understand the story.

I did. You obviously haven't done as much reading as I have on the subject. It's not that there are just similarities between the visions of shamanic practitioners all over the world; their recounts of their visions contain identical elements, and not just hallucinatory projections of the ego (read the Tibetan Book of the Dead); I'm talking about seeing spirits, chakras, the World Tree, and the detailed descriptions of not only other dimensions, but the human light body(aura) as well.

During a "trip" with a friend of mine, who knows nothing of occult studies, she described to me a "spinning disc" which appeared to be "spinning in two directions at once" and was located "directly behind my head." When she came out of her trip, I asked her what she knew of chakras, and she said "nothing, really." Ofcourse there's the chance that she's seen them before in pictures. However, for her to look at me and see the crown chakra was too much of a coincidence, considering that's the chakra that would be most developed in me. I have had many, many experiences with people tripping around me and seeing my chakras.

These are the types of similarities that I'm talking about, and this just scratches the surface. Independent, scientific verification would be wonderful so that you skeptics would stop doubting what it is that shamans have been telling us for thousands of years now; but if you're just going to dismiss it as hallucination, and tell us that we're delusional for believing anything otherwise, why should we help you to understand your flawed view of reality? Because, from our perspective, it is YOU who are mistaken about reality.

Can Abraham tell you what my mother's father's nickname was?

I'll put that in my list of things to do this weekend on my journey.

Again reading about fairy tales does not constitute evidence for the existence of fairy tales.

These are eye witness accounts from people. The reason we have to turn to eye witness accounts is because the shamanic journey is undertaken by the consciousness, and science cannot identify, measure, or verify "consciousness" by any means. Explore the situation like a police detective, and not like a scientist, and you will begin to see verification in their reports that hallucination and "similar brain function" can not explain what they are seeing.

Two people tripping and both independently experiencing a magical land filled with ruby covered trees and purple skies does not constitute evidence for the reality of that magical land. It just means they have similar brains. In cultures where precious stones have no value, the magical lands are always described as having amazing buildings and objects made of fruits and flowers rather than precious stones. What does that tell you?

Much of the fluff that people see is projections of the Ego (see the Tibetan Book of the Dead), you learn to look past that in shamanism; shutting off the ego and it's imagination, and then experiencing what exists outside of your mind. Your consciousness is making the journey, and it is subject to it's own weaknesses - one of which being fancy. What you see beyond these projections, the reality that you're not tuned into right now during your normal state of awareness, is what I'm talking about - that's the part that is not only similar, but identical between eye witness accounts; whether they be derived from hallucingenic trips, or shamanic-ecstasy.

Ah my stupid atheist but when I say God I mean chocolate! You don't mean to tell me you don't believe in chocolate do you? What more evidence for the existence of chocolate could you need? (with thanks to aumeye)

Read Sufism, Dan. I appreciate your argument here, and I know that I'm getting into the impossible "prove God exists" debate, but I figured I'd just be honest about what I know. Also, take into account that:

1. I'm telling you that I've been to other dimensions, and have received knowledge from my contacts with beings there.

2. I'm also telling you that these experiences are real.

When you consider those things, and feel a chill rise up your spine, then I think you will have realized that it may be possible that Thoth108 is right. I'm being polite enought to indulge in the possiblity that I'm wrong about all of this, everything that I'm asserting, for the sake of this debate; do the same for me for a moment.

OMGZ YOUZ RILLY R SIDEKICK!1111!!11

Yea, we all know she's gonna win.

If you don't think that a hallucination is a halluciantion then that is some dangerous ground you're on. That's when you can go crazy. As long as you recognise that all these mystical experiences are hallucinations it's not too harmful. Thinking they're real though.. .

The bolded part I agree with, whole heartedly. While in the heightened states of awareness you have to be able to determine what is illusion, and what is real.

ok so do the challenge and donate the money to the WWF or PETA or something then.

I'm not into wrestling and I don't like PETA. I'll just buy a lot of donuts for the office that day!

Since you nor anyone else has any evidence for this what so ever, it's safe to say you're just making this up.

Is it "safe" to say, or is that a flaw in your argument? Is that which you cannot prove to be false actually false? There is a distinction between what science can prove not to be fact, and what science can simply not prove. You're making an assumption that since you can't prove it, it's safe to say it isn't real.

Sure you do, you're terrified of death. That's why you've created this elaborate fantasy about what happens after you die. The thought that when you die that's it, nothing else, fini. This thought terrifies you and other woos so you create fantasies about what will happen afterwards to temporaily avoid the unavoidable.

You don't know me. I have faced death many time, and in no way am I afraid of it. If you and I were looking at death, I would be calm and comfortable - and in fact would turn my attention to you to make sure that you are calm and comfortable. There isn't anything to fear in death, even if there's nothing afterwards.

Since you bring it up, what fears do YOU have that are shaping your belief system? At the bottom of your skepticism, is there a fear of something that keeps you from seeing the world with any other viewpoint?

Just so you know, shamanism teaches you to confront your fears - question them, find out when/where you formed them, and undo them. I have very little to fear, and most of it has nothing to do with the world you recognize. Death, however, is not something to be feared to me.

Thus the assertion: ALL IS WELL. There really isn't anything to fear.

Right then like i said, use the prize money to donate to the WWF or greenpeace or something.

Why the WWF? Isn't that Hulk Hogan's federation? I was more into the ECW... that was a cooler federation by far. Who's greenpeace?

It isn't about the money. It's about "stopping your world" or ruining the illusion for you. If I convince you to do it on your own, I don't incur bad karma because you took the steps. If I show you how to make diamonds through alchemy, or perform magick in front of you, then I'm taking away from your right to free-will, and I'm doing it for: monetary gain, and to show-off what I have learned; greed and pride. This will be a bad karmic hit, and will subtract from the energy that I have available to do other things (like live my life). Karma is something that you and I don't see the same way; if you'd like to keep discussing this, go ahead. Perhaps you should just say, "this is how Thoth108 is, and although I disagree I recognize his right to believe what he wants."

 

[thoth108]

Mystics have long been drawn to understanding the underlying reality of consciousness. Physicists have a similar compulsion, and lots of new toys.
Both have discovered that there is only energy and space.
Particle physicists are the mystics of this single reality...although, they too frequently speak of parrellel universes; multible unseen dimensions; particles that thus far are only postulations of particles.

Mysticism and science are not incompatible. But they needn't be forced into alignment. So far, we (scientists) can't disprove much about certain approaches to consciousness...and mystics can't prove anything.

I don't think they should try, actually. It craps up both camps.
Which isn't to say that scientists shouldn't meditate; nor that mystics shouldn't learn all they can of science.

In the Castanada stories, all the apprentices were encouraged to get advanced degrees from real universities. They needed to be exceptionaly well grounded in this reality to be able to handle anything beyond this reality.

It doesn't really matter if its pure fantasy. Shamanism has no business with science; nor vica/versa. Either way, there is still much to be learned about the nature of consciousness and perception.

The more I discuss things here in the JREF, the more I start to align with your point of view. Perhaps the rift between the two, science and mysticism, will never be reconciled.... but that's what is supposed to be happening right now according to the mystery of Quetzalcoatl; the reconciliation of spirit and matter, or science(matter) and mysticism(spirit). I'm not giving up on finding someway to find the middle ground between the two. I've seen the interaction of them first hand, (spirit and matter), and I know that there is something there that science can grab onto and measure, verify, and theorize on to their hearts' content. The more scientist that meditate, and look into shamanism, the better.

 

[six7s]

You obviously haven't done as much reading as I have on the subject

Although you might want to believe you're more well-read, it is NOT obvious

What is obvious is that, unlike TrueScottish Sceptics® ™ ©, you are content to arrive at conclusions based on no verifiable evidence

I'm talking about seeing spirits, chakras, the World Tree, and the detailed descriptions of not only other dimensions, but the human light body(aura) as well

And if this is a 'New Age religion' that does make you happy, then great

However, as you have yet to provide any evidence that it has, in any way whatsoever, the potential to be more rewarding (for sceptics) than living in and celebrating reality, I'm confused about what your point is on this thread

Can you at least explain that, please?

 

[Jimbo07]

If I show you how to make diamonds through alchemy, or perform magick in front of you, then I'm taking away from your right to free-will,

Do you seriously have this much trouble distinguishing between the real and the unreal?

I'll show you mine:

The New Diamond Age

Pathway to Diamond-Based Molecular Manufacturing

Diamond Manufacturing Method

Synthetic diamond

and you show me yours:

alchemy



Seriously, alchemy is often credited as influencing the fore-runners of science with early chemists hard to distinguish from alchemists. There is a reason, however, that chemistry left alchemy behind.

One works.

A similar relationship may be drawn between astronomy and astrology.

and I'm doing it for: monetary gain, and to show-off what I have learned; greed and pride.

You've claimed to be teaching. Since you cannot show anything before the first lesson, what can you be teaching? What else is at stake, if not pride?

This will be a bad karmic hit, and will subtract from the energy that I have available to do other things (like live my life). Karma is something that you and I don't see the same way; if you'd like to keep discussing this, go ahead. Perhaps you should just say, "this is how Thoth108 is, and although I disagree I recognize his right to believe what he wants."

I've already recognized your right to believe what you want. I don't know about other ghostly beings. I personally suspect they're not there. That is my belief. However, don't make specific claims about things which are clearly, and have demonstrably shown to be, impractical, like alchemy.

 

[quarky]

The more I discuss things here in the JREF, the more I start to align with your point of view. Perhaps the rift between the two, science and mysticism, will never be reconciled.... but that's what is supposed to be happening right now according to the mystery of Quetzalcoatl; the reconciliation of spirit and matter, or science(matter) and mysticism(spirit). I'm not giving up on finding someway to find the middle ground between the two. I've seen the interaction of them first hand, (spirit and matter), and I know that there is something there that science can grab onto and measure, verify, and theorize on to their hearts' content. The more scientist that meditate, and look into shamanism, the better.

and the more shamanism fans study science, the better.
What i've noticed, is that, usually, neither camp wants anything to do with the other. Scientists often succumb to a smugness about how solid their understanding of the overwhelming mystery of our very being is. The best scientists are driven by a lot of curiosity and a good dose of imagination.

Mystic fans often succumb to making bold claims about what they know about the mystery; with nothing whatsoever to back it up.
That drives scientists crazy.
It doesn't serve the mystic well, either.

 

[thoth108]

And if this is a 'New Age religion' that does make you happy, then great

However, as you have yet to provide any evidence that it has, in any way whatsoever, the potential to be more rewarding (for sceptics) than living in and celebrating reality, I'm confused about what your point is on this thread

Can you at least explain that, please?

My original point was that my religious beliefs have brought me happiness.

 

[CFLarsen]

I did. You obviously haven't done as much reading as I have on the subject.

But I have. So:

During a "trip" with a friend of mine, who knows nothing of occult studies, she described to me a "spinning disc" which appeared to be "spinning in two directions at once" and was located "directly behind my head." When she came out of her trip, I asked her what she knew of chakras, and she said "nothing, really." Ofcourse there's the chance that she's seen them before in pictures. However, for her to look at me and see the crown chakra was too much of a coincidence, considering that's the chakra that would be most developed in me. I have had many, many experiences with people tripping around me and seeing my chakras.

I assume you mean the Sahasrara chakra?

Can you please explain how "1000 petals which are arranged in 20 layers each of them with 50 petals" can be described as a "spinning disc", "spinning in two directions at once"?

Or, are people wrong, when they describe this particular chakra this way?

 

[blauregen]

Can you please explain how "1000 petals which are arranged in 20 layers each of them with 50 petals" can be described as a "spinning disc", "spinning in two directions at once"?

Or, are people wrong, when they describe this particular chakra this way?

Talking about maps and territory.

I would actually be surprised if i ever saw a chakra - if there are chakra, that is - and it would look like a colored ball surrounded by petals and with a glyph inscribed on it. But then i am somewhat prone to take models and poetic descriptions as mental images until i learn more.

As a child for example i used to think about matter as consisting of things that look like tiny solar systems with little planetlike balls orbiting a knobbly core. I saw something like this in a physics book, and apparently for many applications it made a fine model of the real thing.

 

[dannagain]

I did. You obviously haven't done as much reading as I have on the subject. It's not that there are just similarities between the visions of shamanic practitioners all over the world; their recounts of their visions contain identical elements, and not just hallucinatory projections of the ego (read the Tibetan Book of the Dead); I'm talking about seeing spirits, chakras, the World Tree, and the detailed descriptions of not only other dimensions, but the human light body(aura) as well.

Right, you've seen a whole load of psychedelic crap and other people have seen the exact same thing while they've been tripping. Let me spell it out for you again: THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT THE THINGS THAT YOU SAW WERE REAL.

I'll put that in my list of things to do this weekend on my journey.

Yeah right, same list as 'moving objects with my mind'. Are you going to admit that you can't and never will be able to move objects with your mind yet? If this is considered a minor act of iddhi and you cant even do that then that gives me even less reason to believe that you have 'mastered' higher feats of magic.

These are eye witness accounts from people. The reason we have to turn to eye witness accounts is because the shamanic journey is undertaken by the consciousness, and science cannot identify, measure, or verify "consciousness" by any means.

nonsense.

Explore the situation like a police detective, and not like a scientist, and you will begin to see verification in their reports that hallucination and "similar brain function" can not explain what they are seeing.

Yes it can. If, however, you come back from these voyages with knowledge that it would be paranormal for you to know (like knowing my mum's dad'd nickname or exchanging information with another shaman while you were both out tripping).

Much of the fluff that people see is projections of the Ego (see the Tibetan Book of the Dead), you learn to look past that in shamanism; shutting off the ego and it's imagination, and then experiencing what exists outside of your mind. Your consciousness is making the journey, and it is subject to it's own weaknesses - one of which being fancy. What you see beyond these projections, the reality that you're not tuned into right now during your normal state of awareness, is what I'm talking about - that's the part that is not only similar, but identical between eye witness accounts; whether they be derived from hallucingenic trips, or shamanic-ecstasy.

Of course it's identical. People's brains are basically identical in structure. Consider this: how do drugs send you to these lands? After all drugs are PHYSICAL things that have a measurable physical effect on the brain. Can't you see that this fact strongly suggests that our conciousness is just a function of the brain?

Read Sufism, Dan.

Read sufism right. Why?

1. I'm telling you that I've been to other dimensions, and have received knowledge from my contacts with beings there.

Unfortunately none of this knowledge is real. Not one of these beings (like Abraham) has told you anything tangible which it would be paranormal of you to know. If one of these beings could tell you what colour underwear i have on right now or what will happen next wednesday etc then that is something to get excited about. Hallucinating and being told by a hallucination that 'all is well' is not. It's the same reason why characters in your dream can never tell you anything you dont already know. They are just projections. So are these beings.

2. I'm also telling you that these experiences are real.

When you consider those things, and feel a chill rise up your spine, then I think you will have realized that it may be possible that Thoth108 is right.

Lol. Look i've been to these 'worlds' before. I've had physical contact with a being. It actually touched me and i felt it. But it was still a hallucination.

I'm being polite enought to indulge in the possiblity that I'm wrong about all of this, everything that I'm asserting, for the sake of this debate; do the same for me for a moment.

In no way are you willing to consider you are wrong. If you seriously thought about it then you would quickly realise you were.

I'm not into wrestling and I don't like PETA. I'll just buy a lot of donuts for the office that day!

I really hope that you do know what the WWF is and you were just trying to be funny.

Is it "safe" to say, or is that a flaw in your argument? Is that which you cannot prove to be false actually false? There is a distinction between what science can prove not to be fact, and what science can simply not prove. You're making an assumption that since you can't prove it, it's safe to say it isn't real.

I can't prove that there isn't an invisible blue alien that sits on my head all day. Does this mean i should stop and consider the possibility that there is an invisible blue alien that sits on my head all day?

You don't know me. I have faced death many time, and in no way am I afraid of it. If you and I were looking at death, I would be calm and comfortable - and in fact would turn my attention to you to make sure that you are calm and comfortable. There isn't anything to fear in death, even if there's nothing afterwards.

Since you bring it up, what fears do YOU have that are shaping your belief system? At the bottom of your skepticism, is there a fear of something that keeps you from seeing the world with any other viewpoint?

No at the bottom of my scepticism is the knowledge that i used to be just like you. I believed in all sorts of nonsense and thought i was a shaman too. Then i grew up (i won't use 'woke up' again because you'll get excited again and start talking about enlightenment).

Thus the assertion: ALL IS WELL. There really isn't anything to fear.

Why the WWF? Isn't that Hulk Hogan's federation? I was more into the ECW... that was a cooler federation by far. Who's greenpeace?

[sigh].

It isn't about the money. It's about "stopping your world" or ruining the illusion for you. If I convince you to do it on your own, I don't incur bad karma because you took the steps. If I show you how to make diamonds through alchemy, or perform magick in front of you, then I'm taking away from your right to free-will, and I'm doing it for: monetary gain, and to show-off what I have learned; greed and pride. This will be a bad karmic hit, and will subtract from the energy that I have available to do other things (like live my life). Karma is something that you and I don't see the same way; if you'd like to keep discussing this, go ahead. Perhaps you should just say, "this is how Thoth108 is, and although I disagree I recognize his right to believe what he wants."

No no no, it's very simple, use your powers for good. Win the money and give it to starving people. Very simple very easy IF you have powers. If you didnt really have any powers then you'd probably make up some rubbish about how it would be wrong to use your powers to help starving people because their souls need to spend a life getting ***** over by everyone else. Yeah, right.