VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

[VisionFromFeeling]

I am deeply offended that some of you would not consider me to be entitled to my own world of thoughts, perception, and information processing, which is most essential to what a conscious human being is and has the right to be. To consider that what I experience that is personal and subjective to me should be considered mental illness when it does not interfere with my way of life and when in fact my unusual processing skills are what make me an exceptional student in conventional science. What I experience seems to be very similar to synesthesia, which, by definition is not a mental illness and typically not even a handicap.

I experience a richer world of perception than do most. When I look at a page of physics equations, it comes to life in my mind, not as rows of variables but as shapes, colors, patterns and vibrational aspects, that interact on their own in my mind to show the results of their interaction, that I then translate back into physical significance. When I look at the abbreviated letters of chemical elements, they are not just letters, they are color, shape, and vibration. And when I look at human bodies, I perceive vibrational information, that translates on its own in my mind into images of human tissue, felt perception of pain or discomfort, heartbeat, swallowing or breathing. I can look at a flower from inside a car and perceive its scent to a most wonderful extent, even flowers that we don't smell with our noses. I walk by the aisles at a store and can look at the foods and perceive what they taste like. It is a wonderful and rich experience and perception of the world. It does nothing to harm me, or others. I have the ordinary perception as well, and can distinguish between the two. It does not interfere with my understanding of the world otherwise, as a very dull and boring place as seen by others. And I conclude my perceptions to be subjective to me, knowing that others don't see or feel what I do, as opposed to immediately assuming them to be reality-based or "extrasensory" - with the possible exception of the medical perceptions which have shown some compelling correlation.

I am offended that some of you would consider this to be wrong, just because it is unusual, or is not experienced by the collective of you. Skepticism is not about fighting what is unusual, but to trying to explain and to understand that which you yourself do not perceive or experience. I don't understand why I am under constant attack.

I came to the JREF Forums expecting to meet Skeptics who would engage in my investigation, which aims to look into my experiences of correlation between what I experience and with the way the world is mutually experienced. I am being entirely honest about my descriptions of my experience, I am not a liar and I am not stalling progress on purpose. I wish all of you could see, that I am really working toward progressing with the study and reaching toward a final test of my claim. My claim of perceiving correlating medical information in people. And I am open to the other possibility, that they would not correlate.

I wish some of you would let go of the bickering over small details and of magnifying your misconceptions and false conclusions about me as a person and as a paranormal claimant and investigator into my claim, based on what your pre-conceived ideas seem to be about a paranormal claimant or the agendas that I *should* be having with my investigation and my being here.

I really think I have a very fascinating research topic going on, and I was hoping that some of you would be happy to be included in that, as, I am unable to conclude on my investigation without the participation of good Skeptics. And I thought that's why you are here.

I will stay here, as, there is nowhere else to go. But I will keep hoping on things to become more civil. There are ways to express concerns or allegations without becoming rude or hostile. Please adopt that principle, as have I. This Claimant-Skeptics relationship is a rather difficult one. But I am making it work, it has to, for the sake of my investigation.

 

[tsig]

I am deeply offended that some of you would not consider me to be entitled to my own world of thoughts, perception, and information processing, which is most essential to what a conscious human being is and has the right to be. To consider that what I experience that is personal and subjective to me should be considered mental illness when it does not interfere with my way of life and when in fact my unusual processing skills are what make me an exceptional student in conventional science. What I experience seems to be very similar to synesthesia, which, by definition is not a mental illness and typically not even a handicap.

I experience a richer world of perception than do most. When I look at a page of physics equations, it comes to life in my mind, not as rows of variables but as shapes, colors, patterns and vibrational aspects, that interact on their own in my mind to show the results of their interaction, that I then translate back into physical significance. When I look at the abbreviated letters of chemical elements, they are not just letters, they are color, shape, and vibration. And when I look at human bodies, I perceive vibrational information, that translates on its own in my mind into images of human tissue, felt perception of pain or discomfort, heartbeat, swallowing or breathing. I can look at a flower from inside a car and perceive its scent to a most wonderful extent, even flowers that we don't smell with our noses. I walk by the aisles at a store and can look at the foods and perceive what they taste like. It is a wonderful and rich experience and perception of the world. It does nothing to harm me, or others. And it does not interfere with my understanding of the world otherwise, as a very dull and boring place as seen by others. And I do consider my perceptions to be subjective to me, as opposed to reality-based or "extrasensory" - with the exception of the medical perceptions which have shown some compelling correlation.

I am offended that some of you would consider this to be wrong, just because it is unusual, or is not experienced by the collective of you. Skepticism is not about fighting what is unusual, but to trying to explain and to understand that which you yourself do not perceive or experience. I don't understand why I am under constant attack.

I came to the JREF Forums expecting to meet Skeptics who would engage in my investigation, which aims to look into my past experiences of correlation between what I experience and with the way the world is mutually experienced. I am being entirely honest about my descriptions of my experience, I am not a liar and I am not stalling progress on purpose. I wish all of you could see, that I am really working toward progressing with the study and reaching toward a final test of my claim. My claim of perceiving correlating medical information in people. And I am open to the other possibility, that they do not correlate.

I wish some of you would let go of the bickering over small details and of magnifying your misconceptions and false conclusions about me as a person and as a paranormal claimant and investigator into my claim, based on what your pre-conceived ideas seem to be about a paranormal claimant or the agendas that I *should* be having with my investigation and my being here.

I really think I have a very fascinating research topic going on, and I was hoping that some of you would be happy to be included in that, as, I am unable to conclude on my investigation without the participation of good Skeptics. And I thought that's why you are here.

I will stay here, as, there is nowhere else to go. But I will keep hoping on things to become more civil. There are ways to express concerns or allegations without becoming rude or hostile. Please adopt that principle, as have I. This Claimant-Skeptics relationship is a rather difficult one. But I am making it work, it has to, for the sake of my investigation.

Those of us that inhabit this dull and boring world (some call it reality) would still like to see some of that dull and boring evidence.

If you had produced that UY's site and this thread would have never come to pass.

 

[Ashles]

Usual unevidenced claims deleted

I thought you had already been warned at least twice about not using this thread to make yet further repetitions of your claims?

Especially as, yet again, you are making claims we could easily form tests around, yet, once again, if we try to you will back away from the claim saying it is "not your main claim" or "not that strong" or something.

It seems like, as you have some new audience members, you feel you can revert to making outrageous claims and yet when tests are proposed, shy away from them.

I walk by the aisles at a store and can look at the foods and perceive what they taste like

This test could be set up in minutes - why all the mucking about with 'medical perceptions'?

Why in 5 months have you not set up a simple test such as this when you are in contact with at least 3 Skeptical organisations?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

I thought you had already been warned at least twice about not using this thread to make yet further repetitions of your claims?

Especially as, yet again, you are making claims we could easily form tests around, yet, once again, if we try to you will back away from the claim saying it is "not your main claim" or "not that strong" or something.

It would help if you referred to what I had said that was making "more claims"? The fact that I perceive a scent from flowers behind a screen? Or that I taste food as I walk by them? Neither of these were claims that I intend to have investigated. They were just accounts of how I experience the world. I thought I made that clear in the post. The only claim that I have made, and that I want investigated, is the apparent correlation between my medical perceptions and with actual health information. Nothing else, Ashles. What ever else I say, is not intended to have to be proven. I am not here to *prove* that I sense scent from flowers when I shouldn't, or that I taste food just by looking at them, or that I am from Sweden, or that I am studying two B.S. degrees at the same time, or anything else that I happen to speak. Only the medical perceptions are under scrutiny here, for evidence and final conclusion. Only that, Ashles. Nothing else.

It seems like, as you have some new audience members, you feel you can revert to making outrageous claims and yet when tests are proposed, shy away from them.

My accounts of tasting food when I walk by is not a claim. It is a description. And I don't think you should be too quick to judge it as outrageous, it is just what I perceive. Like someone saying that they feel good when they listen to music. Would you ask them to prove it? With brainscanning and endocrine measurements perhaps? Just an experience, nothing else. I think my background about how I perceive otherwise is quite essential in this investigation, since there appears to be quite a lot of misconceptions about what exactly I am doing and why. And all of that is related to the topic of this thread, which in turn relates to whether I should be stopped, or not.

This test could be set up in minutes - why all the mucking about with 'medical perceptions'?

I have not claimed to experience the actual taste of foods as I walk by them. All I said was that that is what I experience.

Why in 5 months have you not set up a simple test such as this when you are in contact with at least 3 Skeptical organisations?

Because my claim is correlating medical perceptions, and it is not as straightforward since it deals with people. A test involving "things" is easy to set up, but when it involves persons with health problems whom I have never met before it does take a little more arrangements.

 

[Uncayimmy]

I ...

I ...

I ...

I ...

I ...

I ...

I ...

Wow! Anita wrote seven paragraphs all starting with "I" - who woulda thunk it? While your promotional material is off-topic for this thread, your post underscores why I am creating the site. You write walls and walls of text - literally tens of thousands of words. You repeat the same discredited statements. At times you are downright deceptive, especially when you ask questions of skeptics knowing full well we have answered them repeatedly.

What's needed is a place where we can examine your claims critically without you taking over the thread with endless repetitions of discredited points, which you have again done in this thread.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Wow! Anita wrote seven paragraphs all starting with "I" - who woulda thunk it? While your promotional material is off-topic for this thread, your post underscores why I am creating the site. You write walls and walls of text - literally tens of thousands of words. You repeat the same discredited statements. At times you are downright deceptive, especially when you ask questions of skeptics knowing full well we have answered them repeatedly.

So I have no right to try to clear out misconceptions, or to answer questions that are posted to me? So I am supposed to watch while all of you spread lies about me, and conclude on very negative and hurtful things about me as a person that aren't even true? And I'm not the only one who has to repeat their questions here.

without you taking over the thread

Says the man who wrote an entire webpage about me and also dedicated this thread about me. So, should I leave and let you all settle the misconceptions on your own?

Would anyone who's actually had a lookie care to comment?

Personally so far I am quite ok with the site, as long as they don't go overboard with the false assumptions, personal attacks, and conclusions that are not true about me or my investigation. Because as it is now I feel that I won't post on the site.

 

[Jeff Corey]

http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/5op/ch02/figs/narcissus.jpg

 

[Ashles]

It would help if you referred to what I had said that was making "more claims"? The fact that I perceive a scent from flowers behind a screen? Or that I taste food as I walk by them? Neither of these were claims that I intend to have investigated. They were just accounts of how I experience the world. I thought I made that clear in the post. The only claim that I have made, and that I want investigated, is the apparent correlation between my medical perceptions and with actual health information. Nothing else, Ashles. What ever else I say, is not intended to have to be proven. I am not here to *prove* that I sense scent from flowers when I shouldn't, or that I taste food just by looking at them, or that I am from Sweden, or that I am studying two B.S. degrees at the same time, or anything else that I happen to speak. Only the medical perceptions are under scrutiny here, for evidence and final conclusion. Only that, Ashles. Nothing else.

Whoops, got a bit carried away there didn't you?

You didn't write
"I perceive a scent from flowers behind a screen"
you wrote
"I can look at a flower from inside a car and perceive its scent to a most wonderful extent, even flowers that we don't smell with our noses"
which is a pretty clear paranormal claim.

I find it strange you are not here to demonstrate certain paranormal abilities (the ones that could be easily tested) but only other ones.

My accounts of tasting food when I walk by is not a claim. It is a description.

It is also a paranormal claim. Quite clearly.

And I don't think you should be too quick to judge it as outrageous, it is just what I perceive.

If it is correct it is a paranormal claim, and an easily testable one. If it is incorrect it is imagination and not really relevant to anything.

Like someone saying that they feel good when they listen to music. Just an experience, nothing else.

No it isn't - you are not describing subjective opinion, you are describing something objective that could be actually tested.

I think my background about how I perceive otherwise is quite essential in this investigation, since there appears to be quite a lot of misconceptions about what exactly I am doing and why.

I do not personally feel I have any misconceptions about that.

And all of that is related to the topic of this thread, which in turn relates to whether I should be stopped, or not.

And now you want to get back on topic when you realise you have made further testable claims?
Interesting.

I have not claimed to experience the actual taste of foods as I walk by them.

You wrote:

I walk by the aisles at a store and can look at the foods and perceive what they taste like.

That is simply bizarre.
That is exactly what you claimed.

All I said was that that is what I experience.
Because my claim is correlating medical perceptions, and it is not as straightforward since it deals with people. A test involving "things" is easy to set up, yes, but when it involves persons with health problems whom I have never met before, it does take a little more arrangements.

That's why, as has been suggested many, many times before, the tests involving "things" would be far more compelling, easy to set up and easy to judge the accuracy of.
Those are the tests we have encouraged all along.

Strangely those are the tests you always reject.

 

[dafydd]

posted by Vision From Feeling
'I experience a richer world of perception than do most."

How do you know this? How do you know how I or anyone else percieves? Do your super powers enable you to experience the perceptions of everyone else in the world?That statement just comes across as insufferable arrogance. despite your many threads and posts,you still have not provided one shred of evidence.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

you wrote
"I can look at a flower from inside a car and perceive its scent to a most wonderful extent, even flowers that we don't smell with our noses"
which is a pretty clear paranormal claim.

That is not a paranormal claim unless I claim correlation between my perception of scent and with the actual scent of flowers.

I find it strange you are not here to demonstrate certain paranormal abilities (the ones that could be easily tested) but only other ones.

I am investigating the particular experience that, among all of these different variations of unusual experiences, are the ones that
1. occur the most frequently
2. occur the most easily
3. and have shown compelling cases of correlation more so than the others

I have chosen to investigate the medical perceptions. Nothing else at this moment.

 

[Uncayimmy]

So I have no right to try to clear out misconceptions, or to answer questions that are posted to me? So I am supposed to watch while all of you spread lies about me, and conclude on very negative and hurtful things about me as a person that aren't even true? And I'm not the only one who has to repeat their questions here.

Gee, why don't you make a website and clarify everything yourself without fear of interruption. Wait...you already do that.

Okay, how about we create a moderated thread here on JREF where only you and I participate? That way you can answer questions directly without having to deal with dozens of people "attacking" you from all fronts. Wait a sec...we already have such a thread. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131343 - you just stopped responding without explanation.

Hmm...How about the moderators step in and moderate a couple of the several threads that already exist to discuss your claims? What? They already did?

What a dilemma. How you can possibly get a fair opportunity to air your points?

Says the man who wrote an entire webpage about me and also dedicated this thread about me. So, should I leave and let you all settle the misconceptions on your own?

Entire web page? Gasp!

Quit playing the drama queen, Anita. You were all for the site a couple of days ago. You added it as a "Fan Site" on your web page. And now I'm some obsessive bad guy for creating the site? In terms of effort I have written single replies on this forum that contain more information than my entire site does right now. I've spent more time in this thread arguing about the site than working on it.

Personally so far I am quite ok with the site, as long as they don't go overboard with the false assumptions, personal attacks, and conclusions that are not true about me or my investigation. Because as it is now I feel that I won't post on the site.

It really doesn't matter to me if you're okay with my site or not.

 

[eirik]

Me: MMMmmm. This hamburger tastes GOOOD.
Skeptic: You haven't even tasted it!!!
Me: i didn't claim correlation between my perception of taste and and with the actual taste of the burger.
Skeptic: GHAAA!!
Skeptic#2: You know, he's tecnically AND semantically correct.
Skeptic: help!!

 

[Senex]

Me-a: MMMmmm. Thees hemboorger testes GOOOD.
Skepteec: Yuoo hefen't ifee tested it!!!
Me-a: i deedn't cleeem curreleshun betveee my percepshun ooff teste-a und und veet zee ectooel teste-a ooff zee boorger. Hurty flurty schnipp schnipp!
Skepteec: GHEEA!!
Skepteec#2: Yuoo knoo, he's tecneecelly END semunteecelly currect. Um de hur de hur de hur.
Skepteec: help!!

Translation didn't help did it?

 

[eirik]

Translation didn't help did it?

Not sure. Is that a trick question?Is it arameic or atlantian?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

eirik, until I reach a final conclusion about whether my medical perceptions correlate with actual health information or not, I will continue to tell my loved ones what I sense about them. Because everyone does that, and most always it is harmless stuff like, "Honey, your neck muscle is tired today", or "Hon, you really need to go to the bathroom!"

Before and after reaching the final conclusion I will continue to experience the perceptions.

I do not express my medical perceptions to people other than my closest loved ones, and there is no risk of me becoming a practicing woo in psychic medical diagnose. If the conclusion is reached that I do in fact have a skill of extrasensory MRI, I would then have to consider what I should and could do with that skill, but as of today that is so remotely from being within my consideration that I can't even tell you what I would do if that were to happen.

Again, eirik, your concerns about the ethics and possible harms involved with someone claiming psychic medical diagnose are perfectly valid and quite necessary in this type of discussion, however they do not apply to me in this case. I am a most responsible person and quite capable of handling this "potential cause of harm" as you portray it. Just like I am fully capable of managing dangerous chemicals in the chemistry lab without causing harm to others. This, what ever it is, is in safe hands with me.

 

[eirik]

eirik, until I reach a final conclusion about whether my medical perceptions correlate with actual health information or not, I will continue to tell my loved ones what I sense about them. Because everyone does that, and most always it is harmless stuff like, "Honey, your neck muscle is tired today", or "Hon, you really need to go to the bathroom!"

I have no big problem with this particular kind of "diagnosing", and I am glad you cleared this up!

I do not express my medical perceptions to people other than my closest loved ones, and there is no risk of me becoming a practicing woo in psychic medical diagnose. If the conclusion is reached that I do in fact have a skill of extrasensory MRI, I would then have to consider what I should and could do with that skill, but as of today that is so remotely from being within my consideration that I can't even tell you what I would do if that were to happen.

Again, eirik, your concerns about the ethics and possible harms involved with someone claiming psychic medical diagnose are perfectly valid and quite necessary in this type of discussion, however they do not apply to me in this case. I am a most responsible person and quite capable of handling this "potential cause of harm" as you portray it. Just like I am fully capable of managing dangerous chemicals in the chemistry lab without causing harm to others. This, what ever it is, is in safe hands with me.

I greatly appreciate that you see this, and I think this is a responsible way to go about it. We are then on the same page, and I am glad to retract my statements of you being a danger to people around you. Good luck with your investigation and your studies, and good luck to UncaJimmy with his skeptical inquiry of your claims!

Eirik

 

[eirik]

It's Swedish. Didn't those rascals leave their language after they left you their fine culture

No, no, no! We have, with Denmark, a common north germanic origin, and I am sure, a mutual influence. This is Swedish:

(how does one do the youtube-thingy?)

 

[Senex]

No, no, no! We have, with Denmark, a common north germanic origin, and I am sure, a mutual influence. This is Swedish:

(how does one do the youtube-thingy?)

Your links don't work. Why don't you ask one of your Swedish oversears how to do it

 

[Uncayimmy]

I have no big problem with this particular kind of "diagnosing", and I am glad you cleared this up!

So, now you're under the impression that she only does readings for close friends and family, right? And you think it's harmless stuff, right? Try reading her website, specifically this page:
http://www.visionfromfeeling.com/observations.html

"I used this ability on a new person who I had just met that day and I had received absolutely no information about his health condition."

"If this were to continue the heart wall would become enlarged to the point of compressing the large artery through which blood enters the heart and leading to a heart failure. I told him about this and said that so far when it has been possible to check my information against facts I have not been incorrect yet and that therefore I need to share this information with him."

And...

"I decided to confide in a person I recently met that I have an ability of perceiving and describing health information and asked if I could try this with him."

"I detected a significantly low stroke volume (the amount of blood the heart pushes out at a contraction) of up to 80% of the blood remaining in the ventricles."

 

[Rairun]

Okay, maybe I'm being naive here, but how exactly is it harmful to tell someone, "I felt that you are sick, go to the doctor"?