A question of The Force.

Uzima Moto wrote: Kyrin, I didn't dismiss your unicorn theory. It's entirely possible for you and some friends to share that experience. You would be sharing a thought-form.. doesn't mean that it would actually have an affect on reality like the concepts I'm speaking on.. you really like to twist words lol..

You also need to understand the difference between investigation smaller occurrences like OBE's and practicing practical applications.. because the science is occult.. like natural science use to be.. so no, I wouldn't take the challenge for that, and other reasons.. if he wants proof, there are plenty of threads to follow..

No I am not twisting words here. I am telling you the nature of the underlying fabric of the universe. The Tenuous Unicorn Herd is not a thought form. It is the beginning of existence itself. You may dismiss it all you like but I think you will find that if you just go a bit deeper into your ideas you will find the underlying nature of even your ethereal beings. They exist because the herd exists and really does not exist at the same time. They are the beginning and ending of all things including your subtle beings. These beings you speak of exist because of the herd.

As for your claim that these scientists are incapable of investigating OBEs or practicing practical applications, are you suggesting that a new branch of science needs to be created called occult science? So im curious, how do you see this scientific discipline being created and by what means would it investigate these occult things? Im really fascinated as to the details of this new realm of science you are speaking of. It might be used to further investigate the Tenuous Unicorn Herd as well, dont you think? Please let me know how you would define this new discipline and I may be interesting in furthering its creation!

Let me fix this quote since you want to nitpick my sentence structure..

"You also need to understand the difference between investigation smaller occurrences like OBE's, and practicing practical applications like telekinesis.. because the latter science is occult and centuries old.. like natural science use to be.. so no, I wouldn't take the challenge for that, and other reasons.. if he wants proof, there are plenty of threads to follow.."

Also, are you that this unicorn would appear as a unicorn to someone who's never seen one? What do they look like to aliens who would have never even seen a horse?..

The difference between your poor excuse of a theory and the concepts I'm mentioning is because of things we already do know about through study. Applied reasonably, people have acquired ever greater working knowledge of these subjects.. Your unicorn would explain very little.. though theoretically, we wouldn't know until we tested it

Uzima Moto wrote: Let me fix this quote since you want to nitpick my sentence structure..

"You also need to understand the difference between investigation smaller occurrences like OBE's, and practicing practical applications like telekinesis.. because the latter science is occult and centuries old.. like natural science use to be.. so no, I wouldn't take the challenge for that, and other reasons.. if he wants proof, there are plenty of threads to follow.."

Also, are you that this unicorn would appear as a unicorn to someone who's never seen one? What do they look like to aliens who would have never even seen a horse?..

The difference between your poor excuse of a theory and the concepts I'm mentioning is because of things we already do know about through study. Applied reasonably, people have acquired ever greater working knowledge of these subjects.. Your unicorn would explain very little.. though theoretically, we wouldn't know until we tested it

So I must ask again, are you disappointed in the fact that science ignores things like telekinesis or do you acknowledge that science is ready and willing to investigate such things but you are disinclined to aqueous for whatever secret reasons you keep bringing up but decline to detail? I am still interested in exactly how you see a scientific discipline that would be able to adequately explore such things as telekinesis? From what you say I understand you believe that normal science cant do it, so please describe the group that could.

As for the unicorn herd, why would the unicorn appear to be anything other than a unicorn, even to an alien being? Unicorns are universal and I suspect that any alien species also would have such a concept of the unicorn because they are the basic underlying nature of reality and all life, even aliens, can gain access to that.

So now we get to the meat of the matter. You are now claiming that my theory is but a poor excuse because of things we already know about. Exactly what things are those that we know about that refute my theory then? I'm curious to know what it is you know that dismantles my theory of everything in the Tenuous Unicorn Herd? Your own theory seems to have no mechanism of interaction between corporeal and non-corporeal, at least you have never presented one, but my theory bridges that gap and even fills in a blank where yours fails. The horn of the unicorn is actually the bridge between existence and non-existence and is the energy transfer unit between existence and non existence. It is actually a generator of reality!

The unicorn manifests in a non-defined un-space, the horn both exists and does not exist and is an energy creator that facilitates the creation of existence and corporeal matter. Beyond that it might be conjectured that these subtle bodies are created upon which in turn the corporeal body is manifest. I see no reason why you cant accept this as it makes such perfect sense to me. I have personally experienced these unicorn through my studies and even interacted with them to some degree. The process is difficult but in time if you grow your understanding of the nature of the universe you may gain this ability as well! I suggest highly that you open your mind just a bit more and you will see that what I say is true. There are loads of ancient texts on this idea of the unicorn herd, you just need to seek them out. There is an ancient Sumerian cult of the unicorn that practiced these disciplines for many centuries before the knowledge was lost.

The first objects unearthed from Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro were small stone seals inscribed with elegant depictions of animals, including unicorn-like figures, and marked with Indus script writing which still baffles scholars. These seals are dated back to 2,500 B. C. Source: North Park University, Chicago, Illinois.

http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/sumeria.htm

We are just now starting to uncover the mysteries behind these ancient writings.

Zanthan Storm wrote: We speak of God in this world; many of us have see the works of God through the Force. For myself I see the Holy Spirit as The Living Force because it is within us all. Here is my question to you.

Have you witnessed an act of The Force?
If so, tell us about it. Did it act through you?

Feel free to answer the OP or begin your own threads.
The OP was posted in 2008 so that's roughly 11 years ago and I understand conversation can grow and change especially over 11 years but the point of this post is pretty clear. I would love to see a few good forum posts stem from this, rather than in this section.... truthfully. Great points , just not in this section- feel free to request a separation or even start a new one.


Edit: Would there be a way to split this over some where else? moderators...any one got any ideas?

Well, Moto, since you seem to have so liberally dismissed everything I said in this thread so far as just "not a thing", I cannot say I'm surprised you ignored my query as to where this is all coming from. Surely, my rudeness deserves nothing less, though, so fair enough.



I am nevertheless flattered that despite my very poor understanding of the basic sciences you still show interest in my opinion about the video. Hereafter are remarks I made in preparation for this post during my watching the footage:


So I'm some nine minutes into the video, and Dr. Hagelin is showing a picture of a rocky planet called Neptune with a sizeable moon. Neptune is a gas planet and has a ring system with some 14 "major" tiny moons. A small nitpick considering the man is an astrophysicist, surely, but in the spirit of levity, why not make it, I figured. Odd that he either forgot what the depiction was supposed to be of or didn't bother seeking out an image of Neptune. Moving on...
While this may be a matter of perspective/opinion, I do disagree with Dr. Hagelin when around 12:35 he says that the formalism of quantum mechanics is "a whole new logic, a whole new mathematics". It really isn't. The logic employed is the same Aristotelian classical logic that is used for almost everything else, and the mathematical tools employed in QM are essentially probability theory, linear algebra and functional analysis, all of which well predate quantum theory and some of which is used even in classical physics to one extent or another.
At around 15:50 Dr. Hagelin equates vacuum energy to dark energy. This is not well established yet. Particularly, the zero point energy is actually stronger than what would account for the expansion rate of the universe. If I had to muster an educated guess (or an uneducated one, as the case may be; cosmology is not my field), I'd say that the energy-mass-equivalence in the form proposed by Einstein would have to be called into question and corrected if in fact the zero point energy and dark energy are one and the same. I do not thing that an alteration like that could be made without abandoning the first law of thermodynamics on macroscopic scales, though.
At around 16:48 Dr. Hagelin says that the unified field is a "field of intelligence". Not knowing what that means I tried googling for "unified field of intelligence" and the results seem overwhelmingly to feature either Dr. Hagelin alone with a few others, often in conjunction with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the founder of the meditation movement Hagelin is leading now. If you have come across an independent source that explains what this means with regards to physics, I'd be grateful for a link.
At around 18:34 Dr. Hagelin says that one of the string states corresponds to a gravity-carrying particle. I am insufficiently uneducated on matters of string theory, but I do know that while the graviton has been hypothesized, it has not yet been observed in experiment. Personally, and particularly after the discovery of gravitational waves, I would intuitively suspect that the graviton does exist in nature. Intuitions have a habit of failing us when it comes to fundamental physics though, so we had for now better remain mindful of them, and sceptical.
Sometime before the 22 minute mark Dr. Hagelin is beginning to build up to and introduce the multiverse model. Again, I am not sufficiently educated on BSM physics to judge how strongly it is implied, but I share Dr. Hagelin's hesitance to speak fondly of it. To me it would seem that no testable prediction can be made from that model in principle. If this is indeed so, we cannot justify basing any of the rest of our modeling of nature on it.
Then Dr. Hagelin proceeds to speak of psychology and drawing an analogy to physics and to nested sets of numbers. I am insufficiently educated about psychology to comment on that analogy. He commences then with a sermon about the benefits of transcendental meditation. It wouldn't much shock me to find that there are indeed plenty such, though considering how rash (one daresay sloppy) he has been with his very own field, I am very cautious about taking him at his word in matters of medicine in general, or neuroscience and psychology in particular.
Particularly amusing I found his likening meditation to the rebooting of a computer. On modern operating systems (i.e. within the past fifteen years or so) shy of processes involving deep system restructuring like some particularly invasive installations, this is almost entirely unnecessary. The sort of bloat Dr. Hagelin is referring to may have been an issue back in the 90's when manufacturers and developers were still used to computers running for the purposes of a very few programs in general before shutting down again, and thus management of the small memory capacities of the day was less of a priority. Nowadays even most consumer grade computers are comfortable running without reboots easily for weeks if not months at a time.
I only skimmed over the last third or so of his meditation sermon. He brought up again a very forced seeming parallelity between fields of physics (not sure how they are "levels") and levels of consciousness from his tradition of choice, but I do not understand what that contributes to his point except maybe making a few credulous members of the audience associate his religion with science and thus transfer the merits of the latter to the former when frankly I think there is enough of an argument to be had for it without such... tactics.

Google is where I'm getting it from, go find it.. there are books, links, etc.. all going into further detail on the different phenomena..

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote:

Zanthan Storm wrote: We speak of God in this world; many of us have see the works of God through the Force. For myself I see the Holy Spirit as The Living Force because it is within us all. Here is my question to you.

Have you witnessed an act of The Force?
If so, tell us about it. Did it act through you?

Feel free to answer the OP or begin your own threads.
The OP was posted in 2008 so that's roughly 11 years ago and I understand conversation can grow and change especially over 11 years but the point of this post is pretty clear. I would love to see a few good forum posts stem from this, rather than in this section.... truthfully. Great points , just not in this section- feel free to request a separation or even start a new one.


Edit: Would there be a way to split this over some where else? moderators...any one got any ideas?

Point noted, Carlos. Maybe lock this thread start a new one, Part 2 and they can take their conversation to another thread...

Uzima Moto wrote: I had fallen asleep and got caught in a sleep paralysis. It wasn't my first time with that lol. I even had a method of wiggling my toe to make me snap back. This time was different. I couldn't shake it. I was wiggling half my foot I think, nothing..

I couldn't call out, move, nothing was working. Then the panic wanted to set in after awhile. I thought I was trapped, or that I could even die. All of a sudden the scenery caught my attention. It was familiar for some reason. Then it hit me. "We're outside of town! We're here!".. Surprised me so much that it snapped me back.

Not to diminish what you're saying but just out of personal concern for your welfare, do you have a CPAP machine? I would recommend having a sleep study done because I've had the sleep paralysis experience myself, and some pretty wicked dreams a few times. It definitely felt like I was awake but that my body wasn't working and a couple times it felt like some kind of demon was pushing down on my chest. Of course when I experienced this I had no clue there was a scientific basis and that I would simply stop breathing during my sleep. I didn't really do anything about it until 20 years later so I know a lot of people simply live with it. However, it does affect you long term so I would highly recommend a sleep study if you haven't already.

As far as anything truly supernatural, it's hard to say. There are times when sleep paralysis basically produces a Near Death Experience and many people report a lot of weird and very intense dream-like states where, as their brains are starving and shutting down, they can even go to heaven. Doesn't mean heaven exists, of course. It's just that the brain is our reality decoder and we underestimate it's power to merge imagination into that conscious experience. So it's hard to know what's a product of the mind and what is an experience that goes beyond the mind.

Gisteron wrote: At around 16:48 Dr. Hagelin says that the unified field is a "field of intelligence". Not knowing what that means I tried googling for "unified field of intelligence" and the results seem overwhelmingly to feature either Dr. Hagelin alone with a few others, often in conjunction with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the founder of the meditation movement Hagelin is leading now. If you have come across an independent source that explains what this means with regards to physics, I'd be grateful for a link.

Without watching the video it reminds me of other people I've seen talking about Quantum Mechanics as an explanation for these other things they believe. And they seem to try and mix disciplines a lot and also pull some pretty unscientific people into it and theorize together. While I don't mind this approach as it is usually interesting if not entertaining, I think we have to be careful not to take these people too seriously; especially when there is a financial opportunity involved.

Uzima Moto wrote: Take a person who is brain dead. Their brain is usually damaged to the point where the soul can no longer operate the body. Whether it's still attached is a different story..

Ahhh but if the soul can no longer operate the body then how does one prove that the soul even exists without the body?

I feel some of what you're saying, but I think it incorporates things that humans have believed for thousands of years without actual knowledge to support those beliefs. For instance, do I believe we are all made of energy? yes. It is only our perception that differentiates slow moving energy from fast moving energy. If you want to call one type physical and another ethereal then who am I to disagree?

But...

Does this reality (which has already been scientifically proven) support other often fascinating beliefs that were, at some point, based largely on superstition? In other words, psychologically we want to live forever and have a basic core instinct to survive that can "overdevelop" or "overcompensate". This same instinct, massaged the right way, produces a shared belief called heaven. Does heaven exist outside of our minds? No. So science will never find Heaven because it's not "out there", but rather within the "holographic" simulation of our imagination. And in one person's imagination Heaven looks different from someone else's. I'm sure in someone's heaven there are no Mexicans. Because that person is racist. And if they dream or have a NDE they will see their own heaven, not a real one that physically exists.

So I am only saying just be cautious of accepting the entire industry of occult knowledge because you have experienced, at least within your own mind/perception, one or two things that seem to suggest a greater mystical world. Often, it is quite simply the mind's own ability to adapt and justify that makes things appear to be true that really aren't. Therefore you may see it, but someone else may not.

My wife believes she can see spirits. Is it true? I don't know. I believe it is in her mind. However, she has had experiences I cannot explain, like feeling someone in her family pass away before the actual knowledge of it. What can we do with experiences like this? Call it coincidence? I don't think so. Can science test it? Probably not. So where kind of left with things that we can prove and know and things that we believe and have faith in. The two are not the same nor to be confused but I don't think one can predict or dismiss the other.

Uzima Moto wrote: Google is where I'm getting it from, go find it.. there are books, links, etc.. all going into further detail on the different phenomena..

Ahh, you need that sort of proof. So if I wrote a book on the Tenuous Unicorn Herd and published it would you find it more credible a proposition then? Of course I would include some of the scientific experiments I have done to prove to myself they actually do exist. And you can do them as well, although it is not an easy process and much work must be put into it and results my vary based on your specific talents. But rest assured I guarantee that if you search long and hard enough you will find that they exist!

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Uzima Moto wrote: Google is where I'm getting it from, go find it.. there are books, links, etc.. all going into further detail on the different phenomena..

Ahh, you need that sort of proof. So if I wrote a book on the Tenuous Unicorn Herd and published it would you find it more credible a proposition then? Of course I would include some of the scientific experiments I have done to prove to myself they actually do exist. And you can do them as well, although it is not an easy process and much work must be put into it and results my vary based on your specific talents. But rest assured I guarantee that if you search long and hard enough you will find that they exist!

Lol, I'm sure if I tried really hard I could envision a unicorn or any manner of creature. However, that would be me causing something. Instead of studying something that's happening to me. People find weird things in the wrong places all the time.. because they're looking for it..

My experience with Astral Projection happened spontaneously. Until I was able to control and test it. The whole time, I had never heard of Astral Projection. So there was no preconception of the ability to leave my body.. Yet leave my body I did.. There are others who have had similar experiences with similar results. It wasn't the books themselves. That's immature to suggest. If that's the case. I might as well be a Scientologist..

With your unicorn, you have the preconceived idea of a horse(native to certain areas on earth) with a horn. According to "Astral Theory" that's exactly what you'll find.. but it won't have affect in the world.. but, wouldn't know until we tested it as those things should be scientifically tested..

@ZealotX I did have a sleep study done but they didn't find anything wrong..

Uzima Moto wrote: Lol, I'm sure if I tried really hard I could envision a unicorn or any manner of creature. However, that would be me causing something. Instead of studying something that's happening to me. People find weird things in the wrong places all the time.. because they're looking for it..

My experience with Astral Projection happened spontaneously.

I find it fascinating that you freely apply this logic to me but not to yourself. In fact I did not go looking for a unicorn. The unicorn herd came to me in a free dissociation lucid dream state. I did not seek them out and I had no idea or concept of them before this happened to me. I had no idea what the Herd meant or were called until they showed me the ancient Sumerian texts that I now study in order to know them better. Why they chose me I cannot say but I am grateful they have. They have shown me a level of reality most will never glimpse but rest assured part of my mission is to introduce as many as possible to this idea. It is a true path to enlightenment and deeper understanding of reality.

Uzima Moto wrote: Until I was able to control and test it. The whole time, I had never heard of Astral Projection. So there was no preconception of the ability to leave my body.. Yet leave my body I did.. There are others who have had similar experiences with similar results. It wasn't the books themselves. That's immature to suggest. If that's the case. I might as well be a Scientologist..

Yes I get this, I had never heard of the Tenuous Unicorn Herd either, nor had any concept of their abilities or place in reality. Like you I am now studying them intently and have discovered them to be the source of your Astral Bodies. Their writings are in much deeper texts than any science fiction book as well. Ancient peoples with incredible knowledge and power knew them well.

Uzima Moto wrote: With your unicorn, you have the preconceived idea of a horse(native to certain areas on earth) with a horn. According to "Astral Theory" that's exactly what you'll find.. but it won't have affect in the world.. but, wouldn't know until we tested it as those things should be scientifically tested..

Well now Im a bit confused? You mention that I have this preconception of a horse with a horn and then you state that Astral Theory actually predicts this? This is what I shall find? But it has no effect on the world? Yes exactly, you can’t see the direct interaction of these beasts, only the focus of their effect on reality.

I agree about the testing part. It seems we are on the same page here. I propose an experiment to start with. Since you have done some testing with astral projection, shall we setup an experiment in which you can demonstrate this ability and we can document it for scientific purposes? Yes I would find this quite interesting!

Of course you're confused lol you haven't understood a word I said too focused on trying to disprove me.. or at least the validity of my claims..

As I have explained, due to the dynamic and conscious nature of the Ethereal, each phase behaves slightly different from the others. Depending on the activity level of consciousness. In other words, in other phases your thoughts affect what you see..

So, your preconceived idea of a unicorn is entirely possible for you to see and interact with. It's called lucid dreaming.. also, for you to use a unicorn is intellectually lazy. As far as I know, unicorns were a mythological creature taken to be literal by the Greeks.. which puts them in one of two categories. Entirely made up, or entirely physical.. neither are the category in question..

In my experience with Astral Projection. I never had the idea of separation from my body. In fact, those types of ideas were highly discouraged in my family. No witchcraft, no other gods or religions, no different philosophies, none of it..

What you're trying to describe is actually how we get legends of angels and demons. What I'm describing is the process by which we now understand that non-physical ethereal constructs appear to people as their minds will allow in forms familiar to it.. People throughout history have actually misinterpreted a lot of these experiences come to find out. We know this because two subjects can be speaking on the same construct yet describe it completely different.. Superstition came from the misinterpretation of both the Natural and Supernatural..

ZealotX wrote:

Gisteron wrote: At around 16:48 Dr. Hagelin says that the unified field is a "field of intelligence". Not knowing what that means I tried googling for "unified field of intelligence" and the results seem overwhelmingly to feature either Dr. Hagelin alone with a few others, often in conjunction with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the founder of the meditation movement Hagelin is leading now. If you have come across an independent source that explains what this means with regards to physics, I'd be grateful for a link.

Without watching the video it reminds me of other people I've seen talking about Quantum Mechanics as an explanation for these other things they believe. And they seem to try and mix disciplines a lot and also pull some pretty unscientific people into it and theorize together. While I don't mind this approach as it is usually interesting if not entertaining, I think we have to be careful not to take these people too seriously; especially when there is a financial opportunity involved.

Well the odd thing about it is that John Hagelin actually isn't a Deepak Chopra. He actually understands much of the physics he references. That makes it all the more disturbing when he employs it as a pulpit to preach his religious sermons from. The connections he draws appear forced and artificial but they are nonetheless sure to impress many who wouldn't know any better. Many who run the quantum consciousness script at least have the excuse of not knowing any better themselves, of being as much victims of the woo as they are perpetuators. But Hagelin is not like them. He knows he is misleading his listeners. I sure hope the profits thus collected can buy him restful sleep at night...

Gisteron wrote:

ZealotX wrote:

Gisteron wrote: At around 16:48 Dr. Hagelin says that the unified field is a "field of intelligence". Not knowing what that means I tried googling for "unified field of intelligence" and the results seem overwhelmingly to feature either Dr. Hagelin alone with a few others, often in conjunction with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the founder of the meditation movement Hagelin is leading now. If you have come across an independent source that explains what this means with regards to physics, I'd be grateful for a link.

Without watching the video it reminds me of other people I've seen talking about Quantum Mechanics as an explanation for these other things they believe. And they seem to try and mix disciplines a lot and also pull some pretty unscientific people into it and theorize together. While I don't mind this approach as it is usually interesting if not entertaining, I think we have to be careful not to take these people too seriously; especially when there is a financial opportunity involved.

Well the odd thing about it is that John Hagelin actually isn't a Deepak Chopra. He actually understands much of the physics he references. That makes it all the more disturbing when he employs it as a pulpit to preach his religious sermons from. The connections he draws appear forced and artificial but they are nonetheless sure to impress many who wouldn't know any better. Many who run the quantum consciousness script at least have the excuse of not knowing any better themselves, of being as much victims of the woo as they are perpetuators. But Hagelin is not like them. He knows he is misleading his listeners. I sure hope the profits thus collected can buy him restful sleep at night...

Or maybe he's actually ahead of the rest of his community.. since one cannot falsify his claims, or that of others, you can't classify it as woo.. and that's a highly derogatory term.. like saying science is uptight and rigid, unkind to major changes that would usurp their careers.. like fake ACC science.. any rebuttals to the Zeitgeist are treated as blasphemy..

Just as he could or could not have ulterior motives. So to can his more agreeable colleagues..

Uzima Moto wrote: Or maybe he's actually ahead of the rest of his community.. since one cannot falsify his claims, or that of others, you can't classify it as woo..

Pardon? No. That's exactly why we can classify them so. Unfalsifiability is the single most defining criterion of pseudo-science. Outlandish claims that are either designed to evade or protected from examination and potential falsification is literally what we mean when we say woo.

and that's a highly derogatory term.. like saying science is uptight and rigid, unkind to major changes that would usurp their careers.. like fake ACC science.. any rebuttals to the Zeitgeist are treated as blasphemy..

Except they are rejected (or at any rate not accepted) due to a lack of evidence in their support, rather than the offense they cause any King of Science™ or their gods. You call my referring to it as woo "highly derogatory". I do not call his woo any kind of offensive at all. I may call it outlandish, woo, or many another name that's either about how unbelievable the claims are given what we know or how untestable they appear to be. None of them are rejected for being an unwanted challenge.

Just as he could or could not have ulterior motives. So to [sic] can his more agreeable colleagues..

Correct. I'm pretty sure that when he gives a sermon about a religious movement he is the head of, a fair bit of his motivation may lie in the furthering of his religion and possibly material profits that come with it, and I shall make no effort to hide that suspicion. However, I do not think that his true motives, what ever they may be, are any kind of argument for or against the veracity of the content of what he is saying and thus I wouldn't present them as any kind of rebuttal.

I said they couldn't falsify it with an alternative explanation, not that it can't be tested..

That's what I mean by misrepresenting my point..

I've never come across any knowledge of the Ethereal that you couldn't test out for yourself. That's the reason there is so much knowledge behind it. There are certain phenomena that we've been better able to understand BECAUSE people have tested them. So your claim that these claims are designed to be unfalsifiable or are protected from scrutiny is patently false..

I've never come across any knowledge of the Ethereal that you couldn't test out for yourself. That's the reason there is so much knowledge behind it. There are certain phenomena that we've been better able to understand BECAUSE people have tested them. So your claim that these claims are designed to be unfalsifiable or are protected from scrutiny is patently false..

There are thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies published over the last hundred years on meditation and revelatory or mystical experiences. While in my university library I would often read books and articles on the subject. I don't have access to those materials right now, but I can guarantee that certain things such as the no-self experience have already been subject to scientific inquiry. Whether those experiences are indicative of ontic truths or purely neuroscientific and epistemic is not known. Even the physical definition of consciousness is unknown; no neuroscientist in the world can tell you exactly when, where, and how consciousness occurs in the brain. The actual significance of experienced phenomena such as Samadhi is not well-understood by modern science, but it is a matter of fact that those experiences happen and have correlative neurological traits. I do not think it is reasonable to say that such things are unfalsifiable or beyond research, even if the terminology isn't in-line with the current scientific zeitgeist.

You can definitely test these things yourself, anyone and everyone. Read the gitas, the vedas, the Upanishads, they are full of techniques. The claims that people make within these mystical experiences are common over time and between different subjects. Nothing about it is unfalsifiable or untestable. Interpreting the information that you gain from such experiences, e.g. "is this real or is it a mental phenomenon" is perhaps more difficult. But I've read plenty of peer-reviewed physics, chemistry, psychology, and medical science -- personal interpretation is difficult in basically any area, regardless of the subject of research.

Uzima Moto wrote: I said they couldn't falsify it with an alternative explanation, not that it can't be tested..

Okay. An unfalsifiable model is one that makes either no testable predictions at all or predicions so vague as to be fulfilled trivially irrespective of any observations that may be made. I don't know what "falsify it with an alternative explanation" means. One falsifies a model by making observations that are in conflict with the model's predictions.

I've never come across any knowledge of the Ethereal that you couldn't test out for yourself. That's the reason there is so much knowledge behind it. There are certain phenomena that we've been better able to understand BECAUSE people have tested them. So your claim that these claims are designed to be unfalsifiable or are protected from scrutiny is patently false..

Point granted. On a few occasions controlled tests of claims of this nature were made, with negative results. For some reason these are entirely dismissed by the faithful and personal experience or personal testing is instead referenced, as if the personal biases controlled against in controlled studies are something to be kept for "better" results by some metric.