A question of The Force.

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.