new CNN article talks about OBE

[Daniel]

Josemi,

As a student of the  IAC http://www.iacworld.org (former IIPC) I would like to ask you josemi, have you done any IAC courses or read for example the treatise of OBE called Projectiology? If not, who are you to think such things as Conscientiology is for the money or that it's based on worship.
It's much more serious than that. La cosa és mucho más séria.
So I would advice you to  read from the IAC page for example the research projects of IAC before you manifest your prejudices here.

Regards,

Goldmundo

 

[Mobius]

Hi Michael & Goldmundo

Just a couple of questions I hope you guys can ask. I've been watching the IIPC website for a few years now, I like it, but as yet havn't got around to any of their courses as I'm preoccupied with a few others at present.

Q1) Do you guys know if IIPC is in anyway related to OBERF ? Not that I think it is good or bad if they are, it's just for my own personal reference.
http://www.oberf.org

Q2) Have any of you guys got the 1232 page projectiology book for sale through IIPC? I'm a bit of a book enthusiast & the book looks awesome. If you have the book, how did you get it? over the net? or get your bookstore to order it in? Or none of the above.

Q3) When you guys did your course through IIPC, was it an online one? or did you do a workshop? And what was the cost when you did it?

Good journeys all

Mobius

 

[josemi]

i recognize that i dont know the iipc in deepness. but ive expressed the impression it gave me once when i attended a conference of three people (coming from barcelona, at 350 km from my town) and i was the only person in the public. ive been receiving propaganda of the insititute and i have no interest on their courses because they offer you 6 courses i believe , of 90 dollars each one, and you have to do 4 of them to know how to project.
im sure that i can get the same information very much cheaper, for example with the books of bruce.
the institute has some facilities in the catarates of the iguazu i believe dedicated to the research of the obes.
i suppose that their activities will be interesting and that it will be a help for many people, but im sorry, it isnt for me. it seemed to me a bit sectary.

 

[josemi]

ill add another thing: when the representants of the iipc from barcelona came to zaragoza, i advised them the best places in the town to make their activities, because they asked me, and they unknew where to make their next conferences and courses. i treated them as kindly as i could. but their system doesnt convince me.

 

[Adrian]

Greetings!

I wouldn't comment on individual organisations, because everyone has the freewill both to make products and services available for money, and people to accept them on that basis.

I would say though that I am fundamentally opposed to charging for any service that is for the benefit of mankind, its Spiritual evolution, the planet and all life thereon. OBE's Astral projection, altered states of consciousness, meditation to name but just a few, are all part of the Spiritual progression of humanity,and is the property of us all - or should be.

Those that seek to offer a progressive series of courses, often which are mutually conditional would, in my view, have a very hard job to justify that.

Many would say that the money thus obtained is used in the production of further materials CDROM's, tapes etc... I had just such a situation recently in fact where I wanted to make some historically valuable recordings available in MP3 format for free download, sought the permission of the trustees, and was turned down flat in the basis it would be depriving them of income to make more tapes.

My point to them was that the Internet is the ultimate physical distribution medium, and by making the sound files freely available in MP3 format, potentially millions of people would benefit, and there are no production costs. They just would not have it though - they just could not free themselves from the materialism of money and tapes, despite restricting their products to a very small potential audience.

There is no doubt that the Spiritual progression of humanity can and should be absolutely free, and available to as many people as possible on a totally unrestricted basis by all those in a position to provide and share it, and are prepared to do so - and there are no shortage of such people thankfully.

I would suggest that before anyone spends a penny, cent etc. on commercially available products, they should ask the questions right here or similar information sources first, and the answers will be forthcoming.

With kind regards,

Adrian.

[Patty]

Hi,

I'm a scientist. PhD in genetics.

I read the article and don't see anywhere that it indicates that OBE is not a spiritual experience. It simply is able to say that there is a brain - chemistry or brain - firing thing going on.

Elsewhere, it has also been shown that transcendant experiences during deep meditation correlate with decreased blood flow to the frontal lobe/cortex (don't know the jargon). this is the area of the brain that normally regulates our sense of how our self relates spatially to our environment.  This might explain why transcendant experiences include elements of no environment, spacelessness, etc.

These advances in understanding most certainly do NOT say that the experiences do not have a spiritual component. I know that I am in part physical. I believe that my physicality is beautifully integrated with my other aspects, which are less 'measurable.'  Given this (hypothetical) integration, I would expect a physical aspect to any spiritual experience.

Did anyone follow that? It is rather in line with Blossom's post.

(Adrian, it seems there must be a story behind your change in career! I'd love to hear about it!  My personal course got re-charted after the death of our first child.)

Patty

[Mobius]

Hi Patty

I'm a human being, PHd in life, currently serving my aprrenticeship in OBE's.

Do you believe what we do for a living has an effect on being able to acheive OBE's? Not sure what you meant by your opening statement, but sounds like you are either offended by something said or feel that telling people your qualifications will add more weight to your words? Could be my mistake though, on how I interpreted what you said.

Personally, I love science, so much so that I am currently studying genetics myself, what a coincidence, hehe. Although I'm only in my 2nd year & seriously considering changing tack, I have really enjoyed it. I don't see why science & OBE's are so far apart on this topic, when some elements in quantum mechanics/physics & astro physics are accepted ahead of any proof besides a hypothesis. Yet the possibilty of their suggestions are not ruled out as ONE possible explanation.

Btw looks like we have another science fan that has entered astal pulse, welcome eukaryote, another person searching for the human equivalent of the big bang eh? Another Btw, have you guys read any of calos casteneda books or the book "the cosmic serpent" by Jeremy Narby? Investigating why cultures believed the serpent or snake was such a prominent & re-occuring theme in their beliefs.

The shamans in a tribe of the amazon stated that there where many tiny serpents inside us, in fact, inside many organisms (looks like the kundalini/medical symbol, the serpent also revered by aboriginies,asians & south americans). That communicated with each other, which matches up pretty well with what we know as DNA & RNA, (something that looks like 2 serpents intertwined, ). Which also happens to look very similar to the milky way.

Neither OBE specialists OR scientists have all the answers, but if they worked together, or pooled ideas/theories together, the picture might become clearer for ALL.

Good journeys Patty

Mobius

 

[clandestino]

hey Mobius, I think Patty has a great point - and it is good to see it backed up with her credentials....

The results of the nature study tell us that when a particular part of the brain is stimulated, an OBE might occur.

It does NOT tell us whether or not it was a spiritual experience, whether the mind is seperate from the brain, or whether the whole experience was internally generated.....these things are merely conjecture.


 

[Frank]

The major flaw that I see in their thinking, is the thrust of their approach. They always seem to come from the POV that obe's are not a "real" phenomena, i.e. they are just some kind of mind created illusion, and that is what they set out to prove. To my mind, that is a big mistake.

I explained in one of my very early posts about how, around 20 years ago, I came across the subject when I just happened to see Monroe's JOB in the window of a newly-opened New-Age bookstore in the vicinity of where I was living at the time. For some reason (and now, of course, I know the reason) I felt compelled to buy the book out of sheer curiosity. Which was strange because there's no way you'd ever find me in a shop like that (not even now) least of all buying some obe mumbo jumbo.

I read the book through a number of times. After which my sense of logic said to me this is complete nonsense; but my curiousity had been ignited to the extent where I thought, well, what if it isn't.

So I fought myself for a while and came to a conclusion. I thought, right, let's assume that everything written in this book, as amazing and as loony as it may seem, let's assume it is all real. So, I'll give these exercises a genuine try, over a reasonable period of time, and, if it is just a load of mystical mumbo-jumbo then nothing will happen.

Well, much to my surprise, I began to get projection symptoms and I never looked back. Which is why I feel that if these scientists would spend just one ounce of effort actually attempting obe for themselves, many of them would finally start to get an inkling of what people such as myself have been going on about all this time.

They are looking for proof alright, but they are looking in the wrong direction. They should be looking within themselves as opposed to looking without.

Yours,
Frank

 





 

[Patty]

Hi Mobius,

My opening comment was in response to the idea that 'scientists are going about this the wrong way,' or that 'scientists are trying to disprove OBE,' et cetera. "Scientists" are not a group separate from "OBE'ers."  I am reading some comments that sound like 'they' are wrong and I am trying to make the point that there is no 'they.'

I don't see scientists doing anything but seeking to understand that part of transcendant experience that can actually be measured.

Good regards,

Patty

[Gandalf]

This discusion is similar to the other one concerning the effects of Electro-Magnetic fields on the brain and how it induces the 'illusion' of paranormal experiences.
As I said in another post, scientists recently discovered that by exposing subjects to EM fields they were able to induce partial obes, feelings of presences etc.
The scientists of course went on to state that this explains all facets of paranormal experiences, however as usual they didnt stop to think that just because they have noted the physical effects of an experience that DOES NOT nececerialy lead one to conclude that it is the SOURCE of that experience.

I can see how EM fields can produce such effects as well.
It makes sense to me that the subtle bodies are kept in alignment with the physical most likely by using some kind of magnetic attraction, so of course being exposed to certain EM fields can lead to them being pulled 'out of alignment' to an extent, exposing the subject to low level astral experiences,
then the presences, partial obes and all the rest of it come in to play.
Subjects often state that the experience is quite frightning.
Their fears will certainly affect them due to the nature of the astral.

The basic problem here, as always is that scientists always try to explain things according to material knowns and this always skews their results.

Don't get me wrong, I like science and we wouldnt be here on this forum without it, we need it.

But scientsts should stick to what they're good at, explaning and researching aspects of the physical world, they should leave everything else alone!

Regards,
Douglas



 

[Mobius]

Hi Patty

Ahhh, ok, now I see where your coming from. It is true that many scientists believe that OBE's are a reality & some professionals such a lawyers, psychiatrists, doctors & scientists have written books concerning OBE's.

Everyone has their own beliefs & passions outside of their respective modes of employment, but rarely are these beliefs allowed to surface INSIDE the parameters of each of these professions, in fact the norm is to NOT to accept it & set about proving that point. How many colleagues, lecturers, doctors etc. have you mentioned OBE's to? & been taken seriously?

I guess saying "scientists" & "they" IS a generalisation & everyone is different. However anything regarded as spiritual such as OBE's remains mostly in the ten foot pole department as far as science goes, with very few scientists, doctors etc considering it a real possibility. Even if they DO, they are almost forced to conform to the ideology of their peers & predecessors. So they write papers with this in mind, so as not to step on any toes & to at least get someone to look at their study.

Science pretty much came about because people wanted another explanation for how things work besides the usual religous response of "It's Gods work" or "It's the work of the devil", which is great for determining the processes of something, but science seems to throw the baby out with the bathwater, going the long way around to finally find themselves back at the point where they should have been in the first place, trying to PROVE OBE's not DISPROVE them.

Why couldn't the scientists involved in this article try & corroborate the theory that that woman WAS out of her body, with experiments similar to what Charles T Tart & Dr Robert Morris did, when they said "ok, you believe you are having OBE's & leaving your body?, tell us what is in that room over there". Performing tests with ALL possibilities in mind, not just science based knowledge & assumptions. Even ask the patient if she saw anything that couldn't be seen from her bed, instead of following one set of assumptions, that somehow her epilepsy triggered it & so it must be some neurological anomaly, related to her epilepsy.

Here is an example of what I mean when I say that scientists/ doctors working AGAINST each other instead of with each other for the benefit of all.
After having a bad accident in which my spine was badly damaged, I thought to myself "I just want to find the best person for the job of fixing me". I went to Neurosurgeons & Orthopaedic surgeons trying to determine which method would be best for ME, as both could perform the operation I needed. When I told them I had asked another specialists opinion, they were fervent in their dismissal of the other proffesions abilities. ALL said, "Oh don't get a blah blah blah surgeon to do it, they wouldn't have a clue".

My point being, HOW can scientists/ doctors come around to acknowledging something completely outside of their field such as OBE's, when they don't even acknowledge the work & theories of others within the same disipline such as medicine or science of which they are part of?.......................money.

The ONLY article that was open minded  in it's language regarding the phenomena of OBE's was the article that density posted, the other articles had a fairly dismissive tone about them, that's how I perceived it anyway.

If science & doctors did something similar to what Frank said, stop & look within for a moment & try OBE's for themselves, maybe they would have a different perspective.

Clandestino, do we need to see everyones resume/CV/credentials to believe what they say? Or feel that more weight is added to those words simply by them stating their qualifications?I know I don't. If we were talking about genetics, then yes. I hope Jesus or Buddha doesn't reincarnate too soon, as the world we have created would mean that they are treated like the Dalai lama is at present by politicians & power mongers, with token jestures & lip service & not even that in many cases. Anyway, Patty cleared up that matter in regards to the position taken or viewpoint, all taken care of, thanks for that.

Good journeys all

Mobius

 

[Patty]

Hi Mobius,

Thank you for your response.

I don't know quite how to phrase what I want to say here.

Let me try it like this. When I was learning to write publishable scientific material, I was taken aback by the dry and brusque tone of what is generally published in many fields. "I don't want to write like THAT!" I thought. I"It sounds so, so, UNLIKEABLE!" My early manuscripts were much more conversational and 'touchy-feely' in tone. (they were not published.)

Over time I came to see that scientific writing is brusque - precisely because it is scientific writing. Science is meant to do exactly what Gandalf wishes it would do - measure the things that can be measured. Stick to the physical world. Et cetera. (And it would appear that at least some spiritual experiences have a physical component. I am all for understanding the physical component!)

Since science (and it's writing) sticks to data about the physical world, any sort of emotional, or spiritual, or non-scientific element in the paper would be completely innappropriate (I'm talking about studies - such as the ones brought to this board for discussion -  that are published in peer-reviewed journals, not popular science on the bookstand or internet sites, which have a different sort of value altogether. )  Everything in the journal has to be backable by data. Period. Rules of the game. That's the best way to allow other scientists to build upon that data.

And I would like to say again that I have not seen any papers dismiss outright the spiritual side of experiences. (I should look into the one you mentioned.)  If they don't address the spirituality aspect at all, it is because they can't. The absence of discussion about the spiritual side of OBE's (or whatever) should not be interpreted as meaning that scientists dismiss them. Even if the 'tone' sounds dismissive, that may well be interpretation on the part of the reader. The passage that Jeff quoted, for instance.

quote:
"Sometimes patients describe looking down on their own bodies, and that experience is actually an aura or a warning that a seizure is about to occur," said Dr. Cindy Kubu, a neuropsychologist at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. She has worked with patients with epilepsy for more than a decade.

He interpreted as dismissive, while to me it sounded very 'believerish.'   In point of fact Dr. Kubu didn't say one way or the other whether she thought her patients were actually out of their bodies.

As a general rule, I don't tend to discuss my OBE's with friends or family or colleagues.  I discuss them anonymously on the internet, with lovely people like yourself! However, I do have several scientist friends who are quite into these ideas. And I just remembered that I DID mention a flying dream at a work party recently. I was testing the waters with some folks that I felt a resonance to.  They enjoyed hearing about the dream..... Ahhh, but these things take time.... perhaps at the next party they'll bring up the idea again .......

Warmly,

Patty

[Mobius]

G,day Patty

Thanks for the replies also. It has cleared a few things up for me & it is really hard for me also to put into words the whole picture I'm trying to convey. I guess what struck a raw nerve with me regarding that CNN article, was some of the choice of wording used by various journalists in putting together these articles. I know that journalists paraphrase particular reports & paraphrase each other so as to sound different/ original & not to plagiarise others work. I 'm just amazed though at the choice of language employed by these journalists in compiling their articles.

I find it interesting that the articles that came from the main media giants (well, the shareholders that OWN those media sources & have certain frameworks that journalists must work within, so as to conform with the owners wishes) sounded fairly dismissive of the spiritual/ OBE type experience, to me they did anyway.

I guess it was the choice of words like the heading :
"Misfiring brain behind bizarre sensation".........................to me, those choice of words set the reader up with a fairly negative view of OBE's or a dismissive one. Nothing in it is neutral & it attempts to appeal to the cringe side of spirituality & phenomena. "Misfiring", " brain", "behind", "bizarre" "sensation". Each word negative on it's own & together a masterpiece of negativity. As you said "you don't like to discuss OBE's with friends, family & colleagues". I have the same problem, although not in the family area as much.

One of the reasons I believe is our tendency to want to appeal to our peers as competent & not crazy etc etc. We all know the brain is the organ responsible for being crazy/ mistaken/ misdirected/ misinformed/ incompetent etc . So I feel this article is trying to appeal to that side of things with it's opening heading. As though it's somehow more comfortable for people to say "Misfiring brain" than it is to say astral projection or OBE's, as saying this would be treated the same way as when you & I go to mention OBE's & astral projection to friends, family & colleages.

We are so concerned as to what OTHERS think about our competancy & status of the mind, that the topics talked about on this site, tend to stay on these type of sites & occasionally make it into book form. When in fact EVERYONE wants to know what happens on the other side, after physical death & if OBE's are somehow related to this.

The article has a paragraph about 3/4 the way down that elaborates on the "misfiring brain" line of thought & goes on to say : "An OBE may be a slight disconnect or misfiring of the processing of information".

Once again appealing to the "oh gee, my brains misfiring, that's why I 'think' I'm having OBE's" side of things, so I'd better look to science & religion for the truth, as telling people OBE's are happening to you is ...............ah, uncomfortable to say the least.

Thanks for the input Patty, most appreciated, I just wish there were more people like yourself or anyone involved in science & medicine, to leave their beliefs at the office/ lab/wards when they finish their shift. It might be our employment for the time being, but our beliefs that are taught to us for employment purposes, don't need to come home with us. I just see so many friends & scientists etc that COULD open up a whole new world for themselves & us, if only they stopped to concede that there just might be some validity to OBE's & other phenomena that we talk about in here.

All the best patty, good journeys.

Mobius

[Mobius]

Just remembered a couple of other things I meant to say. IMHO I believe many scientists & doctors have thought to themselves what Frank mentioned in his last post, but never took it that step further like Frank did & said "ok, lets assume everything these OBE authors say is real". They don't realise that they can have BOTH as it looks like many in here do. Why not have the best of both worlds.

There is nothing to lose from having a go at OBE's in earnest & everything to gain if they DO achieve one.

Patty, I'm glad you say you don't write like the standard science journal method, it's just so lifeless to me & I for one would be interested in any thesis or hypothesis you might have regarding OBE's or genetics, definately, I don't care if it hasn't been published.

Btw I don't follow any religions. My interest in having people acknowledge OBE's comes from a purely experience based one. I would just love everybody to experience something that many in here believe is there.... the astral.

Ahhh, too many things to say, not enough time.

Good journeys all

Mobius