Messages

I agree with the above. I'd been having OBE experiences since childhood, but it was something completely out of my control. I'd either become aware in the experience, or wake in a paralysis state. Having a familiarity with the state didn't make it any easier to have my first conscious projection – it took time and dedication.
I do know that if you stick with it, you will eventually have an OBE. It's just a case of not getting too frustrated with it all and practicing regularly.

It's interesting because in OBEs which seem to be in the RTZ I seem to come across a lot of people with 'dull eyes'. Their eyes looked very glazed over, and they don't really look at me. I always presumed they were dreaming.
I can communicate with them, but it's more like I'm speaking directly with their mind (their lips don't usually move), and they are unaware of it.
I've found family members in this state when wondering around the house – including the most brilliant RTZ experience I've had to date. My awareness was blazing like sun, much more lucid then in waking reality. I found my dad wandering about the house in a glazed state during that OBE and had an extended conversation with him (pretty boring stuff).

Hmm, if I'm brutally honest, I couldn't pinpoint anything OBEs have helped me with specifically. They have been an intellectual curiosity, and have helped me explore myself/reality (which is ongoing). But these things are pretty subjective.
I remember when I was about 16 and I learnt of conscious projection for the first time, I had a burning desire to achieve this. So I would go to bed about 2 hours early each night and practice.
I've had OBE experiences in my life since earliest childhood, so perhaps it's hard to imagine a viewpoint of life/reality without them there – and makes it much harder to pinpoint what effect they have had upon my life (such as I've never known any different).
I guess this leads to a (unintentional) blasé attitude towards the OBE area. When you have experienced something frequently over an extended period of time, it becomes part of daily life, and as amazing and mysterious as some view the OBE phenomenon, its just another part of my life.
I have a very laid back view of the world, and things that happen here. Perhaps my OBE experiences are the reason for this i.e. as stressful as life can  be, I can view the events from a 'higher' place - see them in context of this 'earthlife system', and see their irrelevance in the greater picture. I guess this is why I'm not particularly materialistic .

My name came from a series of books by Tad Williams called Otherland.
Misterjingo was a 'bogeyman', a childhood nightmare of a child - whose fear carried into adulthood. It was also the name of a virtual night club (misterjingos smile/misterjs) in the same series of books.
I've been using it for nearly 10 years now, and started because it was one of the few unique names available as a username on hotmail. So I stuck with it.

Hi thenoob,

before I can give any advice/opinions, it would be good to know what techniques you use. How frequently you use these techniques etc .

Om is something which can be used as a mantra which (if using the right technique) could help one enter a meditative state. BWG utilises binaural beats which actually drive the brainwaves. This means brainwave frequency syncs in with the frequency of the beat. This allows you to achieve states of consciousness which might otherwise be (consciously) inaccessible, and it also allows you to create triggers, so through repeated experience, you can achieve certain states of consciousness at will by using the trigger.
Generally one needs to be deeply relaxed for BBs to be effective i.e. they wouldn't override your natural brainwave state unless you are in a relaxed enough state for it to happen.
This takes a long time and involves a lot of work though

idk if its just HI, i tripped mushrooms last night and could close my eyes or open them and it looked the exact same. also it was a different vision, more like looking threw a skateboard lense(half sphere), and i could see farther and wider, was very wierd. and like i was sitting in one spot but looking from another angle, and it felt like i was in control of my astal body but still inside my human

Tripping is very similar to some experiences from the hypnogogic/hypnopompic state (in my own experience anyway). There are possible explainations why - such as theories which link DMT production in the brain to dreams. And psilocybin (4-Phosphoryloxy-N,N-
dimethyltryptamine) which is the psychoactive ingredient in mushrooms is in the same family of drugs as DMT (N,N-dimethyltryptamine).

I'm curious as to why some people won't eat meat.

Is it for religious reasons? Do you feel that the slaughter of animals is cruel and unjust? Maybe you feel that meat isn't healthy? Or maybe a combination of all of these reasons.

I'm not trying to be a smart butt or anything, just trying to understand.

I can't speak for others, but for me it's a number of many factors. Firstly, regardless of what anyone says, the body has more traits in common with herbivores than carnivores – from our jaws and teeth, to digestive track and what produce we can gain energy from. Secondly, as a sentient being that does have a choice, I choose not to eat the body of another self-aware being who would feel the same emotions as a human when faced with their death. Thirdly, the meat industry today is pretty terrible in regards to pumping animals full of growth hormones and antibiotics, which are then consumed with the meat. And lastly I am eating a much healthier diet since being vegetarian(9 years now). Add to this recent findings linking frequent meat consumption (especially red) with DNA damage and consequent higher incidence of caner, and the shear amount of resources needed to produce 1 kilo of meat (in comparison to any other food stuff) which would make it physically impossible to feed the current worlds population with meat alone.

I am pretty much of the opinion everyone has their own choice. I would never preach what others should or should not do. My partner, friends and parents all eat meat, and that is their decision. I just gave you my reasons in response to your question.

So...

As far as I know the bwg presets and binaural beats as such are to be listened with headphones, using the left bud for the left ear, and the right - for the right one.

But consider this - if a person is left handed , then it means his brain hemispheres are mirrored - the left one works as the right one, and the right - as the left.

Shouldn't then the left handed people listen binaural music with the right headphone bud in their left ear and the left - in their right to make sure the presets function properly?

Love-

Laura

I'm not sure hemispheres are switched in people who are left handed . I think they just show a preference for using that side of their body. I myself was always right handed, but left footed – so I'm not sure how that worked neurologically . Although years of guitar playing have made me pretty ambidextrous – perhaps I always was, but just showed a preference for that foot/hand. Although I still can't kick a football with my right foot - so perhaps not  

MisterJingo- Interesting, because I would trust the scientific meathod before I would trust some stranger telling me what it looked like. How do I know they're right? They could make anything up.

But if you really trust these aura readers, then you'll be happy to know that they helped design the camera. Apparently they brought a group of them in to confirm they had the colors right.

I don't necessarily trust the aura readers (as in I have no reason to distrust them either), I just keep an open mind on what they say – but keep my skepticism about me . I don't really go into the whole aura reading thing, but if a reading is offered me, I take it to see what comes out.

MisterJingo: Are you saying the aura readers are wrong? Or just that the camera is wrong? And how can the camera be wrong, if the aura readers confirmed it was right and helped to design the camera?

My problem with the cameras is how they claim to view the aura. It's either imposing colours onto a picture of you, generated by some custom algorithm, or they use a very similar technique to what measures galvanic skin response i.e. they run a voltage across the skin, then use the readings gained to overlay colours (generated from a custom algorithm) on a picture of the person having their aura photographed.
I really cannot see how a persons skin conductivity, which changes due to muscle state (i.e. tensing up even minutely can increase resistance), perspiration, dirt etc,  can give a picture of an aura.
Lots of claims have been made about these cameras, such as photographing a leaf with a piece removed shows the aura of that piece still there. But this only happens when the person cutting the leaf doesn't clean the plate before re-photographing the leaf. So the moisture/residue of the removed piece still conducts electricity, giving the outline of the missing piece.
I would be dubious that people can see the same colours as what the photographs show. It's something I would have to look into myself to believe such a claim.

Is the aura reader who read you "better" that the aura readers who helped design the camera? And if so, how do you know? How can you automatically discount the word of a group of aura readers, and then believe whole-heartedly what another one says?

I don't believe wholeheartedly . This is the only reading I have ever had, it was offered, so out of curiosity I took that offer up.

As for those kundilini snakes, I would run and see if I could get it photographed. I knew of a woman who had Egyptian hieroglyphs show up over her head. They told her to go research what it was, but she never did, and after several months, the hieroglyphs simply disappeared from the photo.

I find things like the above interesting. But the skeptic in me would want to see how the photograph was taken, software/hardware used etc. People, who have a belief in aura photography to the extent they offer it as a service, are pretty much biased in its favour (just like my skeptisism would make me perhaps biased against) and I have no idea what enhancements they would make to the photograph in their software, even if its with the best intentions at heart i.e. their psychics say they can see certain images, so they impose these images on. I'm not saying this happens, just that until I saw the process myself, pulled the software apart, I'd remain open to all possibilities.

Hey mactombs,

It will be sad to see you go. I've enjoyed reading your posts and ideas in your time here.
I hope things go well for you in whatever direction you choose to take .

Just for clarification, the colours I posted were from a person - not a camera. They also told me a lot of other stuff they saw too like "snake heads of kundalini" above my head. A lot of symbolic stuff which i'm still researching.

You need to take alook at "13 Steps to Mentalism", to see how easy this stuff is:

http://www.magicbox.uk.com/exec.php/product/ProductDetail/00828//

Dammit! Posting interesting sounding books, hence forcing me to buy them   I just went and bought it off ebay

What I would say though is that there is very good evidence for ESP, and I've certainly performed ESP feats which I believe are incontravertible.  I've also been to Psychic Fayres and been utterly unimpressed at the pathetic psychic readings I've been given.

I hope I don't come across as a complete sceptic  :confused:. I've had a lot of very interesting things happen which do seem to have their roots in ESP (or at least areas we currently have no real knowledge of) - I just haven't felt the need to take on board all encompassing belief systems to explain these things.

btw, David Copperfield is a different matter - he's an eastern mystic with amazing powers of levitation...... he can really fly!  

Thanks for sharing mindxplorer . I belong to a yahoo group whose sole purpose is sharing experiences through the use of hemi-sync and gateway materials. It's going through a quiet phase right now though.

The latest and greatest? Can you show us the references?

Sure:

From efficacy to safety concerns: A STEP forward or a step back for clinical research and intercessory prayer?
The Study of Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP)
Mitchell W. Krucoff MD, FACC, Suzanne W. Crater RN, ANP-C and Kerry L. Lee PhD

Duke University Medical Center, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC

Received 27 June 2005;  accepted 28 June 2005.  Available online 28 March 2006.

If you can't be bothered to pay for that, some of the details can be found here:

http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2006/04.06/05-prayer.html

That's what happens when a bunch of skeptics, doubters, and disbelievers get together and try to disprove prayer experiments. So you discount all the science research that yielded positive results? You would rather not dig into the details and just assume they were faulty experiments? So you chose to ignore the many positive results and hold on to the very few negative results?

Well this shows what a person states when they can't see outside of their own rigid belief system. If you read the study, if you research the people who carried it out, you will see they they're not a bunch of sceptics, doubters and disbelievers. They actually conducted the study because those done previously were highly criticised and flawed – whose results were open to wild interpretation. But I guess flawed is ok if it follows our own beliefs?
Nothing has been ignored. I simply stated that near as many experiments carried out into this area have shown prayer has not worked. The most recent study which attempted to be as rigorous and unbiased as possible found that prayer actually made the people being prayed for recover much slower. No attempt at doubt or scepticism, just a series of double blind studies and their results.

I've seen the results of prayer. Long ago my Mother had serious back problems. For a long time she could not bend up. So she lived a life bent over at 90 degrees. It was terrible, painful, and consistent for a long time. Doctors had documented this for some time. One day she went to Catherine Coleman, a famous Christian healer. During the healing ministry she suddenly felt heat in her back and from that day forward she has been healed, completely.

Well that is fantastic news. But all it shows is she was healed. For all we know the belief she had in this person, the mindset created during the healing ministry, is what healed this problem ie she healed herself, not gained healing external to herself.

So being a doubter you might think it's just the power of that old physical brain. There has been many supernatural occurrences in various such crusades of most ministries, just not Catherine Coleman. For example, one day in Kenneth Hagan's ministry he asked a crippled woman in a wheelchair to come up to the front of the church for healing. Suddenly her entire body began floating up and levitating about 10 feet off the ground floating and rotating around and began to unravel her crippled curled up body. Then she slowly floated down. This happened in front of thousands of people.

Please can you provide any evidence of this apart from hear say? I just find it staggering that we can view galaxies hundreds of billions of light years away, we can see down to the atomic level, we can see near anything on Earth in an instant. Yet, we still have no evidence or proof of all these flying, levitating and teleporting people. But I guess this makes me a disbeliever because I don't believe third hand knowledge.

Do you actually think a huge piece of glass is going to move up and be replaced by another piece without anyone seeing or hearing this? Have you ever tried to place two pieces of glass together seamlessly so that you cannot see the seam?

The glass is specifically created for the trick, most people around are in on the trick. If you really want to argue about this, argue with the magicians who have been doing this too and have stated how it is done.

Where can I buy a magic trick device that allows me to fly over 50 feet across and about 50 feet high in the air from one building to another? Are you tell us there was a huge crane that hosted Chris 50 feet in the air and moved him over 50 feet to the next building? Will you say that all the people who came out of the businesses to watch Chris were lying on camera. Don't you think they will notice a 100 foot crane? What about the cranes shadows on the walls and ground. What about engine noise? What about when Chris walked down one the highest Las Vegas buildings, when there was clearly a ledge that extended over Chris. How is a string going to do that?

Do you mean this trick?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WauSnzWG2E8
Which was done with wires, which was done with a group of Criss' groupies to show shock and surprise, and was actually done in some secluded industrial park which just happened to have a group of people to see hanging about. Just watch the camera angels, always at a position not to expose shadow, always at a position as not to look directly upwards (as they would show the devise the wires were attached to). No magician to date has been truthful when they say they use no camera tricks, that they use no stooges. Their job is to misdirect and entertain us.
If you really take this kind of stuff as proof of people doing amazing feats, I really do worry.
Also, please go do a search on the tricks Criss has botched giving the secret of the illusion away. This has happened a few times now.
Criss is a talented showman, but he is not a superhuman with mystical powers.

Lets clarify the difference between David Blaine and the famous David Blaine copycat magician. David levitates about two feet off the ground while the camera man films low, showing all his feet and his feet shadows. The famous David Blaine copycat claims he can do it and he sells this trick online. People who've purchased this trick reveal the secret in forums. Most people are disappointed and even want their money back. The instructions say to cut the bottoms of your shoes off. The idea is push yourself up with the front of your feet and the people see your entire shoe rise, including the front part of your shoe.

That's not how the trick is done at all. Blaine uses a form of levitation called Balducci levitation (which has been around for a long time) http://www.magiclearn.50megs.com/photo2.html . If you notice, he will only levitate while at a certain angle to the people, with the people in a certain spot. The crux of this levitation type is you almost tiptoe on one foot while keeping the other foot straight. Due to your angle to the observers, that foot is obscured, so it looks like you are levitating an inch or too.
What makes the trick more interesting for home viewers is that the camera cuts to his feet, where it now looks like he is levitating 2 foot. This is added in later using wires. But the people's reaction is genuine. They simply see him rise a few inches to our 2 foot.

So here's the comparison:

* David rises 2 feet, clearly showing the shadows of both feet. The camera films low and clearly shows there's no part of David that is touching the ground.
* David copycat rises about three inches off the ground and the audience must view this at an upper angle.

So the debunkers claim David used a crane to hoist his body up in the air and then used computers to remove all the cranes shadows and reflections in the glass.

Read the above and do your own research on this. This is an illusion which has been used for a very long time.

Here's another question. How does Chris do his levitations where he walks in a cafe filled with people, everyone is watching, Chris floats up about 2 feet in the air and then moves forward on to a chair. The camera angle clearly shows that Chris Angles feet where no where near the ground.

Hmm lets see from the horses mouth:

http://media.putfile.com/Criss-Angel-Levitation-Revealed-20

Add to this stooges and complimentary camera angles. If you look at no links I supplied, please look at the above.

I am very surprised you do not know anything about this. It was a well known TV science show by BBC called "Parallel Universes." It interviews a lot of famous scientists. In there Alan Guth describes how to create a new universe in your basement:

Yes, but this is speculation not theory. Alan Guth is the guy who proposed inflationary theory. This theory has seriously holes in it, which you can research for yourself. This is nothing to do with M-Theory as such. It's just an idea that a universe can be created (no information on how such a feat would be possible) and it would expand rapidly. That's it.

Surely you know millions of dollars are being spent on M-theory experiments now. M-theory is booming. We'll just have to wait and see what come of it.

What M-Theory experiments? I'd be very interested to hear about them.

It predicted 911 3 hours in advance. Did you know that quantum random generators are supposed to be the only thing that is purely random? How do you explain how they suddenly cease to be purely random?

No it didn't. It simply showed a supposedly none random spike in random data before an event. We don't know what this spike is, or what caused it. It could have been some global awareness. We really don't know. So I don't make claims as to its meaning or importance right now.

Honestly MisterJingo, don't you think a lot of people would find your above statement very insulting? ... "suggestions" Please by all means, it is your right to believe all these small groups of scientists, researchers, and spiritualists are creating a big cesspool of brainwashing, fooling each other into seeing things. So I guess it helps your theory in belittling these people. It would be quite a big assumption on your part to suggestion all small groups are only succeeding through acts of suggestion and shared belief.

I for one have not directly insulted anyone. I actually have stated many times I respect people interested in, and researching into these areas - so making such claims is a bit dramatic.
If you wish to see the power of suggestion do a bit of background reading into the countless experiments which have researched suggestion in solo and group situations.   Also look into false memory syndrome, the placebo effect (which has been shown to have a natural cause), accelerated recuperation, and do further reading into mentalism, suggestion through media and advertising etc.
I haven't belittled anyone. I have simply stated that I have seen groups convince each other of pretty drastic or far out actions through reinforced belief and suggestion. I have seen people who, through belief imposed on them through a group, believed amazing things were happening to them i.e. their body was taken over by another member, they were pushed down to the floor from a distance by another group members mind etc. All of it had its roots in suggestion.
Nowhere have I ever said everything is suggestion just that by giving up rational thinking and having total belief in a group don't mean amazing things experienced there hold any greater truth.

That is your opinion that I do not share. Indeed I believe that if I found a person that can vanish right before my eyes then that is better than you finding nothing.

Well that's fantastic. Why don't they record themselves doing it and put it on the net. They could obscure their face etc if they want anonymity. As you said in the RTZ thread, you have to ask for proof and research it.

No MisterJingo. You incarnated in this life, on this planet for a reason. This is a planet where nearly all people incarnate with a veil placed over their memories. It is one's choice to drop the skepticism, doubting, and negativity, but it takes time to overcome such negative momentum.

I might have incarnated here for you to teleport to me. Belief or disbelief has nothing to do with this. So please, I would love you to teleport to me. For all you know, you could have incarnated her to do this act.

You really think so? You really think that countless incarnations of building up disbelief and doubt has not consequences on what you attract to your reality?

I believe one can effect change in their reality own interpretation of reality, but not effect reality itself. I've seen nothing to convince me of this fact to date.

Yes I did MisterJingo. Perhaps you chose to not focus on it. Again, there are universal laws the all beings work with. It is very simple. Doubt, disbeliefs, negativity is not the way if you want to manipulate material matter with the mind. Such manipulation abides with universal laws. My research has provided personal proof that mind over matter is real. If you analyze numerous research, you should begin to notice a pattern. Take a look at research that is publicized to the world. Then spend some time searching for small group research. See if you begin to notice a pattern.

Well you didn't answer why babies (no belief at all) do not produce amazing feats, you didn't explain why animals who wouldn't understand our beliefs do not do amazing feats. You didn't explain how tribes found within the last 10 years, so absolutely secluded from our beliefs, haven't had a history of amazing feats. There are countless examples where such a theory falls on its face. But I've found adherents to such theory either ignore the gaping inconsistencies or simply redefine their beliefs to state such things as the collective unconsciousness is the cause .

There was a person who could prove time after time if a person is walking behind a wall simply by looking at their aura. Amazingly enough, they could even prove this to a few people here and there, which in itself is a great accomplishment. Yet when they went on live TV they failed miserably.

I've read of experiments where such people also failed in laboratories or the experiments where a psychic claimed they could detect the energy of a living being. The experiment simply consisted of a young child putting their hands under the blindfolded psychics at random intervals, and the psychic simply had to state when she could detect energy. This failed spectacularly. All experiments I have read like this have failed. An amusing program pitted a monkeys' random predictions against that of a psychic in a number of challenges, and the monkey actually scored higher. I really wish these experiments had gone well. I don't watch them, or read up on them wishing them to fail. But having seen so many spectacular failures, and no stunning successes, I have to question why this is.

Perhaps there is no Etheric Body, just consciousness.

Why does consciousness have to be mobile and why does it need a body?

Ever use Google Earth? You can go anywhere in the world without moving your body. I believe that our consciousness is the same way. If we want to see something we focus our attention to it. No need for travel!

This idea is similar to the phasing model of AP. That is, everything is interpreted through consciousness (this doesn't necessarily mean consciousness is everywhere though ). Such as the physical is simply one point on the spectrum of consciousness (so are all the other places/planes in creation). Going OOB is simply shifting (phasing) our attention from the physical to another location.

MisterJingo, I will ask again, where do I state this effect is Quantum Mechanics??? Your accusation is clear. I never stated QM describes any such material interaction from consciousness. My statement is regarding my understanding of the universe as I am taught.

The fact you first started talking about quantum mechanics, then a few paragraphs later mention 'researchers' in regards to this theory, implies you are attributing this theory to scientists rather than to a belief created by mystics. To a person reading it gives a false impression. Having a belief is one thing, implying science has backed up that belief is another. If such a link wasn't your intention, then it makes sense. But to people reading, the link was implied.

Perhaps you found what you wanted. If you research this you should find that in most cases prayer results positive results.

I haven't found anything. I am not looking into areas such as faith healing; I simply come across such research in my day to day life. The latest research didn't find prayer created positive results (quite the opposite when the subject knew they were being prayer for), which I did find interesting. Previous research could have been flawed, or this research could have been flawed. That is the point, it suggests basing views on such results will result in flawed views – because there is no definite answer (outside of belief).

No comparison between Derren Brown and my friend. You've made some strong claims about Chris Angel. So show me the published details of Chris Angels top wow tricks such as how he walked through glass.

Firstly I haven't and wouldn't make claims about your friends as I don't know them. I simply point out that people are achieving feats through natural means which others attribute to paranormal activity.

Well his walking through glass trick, here are a number of ways which can be utilised to achieve this trick:

This is a great illusion but requires tons of set-up.
1. the "paper holders" are in on it. They hold the paper in a way so as not to press against the glass
2. The "found" paper was planted, and is ridgid enough to be held taut
3. The glass is actually cut to the shape of the letter "U", with the open end of the "u" on the bottom--an upside-down "u"
4. The open sign is not attached to the glass, but is fixed to look as though it is.
5. The "U" shaped cut is critical because it shows the solid glass on both sides of the paper, BUT NOT THE BOTTOM. Holding the paper so that it covers the bottom of the window frame is critical- it makes or breaks the trick--as well a positioning the paper so that glass is visible on both sides of it
6. The next critical thing is CLEAN GLASS. It must be spotless, immaculate, otherwise you would see a dirtline or lint rising up as the glass is pulled up into the specially made frame. This is why the paper holders don't press the paper against the glass--they must hold it just off from the glass and not touch the glass with their hands or the paper.
7. Its a great illusion

A U shaped piece of glass is not needed if the window is a sash-window. The people holding the paper are in on it, and if you watch closesly, you'll see how perspective of the camera is used to make the trick seem more solid. On one video of this, if you are perceptive, you can actually see the window moving (the glass must not be 100% uniform, so you see the minute change is reflection).

or

Very old trick, been used for over 50 years(though usually just a hand but concept still the same). The glass actually extends down through the wall, the trick is the bottom half has a hole in the middle, put the piece of paper over it and an accomplice slides the glass up, push through the hole give your TADA's while your accomplice slides the glass back down, tap the glass and prove that it is solid.

Very impressive. Very natural. Look into his levitation techniques and the devices he uses to accomplish them. You too can buy these devises, and learn how to do these tricks (although it will take lot of practice to pull them off).

You have it backwards. I really think your understanding is being left behind and is classical physics. M-theorist are now stating that it is possible to create a new universe from hardly nothing. They say it will start as a bubble and it will grow at unimaginable rate. Yes, these are experiments they are thinking about. I am sorry, but I really see your idea as old school, classical physics. Each and every year there are more scientists doing metaphysical studies of supernatural phenomena and with some good results. I wouldn't be surprised if such proof becomes global within 20 years.

Please link me to papers on growing a universe from nothing, as I read deeply into such areas and find nothing of the sort. M-theory is simply a way of tying together the various branches of string theory into one common place. It adds an extra dimension (theoretical) to allow the theories to co-exist. M-Theory in and of itself is pure theoretical right now, with no idea how to even empirically prove parts of it (outside of mathematics). If you know so much about M-Theory, you would also know the growing unrest scientists are having in it as a framework of a TOE.
My understanding is nowhere near classical physics, as my interests lie in QM, ST etc.

How do you explain the Princeton University Global Consciousness Project?

Well the fact is this project hasn't really much to explain right now (please link me to papers which state otherwise and I'll happily concede). It simply collects random data from a number of sources and correlates it. I've read a lot of lies about this project, such as stating its predicted future events (no it hasn't).
You are also misunderstanding my stance. I am not saying everything can be explained (the world would be pretty dull if it could), I'm saying most people drop at the first hurdle of research and belief the 'magical thinking' ideas, rather then open their mind a bit more and look further. I'm saying many things which are even now taken to be psychic phenomenon on the net has a natural means of action (I've lost count of the number of sites giving retinal fatigue as an example of proof of auras).

Perhaps a great deal of people have become liberated from the physical plane from such teachings? Just because your consciousness has repelled you away from such people does not mean they do not exists. Again, you are looking for global evidence. I recommend you try to discover hardcore proof on a small group level because there is a very real force that prevents such proof occurring globally. If you put forth the energy in searching and drop all your skepticism, doubt, and negativity then you will probably find such a group. If you go in with the intentions of publicizing this on a global scale then according to the theory you'll failed before you even begin.

You state the point exactly. One has to drop everything, and believe fully in a group to get proof. The problem with this is, utter belief in a group environment can create many amazing things through the acts of suggestion and shared belief. This proves nothing outside of the group.
What is this real force that prevents it globally, why does it prevent it globally, why does something repel people from such groups unless they drop critical thought and become believing followers?
The above amounts to "only believers will get the answers (as dictated by that belief)". It really means nothing.

Did it occur to you that *you* found "absolutely nothing what-so-ever apart from belief to suggest a group/collective unconsciousness exists." I certainly found something.

And did it occur to you that you found something because that's where your belief lay? Your finding something holds no greater truth or reality than my finding nothing. Do you see the problem with this? In physical reality, my neighbour can deny the existence of trees all he wants, but that wont make the trees go away. But I guess this is explained away by other beliefs regarding various planes and being repelled by unseen forces for whatever reason.

Yes, but haven't you noticed an obvious difference between our stories? You might consider that some people have become personal friends with people who can stand right before their eyes and teleport across the globe? I am telling right now as direct as possible, there are people on the physical plane who can teleport across the globe. The physical plane is not as you think. Yes, it is a dense plane, thousands times more difficult to manipulate than astral energy, but there are people who have dropped the disbeliefs, all the doubt, the negativity, and they can do it.

Well please come teleport to me. Then I will believe. But I guess that can't happen because it has to remain secret right?
Dropping all disbeliefs doesn't change reality. We are not bound by belief, we are bound by natural law. You never even answered any of my critiques against such points of belief changing reality in previous posts.

I am not sure what you are talking about since I have so far corrected and made logical sense out of all your problems with the theory that I presented.

You haven't answered about 90% of what I asked you, especially concerning why people/animals etc with no belief are still seemingly bound by the exact same laws that we are. You simply missed all those parts out, and countless others. You have also not made any logical sense – I really cannot see how logic can be applied to beliefs which are the sole domain of one person i.e. there is no way of showing those beliefs hold truth outside of the person holding them in these philosophies.

That brings up a good point. Does it really bother you in some way that some people are so blindly following a philosophy? Have you ever considered that they are utilizing another part of consciousness that is beyond mental, called Intuition? Yes, I know, intuition is highly undeveloped in nearly all people. Yet, consider that these people are exercising their intuitive body. As long as they are not using such intuition to judge others it is fine. Lets let them be and allow them to enjoy this energy of intuition.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest. It only bothers me when people try and claim those beliefs as a universal truth – rather to conceding the point they are personal beliefs.

When I project the few times I've seen my melty hands I think they're bluish, but not dark blue.
BTW, what is tray red?

I've no idea! I've been googling about regarding this and other parts of the reading, but with little luck so far.

Well firstly you were making claims to quantum theory which states people's expectations effect the outcome.

No I did not.

You clearly did:

Did you know that many researchers would tell you there already is proof of projection? There is an interesting phenomenon where the outcome of certain experiments is dependent upon who is present. Who is aware of this phenomenon? If the negativity/disbelief level reaches a certain level then the experiment will fail.

This was on page three, and is the only reason I posted here. Are you really saying the above doesn't state negativity and disbelief affects the outcome of the experiment?

I told you exactly why I mentioned QM. Again, people should have no problem or guilt considering spiritual theories because most accepted interpretations of QM such as MWI have surpassed many spiritual theories in the weirdness factor.

You mentioned QM giving the above example. Skewing QM interpretations to such a degree is what spawns many of the sites claiming such (misinterpreted) science as proof of outlandish theories. Going down that route won't get us anywhere.
I fully agree things like the MWI are outlandish, but the MWI is purely an idea with no empirical evidence to back it up.

There are a lot of spiritual teachings on this, but the teacher I followed is not public so there would be no name I can give you. I thought that was clear.
As far as studying the effects from groups there are many. The Princeton University Global Consciousness Project for one. I witnessed one of their experiments on a radio show that broadcasts to millions of live listeners. They asked the audience to focus on their Quantum Random generators, called Eggs, that are spread all over the world at universities. The next day they published the results and it showed a clear spike in the time graph when the audience focused. The purely quantum randomness because predictable. The study of such effects from groups of people are well studied. The problem here is that it is not 100% predictable and still remains a mystery as to why it is not always predictable. It always seems that there is just not quite enough understanding why it is mysterious or unpredictable to make it unprovable. Yet, anyone with a brain will know that the odds of there being a huge obvious spike in the graph at the exact same moment when the people focused on it is outrageous. They know something is happening. They just can't get a grasp as to what is happening. Again, it will always be this way until the global consciousness on Earth is ready to entertain the idea of global proof.

Thinks like this are interesting and could lead us a lot further towards whatever truths might be out there than any amount of theorising things grounded in belief.

Studies on the effects of single people are also well known, as in the case of prayer.

And there have been recent studies which showed ill people who were prayed for (and knew it) actually recovered a lot slower than control groups who had no people praying for them, or who had people praying for them but didn't know it.

I think perhaps you should reconsider that the physical plane is not meaningless unintelligent particles unaffected by consciousness. As you agreed, you cannot prove with 100% certainty that your reality is nothing more than a dream. Yet from my point of view, I found people who have made sense of the universe, who have proven to me without doubt they are the real deal, and in my case I'd have to be stupid to go back to all the questioning and doubting and searching of such simple ideas. Sure, I still and always will seek high forms of truth. Here's an example. Consider some medical teachers at a university. Would you expect a student to question such teachers and go off on their own tangent trying to invent better medical theories? SURE, there will always be better theories, but it would be very advantageous of the student to accept present medical theories. When they studied such theories, then they can expand upon those theories.

It's not about inventing better theories. In your example, the medical theories can be researched by the student, and they can see why those theories were reached using objective (shareable) methods. Most spiritual philosophies expect one to give up all questioning (except for with the philosophical framework presented), and present nothing by belief. People following such philosophies only have their own subjective experiences (based within a framework). You can tell me how you've had proof given to you personally, and I can point you to people such as Derren Brown who can give people such proofs using natural means too. An interesting example is when he used a doll to take complete control of a woman – he took control because the women's belief system allowed it. In her eyes, some deep, paranormal belief had been validated – yet that validation was not paranormal in the slightest. This is where the problem lies. For every psychic out there doing amazing things, we are getting to a point where those exact same things can be achieved naturally – so they give no proof of anything greater than reality.
My entire experience of all this is that the beliefs and philosophies mean nothing. They are a prop for the mind. Such as in ritual magick, the ceremonies, incantations, objects, alters etc are simply tools to focus the mind in a specific way to achieve the intended result. The mind does the work, not the philosophy behind the ceremonies and beliefs.
I could build belief systems and progress within them. But I see that as missing the point. I want to move beyond belief systems to the core of it. See what is actually achieving these feats, rather than experiencing that source as filtered through enforced beliefs.

No, no, no. You're changing the subject. I'll put your quote back in once again,

The fact we are having such a discussion as this, and that no one knows what OBEs truly are shows there must be serious problems with those theories.

Just because we are having a discussion on this topic does not mean there must be serious problems with these theories, lol. That should be without question.

My point was many theories which are around to date have their roots in ancient Egypt and earlier (many being given a modern slant by groups such as the Golden Dawn). These theories have been around a very long time. The point of a theory is to describe something. Yet 2000+ years on, in an age where we can describe the world in unprecedented (staggering) detail, we are still arguing based upon belief rather than things with objective fact. Not only that, there exists many groups with their own view of creation and how it all fits together. Nothing in the model concerning chakras, energy bodies, astral/mental planes etc puts it above these other theories. How long should we give something before we look elsewhere, or consider the possibility we need to look elsewhere?

When you understand group/collective consciousness theories then you see how it explains why such things become inconsistent when trying to provide globabal proof. It is silly to discount such a theory because it seems like a copout in your mind. Global proof will not happen yet. You seem to keep trying to find global proof.

Again we'll just have to agree to disagree. Call me a lier, call me delusional, lol, call as you wish, but I have my personal proof. From my point of view Earth is a school. Call it a drama play, a playground, a sandbox, or whatever. Would you expect the teacher to give all the students the answers during the test? Why would such spiritual teachers suddenly reveal themselves right now and say, "Hey people, here's your global proof. Opps, sorry that I just destroyed all your opportunities for spiritual growth in an environment where beings chose to incarnate in an environment where there is a veil over the memories."

Yes but there is absolutely nothing what-so-ever apart from belief to suggest a group/collective unconsciousness exists. I really did believe this, I believed the Earth-life system was a learning environment, and if you do search on my early posts here – you'll see I'm speaking the truth. I actually took the position you are now against many a sceptic who posted here.
What I realised is these were beliefs and not knowns, I looked at all my knowledge and was shocked to see how much I didn't know personally, and how much 'third-hand' knowledge I took as absolute. Couple this with a lifetime of OBEs, and intimate experience of how belief dictates experience (so you might project and find this group consciousness, yet others don't). I also have corresponded with many 'Gurus' in this field, and know many proficient projectors – and as my experience grows I come to realise they have no answers, they are exactly like me, looking for answers and fitting them into the belief systems they carry. I respect immensely anyone with an interest in this field.
There is really too much wrong with these theories right now (including my own experience) to follow it as a known. So I moved them from 'knowns' to possibilities.

You are assuming that all mystical teachings are incorrect. Sorry, but even though a great deal of mystical teaching are incorrect, doesn't mean they are all incorrect.

I agree it doesn't mean they are all incorrect. But many people believe them blindly, and I choose not to do that. I think being a bit sceptical is healthier in the long run than jumping head first into a belief system without any research or critical thought.

Humanity on Earth is not exactly all that responsible in totality, yet. Yet even in the present state of the U.S. it is our scientists objective to keep interference with primitive tribes to a minimum!!! The old tv series "Star Trek: The Next Generation" consulted with scientists. Even they thought that advanced humanity would not interfere with primitive cultures. Perhaps you should consider that the universe is infinitely old, that there are and always have been beings watching over us, and that Earth is a school.

I can agree we are not all that responsible, but I think we have a lot of potential as a species. But for the rest, right now they are simply possibilities (as I see no evidence for it – but that in itself doesn't rule it out) in my outlook. Perhaps in the future that will change.

Note to self...

Don't ever get into a debate with MrJingo! :doh:  

when I get involved in these discussions, i'm actually arguing with my own beliefs and views as much as those put across by Inward . I seem to fluctuate between spiritual (belief driven) viewpoints, and more scientific ('objective' orientated) viewpoints - and discussions like this really do help me - I think i'm going through a more objective phase right now. I Hope Inward isn't taking anything i'm saying personally - because I am getting a lot from it, and don't mean any disrespect.
I'm not being negative for the sake of it. Both scientific  and spiritual theory has holes in it if one looks hard enough - and I like to (need to?) pull at those holes.

Hey blade5x,

I think the whole seeing through the eyelids is a form of HI. I've experienced this a lot (including variations on it, such as having a book held in front of my face etc), and it always occurs either in a SP state or on the border of waking/sleep. On most occassions, once I become aware of what is happening, I wake up more fully and it fades.

The reason for my replying is that you brought quantum mechanical interpretations in – and the interpretation was incorrect.

Hold on there. That's not fair since you have not corrected me on anything yet. I already point out that you made assumptions.

So please, by all means, lets see my incorrect QM interpretation.

Inward

Well firstly you were making claims to quantum theory which states people's expectations effect the outcome. I asked what theory this is, and you never replied.
Trying to get an answer to this question, I wrote that the only part of QM that states an observer has effect on an experiment is the uncertainty principle (the intention is moot, and it looks like a sentient observer might be unneeded too). You then said this isn't true, and once again ignored the question when I asked what theory you were describing. The fact you mentioned the many world interpretation (which was created to describe the effects of the uncertainty principle – as seen in the double slit experiment) in the same space as this theory either points to misdirection or misinterpretation.
So again, what theory are you referring to in which a person's positive or negative outlook affects the experiments results? If you were indeed referring to the UP, then your interpretation was incorrect. If you were referring to another experiment and area of QM, then I am genuinely interested to hear of it as I've overlooked it in all my reading and research to date.

According to that logic then there must be serious problems with all things known to man since you will find similar discussions about any topic amongst humanity.

Not so. According to this logic, we have moved illness away from spirits, demons and other mischievous paranormal entities which were blamed for such illnesses (and birth defects) and have now placed its action in bacteria, diet, genetic errors etc.
Even rudimentary research will show countless examples of how seemingly paranormal phenomenon was found to have 'natural' means of action, where once, such phenomenon was seen to be at the hands of the same constructs which are still used to describe a lot of paranormal phenomenon.
I believe our understanding of what OBEs are will become a lot more detailed once we leave speculative belief behind and really look into it in a consistent manner.
If you miss the point of the above, I'm saying that areas where we dropped the supernatural interpretations and started looking into their true nature, we have advanced more in a hundred years then in ten thousand years of unquestioning belief.
I also think that if certain explanations are leaving the vast majority in the dark after thousands of years, we might have to reconsider those explanations – or at least be open to the possibility they hold little or no truth.

OK, here's the deal. In the highest sense of the word, nothing is provable because you always say, "what if you're dreaming right now." One could say, "I drop the ball and the ball falls, therefore the ball exists." No, because you do not know if you are dreaming. Perhaps the only thing one can be certain of is their own consciousness.

Unless we follow a solipsist outlook, I think things can be proven to a very high level of certainty. Most of modern society is based upon technology and ideas which have proven consistent enough for us to have accomplished what we have to date.

But has it occurred to you that such people do not want to become public eye? It has been my experience that nearly all these type of people learn early on that it is not in the best interest to publicize such a group or ability. It fact, I believe people such as Jerry Gross are a rarity, but it is Jerry's karma to work with the public.

Well I find it very sad that people would rather keep such knowledge and experience to themselves (by my own outlook, this doesn't come across as very advanced) and let the rest of the world suffer (but I guess this is karma, so its alright not to help others right?).

A recentish reading saw my aura as:

i see aura around you as pink, orange, golden, white, indigo, tray red, ethereal green, topaz

Thats a lot of colours there

I saw some of these in a national paper a while back, they are stunning .

Hi MisterJingo,

I read you post and I agree the discussion is deviation. One thing I don't care for forums is the splitting effect. When two people continue to reply to each other then the next thing you know you end up with a zillion quotes, lol. I would be more interested if this did not occur. I think we each are looking for something different. I truly searched for real super humans, and found them. Perhaps you searched to disprove this, and found all the evidence to support your claim. As I am certain you know that I could reply to all your issues and yet once again correct them. From my point of view, you are misunderstanding the theory. So in my mind, I continually correct you and I clearly see the flaw in your thinking. Yet in your mind, I am sure you see the opposite.

Hey Inward,

All I am searching for is for answers regarding what I am, what reality is, the relationship between the two etc. I've been projecting since childhood, and so see projection as a natural method to accomplish this (Along with research in the physical).
I haven't ever had the need or inclination to search for super humans, so haven't disproved the possible existence of such beings.
The reason for my replying is that you brought quantum mechanical interpretations in – and the interpretation was incorrect. I understand the theory very well (in regards to such astral philosophies which you put across), but I just don't agree with it, as my own experiences counter what it claims. Also, man has bestowed such mystical meaning upon OBEs for probably as long as there has been man. The fact we are having such a discussion as this, and that no one knows what OBEs truly are shows there must be serious problems with those theories. I guess the argument about this will regard having to believe and never know – which I guess means we should not use words like theory .

In short, it seems we both found what we wanted. I think you are a scientifically minded person. All I can say is that I tried my best to study these people that I know and knew in a very scientific manner. With those studies and my personal experience, I come to another conclusion that you have.

I'm not scientific minded as such. But we can either attempt to bring light to the subject of OBEs, or we can keep it as a niche interest of a few people and cover it in mystical and occult terminology (Which I don't think is necessary). I can happily drop all questioning and get lost in my own belief systems, answer questions on forums such as with mystical lingo. But in the long run, I don't think that would help anyone.

For example, you question if anyone can make the astral seem stable in obe's. Yet I have to question that perhaps you attract exactly what you want and repel what you do not want. For example, Jerry Gross makes the claim that you seem to think is impossible.

I could perhaps agree with you if this was my own personal experience, but as I said, I have had correspondence with many who regularly attend the Monroe institute, and I'm a member of groups of proficient projectors. Yet, none of them can have consistent, stable or remotely similar shared OBEs (unless guided). I didn't set out with this belief, I set out with the opposite, but this is what I've found to date. So I don't see how this has had an effect on anything.

Personally, I think discussions like this can be productive, but perhaps in this instant not. You have to follow what you want to follow .
But, if you can project in a consistent manner, perhaps we should set up a meeting in a familiar astral locale? Or, get a group of us to do this, you using your knowledge and experience to guide us etc. We could then report back here and share stories. I'd be happy to attempt such a thing as this if you say you can truly do it.

Oh well, may your journey be a great one!

and your journey too .