Messages

And your goal in "discussing" it is what then?
Because there is a very strong chance that this stuff will NEVER be proven.

As I said, I'm here because I find this stuff very interesting, both on a personal level and because it provides great inspiration for the games that I make. I don't care if it's ever proven. I'm just here to observe. I ask questions because I want to know the answer so that I can know exactly what it is that you believe. The more I know, the better I can adapt it to my games.

My experiences in discussing the paranormal before now were mostly in the area of ghosts and psychic powers and spiritual healing, not dreams, so this is almost an entirely new area for me. That's why I'm asking so many questions.

You might be better coming back when the day comes that science says "hey, this stuff is real" or "hey, this stuff isn't real".

Except that that's not what I'm here to talk about. I just want to know what you believe. I'm not here to disprove anything.

Fair enough.  However, you do understand that is YOUR problem and not ours, right?  

Yes. Again, I'm not here to disprove anything. I'm just responding to what was asked of me.

Again, you not being able to understand (or attempt to understand) what that "whole picture" might be isn't our problem.

I didn't say that it was.

See, the problem is that you're going to face this kind of understanding anytime you try to question what we're experiencing here.
It's a kind of understanding which you're just always going to be in firm disagreement with.

There's really no "discussion" to be had here.  You either believe that Astral Projection is possible and you're here to learn about how to do it... or you don't believe it's possible BUT you want to try to experience it... OR you're you.  

Yep. Here, "me" means "you don't believe it's possible, but you'd like to learn what other people believe about it anyway".

I think that the fact that I don't believe is causing conflict where I'm not trying to make any. I'm just here to observe, not to debunk. I asked why you believed this stuff about dreams because I'm trying to build a coherent picture of what it is that you believe, not because I'm trying to disprove it.

And I guess you're referring to me when you say "Xander"?
It's Xanth... or more to the point, you may call me Ryan.

Yeah, sorry. I got you mixed up with someone on another forum. Xanth... Zander... I got mixed up.

Mate, most people here welcome the idea that there is a non-physical world and that we interact with it in various ways, be it through intuition, through dreams, through astral projections, etc.

Yes, I know.

Some people aren't so receptive to such idea, and try to look for some hard evidence before directing more efforts and time into it.

That's me.

The basic premise that keeps this belief going on is the following: no one can say the non-physical doesn't exist. It's not proven it exists, however

Exactly. I don't believe in it because it hasn't been proven to exist.

so the main difference between believers and non-believers is how much energy one is willing to direct into this investigation.

I don't think so. The difference, to me, appears to be more along the lines of what one considers to be evidence. You consider your personal experiences to be evidence of it (I assume that you do, anyway - it wouldn't make much sense if you didn't). I don't consider personal experiences to be much evidence of anything, on account of them being notoriously unreliable.

Each one has different experiences, and it is the sharing of these experiences that helps us understand the whole picture, little by little.

But this assumes that there is a whole picture to understand. This, to me, is an unwarranted leap; you can't say that you are gaining understanding of the "whole picture" until you prove that the data you are gathering is anything more than a dream.

This discussion doesn't go too far, it usually isn't very productive, but we welcome anyone who's willing to have a decent conversation on the topic. I say that because this thread was meant for the discussion of dreams. If you want to, we can all gather in another topic and talk about that later on.

I agree, but it wasn't me that took the conversation in this direction. Xander asked me what my experiences were, and why I don't believe. I'm fine with splitting it to another thread if that's what the rest of you think should happen, but since it's Xander's topic split in Xander's thread, I think it's his decision.

Generally, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt and believe it's the first option.  There is nothing wrong with having confidence in your beliefs.
Hell, I get blasted for that here all the time. 

I don't think there's anything wrong with having confidence in your beliefs either. That's what I've been trying to say this entire time: I don't mind them believing the bit about the angels. The bit I'm against is their unscientific "experiment", which gives a false image of what the scientific process actually is.

But that's not what I was talking about. I mean that these people really, truly, were lying, and knew they were lying, and didn't care, because they made money off the people that they were scamming.

It was not a fun conversation.

Still, I don't understand why you're so willing to put so much energy into something that really has no bearing on you what-so-ever. 

I don't either, really. I just am.

Really?  That's the honest to goodness truth?

Yes.

You might want to look a little deeper into that directive of yours... there might be something wrong with it.

I don't see it. Can you explain?

My point here this: who cares?  Let people believe what they want to believe... they'll either come around eventually, or they won't. 
You trying to 'save' them isn't going to do a lick of good if they don't want to listen in the first place, you're just wasting your breath.

You still don't seem to understand. I don't care if they believe in the angels. I care that these people are spreading false information about what constitutes scientific, valid proof of that belief.

I don't care if people believe. I care if they lie about having proof of that belief.

To each their own, I guess. 

Yep.

You're barking up the wrong tree then.
I suggest messaging the people who did the video. 

I've actually attempted that with several videos (on homeopathy, not this). In my experience, the video makers are either so set in their beliefs as to make all discussion impossible or know that they're lying already and simply don't care.

I didn't see much actual science in the video... apart from some documentation they did.

Exactly. There is no actual science in the video. But it is, quite clearly, trying to pass off their non-scientific nonsense as legitimate science.

But as I said, it is what it is.  And as you said, it's not exactly harming anyone...

Except in that it can convince people that these people have actually done something that is scientifically legitimate. I consider "spreading false information" to be harm.

In any case, personally, I took the video as a purely spiritual expression of their opinion.

I didn't. While that's part of it, they try to dress it up as science.

I'm curious as to the reason behind why you're so concerned about HOW they go about discussing their opinion/beliefs in the video.
The video clearly had no impact upon your opinion of the subject...

I don't care about them discussing their beliefs, but that's not what they're doing. They're talking about their beliefs and trying to pass them off as scientifically valid. It's the latter bit that I object to, not the former.

or are you concerned that, perhaps, other people might "fall" for their ploy?  Although, I'm at a loss for why you would worry about such a thing.

No. There are times when I do attempt to debunk things for that very reason - for example, belief in faith healers like Peter Popoff can seriously damage ones' health, and I can't just sit by and watch him hurt people - but this isn't hurting anyone.

In other words, (as you said in your intro thread), what are you trying to debunk exactly? 

I'm arguing against the "science" in the video for the same reason that I would correct someone who made an obvious math mistake. They're wrong, and they're going to continue being wrong until someone sets the record straight. Worse, they can convince others that they're right, and then your entire class is flunking ENGR 201.

In this specific instance, I can't respond directly to the makers, but I can show the people here what's wrong with their methods. This is not how science works. I'm not particularly concerned if anyone chooses to believe the bit about the angels, but people who buy into the experiment bit can get a very distorted view of the way the world works. So... yes, I guess I am slightly concerned that someone might "fall for it".

Oh, hey. Just realized your name is Ryan. I'm a Ryan as well.

That's definitely one strong possibility of what they are.
The movements could also be something else.

Yes, they could. I just see absolutely no reason to think that they are.

You gave up... why did you give up?

Because several years' experimentation had failed to produce a single iota of evidence that there was anything to it beyond the ideomotor effect. A man only has so much time to spend on stuff like that.

Unfortunately, there's very little, if anything, that I could say to sway that opinion of yours.

Probably not, no.

I prefer to use my time and energy more wisely. 

Ah. You are a wise man.
[/quote]

Xanth, if, at any time, you decide that my presence is a negative influence on the forum - if I'm coming on too strong, or scaring away members, or anything like that - let me know, and I'll leave quietly and without issue. I realize that not all forums are ones where a presence like mine is wanted, and I'd prefer not to stay where I'm not wanted.

I thought the video was fine... it's a recounting of their view on what happens when a person dies.  Regardless of whatever scientific reasoning they come up with, at the base, THAT is what the video is.

I don't think so. The video attempts to make itself look like a scientific experiment. While it is definitely about what they think of the afterlife - I never said it wasn't - it tries to give their view a false scientific basis. I'm objecting to their faulty reasoning, not their belief.

I think you're trying to look too deep into the video, Alakazam.

Again, I disagree. The video is titled "PSI TECH - Remote Viewing the Afterlife: What Happens When We Die?". In addition, the movie description reads:

A PSI TECH Investigates Special Report For thousands of years, man has sought the answer to the ultimate question: what happens when we die? Some religious texts describe an afterlife that is a reward for only those who are pure in heart and repentant for their sins. Some describe reincarnation and past lives; a process of continual rebirth on Earth for the purpose of learning new lessons. And there are those who believe that upon the moment of death, everything simply fades to black our memories and consciousness cease to exist. This is the ultimate human enigma. For the first time, a tool has been able to penetrate the unseen events which take place at the cessation of life in human beings. Using Technical Remote Viewing, a PSI TECH special operations team targeted the death event specifically to determine what happens after a person dies. The results were reassuring to some, and astonishing to others. In this PSI TECH Investigates special report, we reveal the mystery of life after death.

This is definitely an attempt to make it sound as though they had definitively, scientifically proven that this is the correct view of the afterlife.

I have no issue with people believing things like this. I'm not objecting to them believing that two angels show up at the moment of death, hang around for twenty-four hours, then take the soul and the memories on their separate paths to the afterlife. I'm objecting to them using phony scientific methods to try and justify that belief.

Let's go this direction then...

Perhaps we can help you find some experiences that AREN'T mundane?
Can you describe what were you experiencing to us?

Lucid dreaming, mostly. I experimented with Ouija boards for a while. The Ouija I gave up when I realized that it was just the ideomotor effect. I still experience lucid dreams on a regular basis, but I don't think that they're anything along the lines of astral projection, as most of the members here seem to.

Just a quick word... this is a forum where people come to learn how to do Astral Projection and associated skills in a non hostile and accepting environment.
We're not here to prove anything to anyone who isn't already willing to learn and be open... and I doubt we could provide you with any evidence to whet your appetite, nor would any of us even try really.

That's fine. For the most part, I'm just here to read.

A large part of why I participate in forums like this is because - like my title says - I'm a tabletop gamer. I write and build adventures for various tabletop RPGs like Dungeons & Dragons, Deadlands: Reloaded, and World of Darkness. Since a large part of the flavor of those games comes from the occult, I do my best to learn about all the beliefs out there. Think of it like field research. The questions I've asked of you and other members aren't meant to "debunk" anything. I'm honestly interested in knowing the answers.

I do participate in sites where I do my fair share of debunking, but that's not what I'm here for.

EDIT: With the exception of the thread where I responded to a video posted by Lily. There, I am doing what might be considered debunking, because the OP asked about what happens when we die, and I think that the video she posted is nonsense. Even there, though, I'm trying to keep it as inoffensive as possible.

I'll be blunt with you as well... you won't get much leash here.  
So please, be courteous and tolerant (I know you said you will, you will be held to that).

Thanks.  

No problem. You won't get any trouble from me. I'm a forum administrator and moderator on several sites, including one paranormal forum (now defunct due to server issues). I know how crazy it is trying to keep track of all the stuff that gets reported, so whenever I'm on someone else's forum, I make a conscious effort to give the site staff as little trouble as possible.

I can't really answer that without bringing up a hundred other questions from you.
So, to be brief... my experiences and what I've learned from them.

Fair enough.

To explain further I'd really just suggest you stick around and learn to have your own experiences. 

Probably not going to happen at this point. Part of the reason that I don't believe in this stuff is because I used to spend a lot of time trying to get myself to experience all these things that the other people talked about. I never had any experience that wasn't fairly easily shown to be mundane, though.

Not at all.  Brainwaves seem to be the result of how our consciousness interacts with our physical brain.

Now, I'd ask why you think that the consciousness is separate from the brain, but I know that would lead into a thousand-question discussion.

No...not right now.  But we are also in different states, we just knew that we were both trying last night. And then compared notes today.

No idea, then. It could be any number of things on either of your ends.

Thanks, both of you.

And don't worry about it, Xanth. I've got no problem with smilies in others' posts. I just don't like using them in mine.

nice idea. I'm guessing a porno may be counter-productive.

Depends on what you're trying to achieve.

Anyone have an ideas as what this is?

Is there a stomach bug going around?

I really haven't had any scary false awakenings, just annoying.  I can't count the times I've woken up only to try to make toast and have my hands go through the toaster or the bread.

Hah! I've had the same experience. Always funny, but always annoying, too.

Hello all. In case you haven't read it, I'd like to ask you to go see my introductory thread; it should explain a lot about where I'm coming from on this, and help to prevent needless fighting.

Dreams are NOT what we think they are.  They're not some random interplay of images and scenes that play out while we're asleep.  What we humans call a dream is one part of a much bigger "non-physical whole".

So what is a Dream? A Dream is you being in the non-physical and being completely oblivious of that fact. You go about the environment as if you were wide awake and living your physical life. The environment is being fueled entirely by your own subconscious thoughts, desires, intentions, beliefs... everything.

Why do you think this? I'd like to know what led you to hold this belief, if you can explain it.

There is the thought that we dream every night of our lives, even if we don't remember it. I guess certain experiments using brainwave monitors have been used to figure this out. This means that we don't remember these dreams because we're simply not aware enough to remember them.

This seems self-contradictory to me. You said that you believe that a dream is not a physical event, right? If that's true, then why would the brain-wave experiments indicate whether or not we were dreaming every night? Or am I misunderstanding your position? Please correct me if I am.

[Lily, do you have a link to a more complete version?]

So here are my thoughts on the video.

Before I begin, though, I'd like to restate what I said in my intro thread, because I'm new here and it's unlikely that anyone reading this actually saw that.

I do not believe in the afterlife, spirits, souls, energy healing, or anything like them. But I participate in forums like this, because I find the subject incredibly interesting. I am not here to insult anyone's beliefs, but I sometimes come across as cold or mean. I don't mean to, so please don't think that I am here to bash your beliefs mindlessly. I am going to speak my mind, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfD8qLA_aQo

I'm skipping over the introduction to get to the meat of it. I'll pick up at 1:34, with Ms. Dourif's statement:

"We started to look at, person by person, what happened when people pass over... famous ones, historical figures, saints, Hitler... across the board... the same thing happened. It was always the same."

What happened? She never says.

As for the experiment:

"Each member of the team focused on targets that were unknown to them. Again, all they were given was a random set of eight numbers."

This seems very abrupt to me. What is the experiment that they are performing? What are they trying to prove, and how are they trying to prove it? The video offers no explanation. Presumably they are attempting to prove the existence of the afterlife, but the video fails to explain how the eight numbers do that, and it never explains what the "targets" are, or what they are supposed to prove, either.

"Working by themselves, they collected data that had no apparent meaning. Different colors, textures, objects, dimensions - even emotions were recorded and organized. It wasn't until the analysis phase of each session that their work began to make sense."

What data are they attempting to collect? To validate what hypothesis? What method are they using to collect the data? What sorts of quality control insurances were there? What data would have proven the hypothesis, and what data would have invalidated it? The video never explains.

"After many hours of exhaustive effort, their sessions revealed specific types of data. The complex jigsaw puzzle was slowly pieced together, and the team became witness to an amazing series of events. As the drama unfolded in front of them, the realization of what they had discovered inspired awe and reverence..."

As far as I can tell, it continues like that. The gist of the video appears to be that the team members came up with similar "results" after each session, and these pointed - in some undefined fashion - to the final "theory" of what happens when you die.

So... my final opinion on the video is that it is largely nonsensical. I don't think that the experiment was carried out in any way that could produce any kind of useful, verifiable information. However, from the jagged nature of the video, it appears that this may have been a version which was trimmed down so as to fit within the ten-minute time limit for YouTube. Lily, do you have a link to a more complete version? If so, I'd very much like to see it.

so what exactly happends at the moment?

does your brain send out a command to shut down to the rest of the organs? or does it shut down itsself leaving the rest of the body without control.

The brain simply stops sending out signals. Without the brain to control it, the rest of the body stops functioning. The heart, lungs, and other organs simply stop, since they no longer have any source of animation.

and what if you artificially restarted the heart after few seconds to keep the blood pumping would that reverse the process?

It would take much more than just re-starting the heart. You'd have to get the other organs working again as well.

If you can do that, though, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't, except for the fact that the brain deteriorates very quickly after death. Even if you can get the other organs working on a level that can support the brain, it's probably been too long, and the brain has probably deteriorated past the point where you would have anything other than a vegetable.

That's the purely biological bit, anyway. I haven't seen lily's linked video yet, so I'll watch that and post my thoughts on it in a second.

Hello hello. Alakazam here.

I don't believe in things like the afterlife, energy healing, and the rest. However, I find discussions on the subject fascinating, and I'm open to new evidence.

I'd also like to assure all the members of this site that I am not here to bash your beliefs. I may - scratch that, I will - ask questions, but I am not here to hurt people, just to talk.

I look forward to speaking with all of you.

PS: I've been told on several forums that I come across as cold or nasty. I don't mean to, but I'm generally very blunt, and I rarely use smilies. Please excuse me - I find smilies annoying, so I don't use them often, and I'm not the most tactful person. I'll do my best to keep from offending anyone, though.

See, look: here's a smiley, to show goodwill!