Concious Astral Verification for Everyone.

[Nostic]

I think the important thing for "the masses" is practicality. Once a good number of people like those of us on these forums can show clear-cut, practical benefits form our work, I think that's when the world at large will catch on. As for now, AP can at best be considered something equivalent to having a vivid imagination.
When I say "practical benefits", I mean things like instant thought manifestation, levitation (of self and separate objects), immortality, 100% accurate (or close) remote viewing capabilities, superpowers etc. If only a small number of us can accomplish these things, they can (and will) definitely be written off as hoaxes. But if you have the numbers, the world can only remain asleep but for so long.

[GypsyWanderer]

child vs adult.  i wonder when i lost my keys now. after all, i am an Eighteen Year Old Adult.  

why did you capitalize
I'm an American adult.  importance rests somewhere...

age is number, puberty is natural, not one better then before, age, less motivation, more chance of spiritual seperation, maybe adults are the bad, maybe kids deserve spankings, maybe electrons are the mommies and protons are the daddies. but no, its not that at all.

So really what is it that makes an adult? proof?  does proof make an adult.  then adult is nothing more then life + variable  
(variable being the experience of life plus the need of its understanding)
happiness comes without understanding , it just happens, but i guess you do need to know how to understand some things to fix them, or else hell never ends..

also, i don't really agree or disagree at this point in my life, thats sad

[greatoutdoors]

Nostic, I believe you and I are in accord on this issue. The abilities we are just beginning to understand could go far in eliminating so many of the problems with our world today. And that would be so even if not everyone had those abilities. Suppose for a moment that telephathy could be proven in a scientific, repeatable, demonstrable manner. IMO that ability would eliminate lying! That improvement alone would be earth-transforming! Imagine if all of the politicians in the world knew without question that most, or all, of those listening to their fine speeches knew what was in their mind and heart. And how many of those masses would continue follow like sheep if they knew the true motives of those "noble" politicians?  

As to levitation and/or astral travel -- what need for fossil fuels when we could travel wherever we wished with no artificial help. Again, world changing! We would still have the presence of evil people who imposed their will by brute force, but at least their motives would be right out in the open!

Yes, I believe many of the powers we are exploring are real and very valuable. I also believe it should be the absolute primary goal of everyone on these forums gifted in one manner or another to find a way to prove that skill -- and the quicker the better!  

[Dagalvyi]

Hi Ty! You raise a lot of good points to your questions. I gather by your confusion that you have never experienced the astral plane. I think that if you have you would defiantly KNOW that you were  there. There is no doubt left in the mind if it has experienced an OBE. As far as the progression of other mental/ESP abilities, that would differ per person and the broadening scope of their individual mind. Per say a person has OBE and cannot master it, he/she cannot possibly open another window of opportunity to master. I believe God gives us gifts/skills as we are capable of handling them. How can fly if he cannot even get off the ground?

[Tombo]

Selski,

WOW! Congratulations! Have you been able to do it again? I know how hard that is, mind you, because of my own experiences.

Wow, again!

I don't wanna devaluate  that experience but it could have been pure luck. The card trick has been done by many people, myself included. Most of them have failed. It is nothing more but logical that from time to time somebody hits the card. If somebody has success it is more likely that he reports his experience. (If I would have been able to guess the card right during my own trail, I definitely would have posted it, since I failed I never wrote about it...)

If somebody can do it 3-times in a row, then I would call it a proof.

[Selski]

If I would have been able to guess the card right during my own trail, I definitely would have posted it, since I failed I never wrote about it...)

I'll mention it one more time, just for the record.

I didn't guess the card - I SAW it.  I admit I didn't see it like one would with physical eyes, but I saw the two black 'J's.  There was no guessing involved - in fact, guessing would have hindered what I was trying to do, because it would have meant presupposing what I was going to "see", thereby causing what I did see to be influenced.

The hardest part of the experiment is to have no expectations and simply look at the card.

Do you get me?  

I'll go away now and let everyone else bash it out - I know what I saw, I'm satisfied, that's enough for me.  And walking on the ceiling was unforgettable.  So there.

Harrumph.

Sarah

[Tombo]

Sarah, If you are 100% sure that you saw the card without any guessing then I would take that as proof if I was you:)
But you must understand my position as well:
I tried the experiment saw a card and it was the wrong card. Now, my problem may have been that my Subc. guessed the card which hindered me do correctly perceive it. (Just for the record:I believe the card trick is possible!)

BUT What is so threatening about repeating the trick?

[Gem]

Well I visited a friend once at his workplace over three hundred miles away. I'd never been there in the physical but I was able to describe it and what he was doing at the time. Does that count as proof?

[Selski]

BUT What is so threatening about repeating the trick?

Tombo

I didn't mean to give that impression.  I lost interest after I'd done it once - it satisfied me, and I was only out to satisfy myself.

It took quite a few attempts (due to distractions and forgetting I was supposed to be looking for a card when I was out), so to repeat it numerous times seems laborious and unnecessary.  I have other things on my "to do" list now, and I still waste so many OBEs being ridiculously absorbed in pushing my hands through walls - it never ceases to amaze me - you think I'd be bored of it by now

If I came across as an old grump in my previous post - I apologise - I was having one of those "harrumph" moments.  

Sarah

[stephen~]

I've had mixed results witht he card test, and come to realise it is not the brightest  of methods for any kind off proof.

Here we have something very small, and you can roughly divide the cards into 2 types, face and numbers, faces all look alike, and many of the numbers are alike too.

There's just too much opportunity for chance guesses. We really need to make the test infallable. A test that leaves a window for self-doubt to creep in is not a very usefull test.

Like Sarah, I have little will for repeating these tests (I started in the early days by reading the labels on products  in the bathroom, with mixed results again). I think a better idea for anyone thinking  of trying this kind of test for the first time would be to ask 5 friends to sketch anything they like with a large nibbed marker pen on a piece of paper. Don't tell them why, and get them to place them in an envelope. Wthout looking put them up somewhere without looking, maybe 1 per room.

My thinking on this is that  it negates the need for boring multiple tries that playing cards require, even then you cannot rule out the statistical chance, as unlikely as you may feel it, that you can guess 3 or 4 or more playing cards right in a row.

One vaguely right interpretation of a simple individual sketch is worth more in my opinion  than half a dozen near misses with playing cards.

Btw Sarah, don't bite me! your card test was more conclusive than my most recent, and still about the only one I have seen that looks valid just about anywhere on any forum.

I am currently working on an idea for a test I can show to the forum where the results are checkable by anyone in the world, all date stamped and unedited. It's RV rather than AP, but if it works it might encourage some more immaginative attempts among others. We'll see, it is early days...

Steve

[Tombo]

No problem Sarah  I can be alittle annoying sometimes


Stephen what about that. Taking a extensive picture-Book, then open it randomly without looking at it and place it somewhere?

BTW last time a projected I felt a little indent at the wall, after I awoke I checked it and it really had a dent there!

I also heard from somebody else that he had better results with proof when using his tactile sense instead of sight.

[stephen~]

Tombo -

A picture book sounds fine, infact better because of the sheer number of pics likely to be in it. So long as it is simple, not too coloured. My thinking is you want something basic, like a line drawing of a tree or a guitar, something you would have a very hard job misinterpretting. I think when you add colour you just make another load of info the consciousness has to experience,

What you say about tactile senses is also something I have been thinking of. It was really that crazy data thread where he keeps asking for proof and says it's easy without really appreciating why it isn't. It inspired me to have another crack at some RV pics last couple of days.

I found I got the dominant colour right of the three photos I looked into, when I did so I remembered what I had read from RV literature about getting minimal information, such as colour and texture and slowly building up the picture from there.

To me this kind of ties in with feelings during some APs: like it is much easier to sense a wooden door than to actually describe or see the wood itself. Difference being with RV you have time because it is not a big effort to practise it, you can build the info at leisure. With projections there's a definite limit to how long you've got and you are aware of that during the projection and nerves play a part because of that.

That's what I think is wrong with the card test, there's too much information to be sorted in a short space of projecting time, you rush, well, I do. If I read you right, you also felt the dent rather than saw it during the projection. And shows that touch is just as valid a sense for proof as sight. We are so used to using our main sense perhaps we tend to forget the others!

It surely can't be a coincidence that RVers get the basic info first, I think that's what we should be aiming for with these tests, minimum info that is nevertheless clear enough to be able to say roughly what it is you saw, or felt etc. Picture books seem a good place to start.

[redcatherine]

I feel the best proof lies in confirmation by peers.
1.Project to another's home  that you have not been to physically and describe what you see to them . Begin with giving the location of  the computer  the window and the door these are easy then go to more difficult objects . If will be easy to find them too . So have them leave the computer on but walk away from it and see where they go . You might even be able to see a trail of energy . Large objects without light are the next easiest . But small none lit objects may escape detection  .

2. Project to a spot with a group in RTZ and plan a party . Have a group of projectors come to a room where live ones are gathered and try to see who can identify how many are there the gender the shape and location .

3. Go to a realm together in a group merkaba meet each other there locate each other and confirm what you see hear and feel occurring there .

Recall that we may perceive mirror images while projecting so the whole room may become reversed.

Expecting proof like the name of a person or the location of a small inanimate object or the number on a card is beyond the scope of most projectors .

Look instead to easier to proove phenomena like  the floor plan  of a room in RTZ or  the location of physical boundaries  in a realm ie rivers mountains lakes . Look to how many humans are there whether they are alive or in spirit and what their gender is . These are proofs we can provide  .

[ECCO]

hi guys,
first post here but i feel impelled to offer my opinion on the matter surrounding verification of OBEs. i guess i should come up front and say it: i'm agnostic and i'm sceptical about the reality of OBE, astral projection etc. before you get your limbic systems all excited, i just wanna say that i for many years i was completely convinced that AP is true. i'd always had difficulty accepting religion and i so desperately wanted evidence, some firm basis upon which to support the claim that there's life after death. so experiencing OBEs seemed such a fantastic method for verification. but enough sentimental ranting....

i've experienced the vibrations, i've felt the floating, i've flown away, left my body etc. so one might conclude that this is enough "proof" of the reality of AP? well, no it ain't. these experiences can all be very easily encompassed within the concept of lucid dreaming. there is no need to conclude that one has really "left their body" or that these experiences are "real". the pseudo-profound "what's real?" is a favourite of new-agers (and once myself) but lets not play this game.

a lot of people here are complaining that no amount of evidence will convince society at large that OBEs are real, and i can sympathise. but you also have to accept: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. and no, i don't think the strength of your convictions have sufficient persuasion in this respect.

now in terms of the card trick, i like that i really do. i think that you're on the right track in terms of obtaining objective support for your beliefs. if i were adept at AP then i'd make this my primary goal. but now here's my criticism: the chances of you having attained that result were only 1/50. that you "really saw" the card and didn't just guess is of no consequence, the fact remains that the odds are 1/52. other people have suggested using drawings, descriptions etc -- i think this is one of the WORST things to do as you can always be criticised for your criteria re obtaining a hit versus a miss. it needs to be more objective. i know that this is beyond the scope of most people's abilities don't think it's right to lower the criteria for evidence to accommodate people's abilities.

so more convincing experiment i thought up a while ago goes something like this:

have a friend at a different location randomly generate on a computer numbers ranging from 1-1000. numbers are printed and stuck on the wall or whatever. testing involves synchronising your clocks, so every, say 15 mins, a tone sounds signaling to both you and your friend that a new number's been generated. you then have 15 mins to submit ONE response on a tape recorder, and this continues until you've done say 10 trials. responses need to be clear and close, multiple or no responses are considered wrong. lets assume that you just do 5 trials, the odds of you being correct purely by chance are (hoping my maths is right!) 1 in 1000^5, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000. now i dig those odds!  

although the only thing you could claim is that you can access information through (as yet) unknown means, if anyone could pull this experiment off -- or even come close -- i'd be willing to entertain the existence of AP. in the end, all i wanna say is you need to be doubly sceptical, doubly strict about your beliefs, because its so easy to get carried away and jump to unwarranted conclusions. strip away your beliefs, look at them closely and you may find that they rest on shaky foundations.

you may now commence nailing me to the wall  

[stephen~]

Oh no, not another one! lol

Only kidding, but if you had been here the last week or so, you'd get my meaning.

Ok, I'd like to ask of you, seeing as you said that projections can be like lucid dreams. Did you never have a projection where you were sure it was real? Because for me lucid dreams are less conscious excursions than 'astral' projections. I cannot speak for everyone, only myself, but in my experience a projection is different from a lucid dream in that I am aware completely who I am 'really'. In lucid dreams, although conscious, I tend to know I am in some kind of 'play' for want of a better word. Yes I can manipulate it, but it still doesn't feel totally real in the way projections do. I'm not saying it is always so, or that there aren't blurred edges where one experience can seem more like another, but for me the really sharp projections are unmistakeable as 'real', not a dream scenario I find myself taking a part in.

Just to correct your maths a little - there's a 51/1 chance of guessing, not 52/1, a small difference I know, but i feel like being picky today.

How can you be criticised for 'guessing' a bicycle, if the picture is a bicycle, I fail to see the logic in that! With a playing card you know in advance that it is a playing card, so a guess is always going to a 51/1 statistical chance. What are the odds on guessing an object from everyday life? There are literally thousands of things from socks to sherman tanks that you could draw.

Numbers, they are so hard to see, they don't remain stable, they mean nothing! Words and Numbers make the most difficult test possible, so perhaps yes it is harder to guess, but you rule out just about most people from doing the test.

Another question: what drives a nonbeliever to join an astral projection forum, I'm just curious?

I'll go and get my nail gun

Steve

[Selski]

(only joking, only joking...)    

Sarah

[stephen~]

but it (a lucid dream)  still doesn't feel totally real in the way projections do.

I hurried that post a bit due to cooking. What I meant to say is I feel they are both real,  but in some projections there is a clarity that is hard to dismiss. If you are looking for proofs it is easier to accept an experience that doesn't have a dream feel about it, and really shouts at you, in my opinion. But I don't think of any of them (dreams, lucid dreams, rtz and astral projections) as being 'unreal' situations, just differing situations.

I understand that most conclussions you will find here are unacceptable to the sceptic who wants rubber-stamped proof. To me what I have gathered over time is enough for me to say 'it's real', it's the accumulated ballast of experience that keeps my astral boat upright, as it were.

Steve.

[Nostic]

I like the idea of numbers and words. Yeah, it'd be really tricky, but that's a good thing- that's just a personal opinion though; we should all try what we're most comfortable with.
I have to say though, the more I advance, the more I have a kind of "no big deal" attitude towards proof. I can't provide proof yet, but I'm certain it can be done, and I'm certain that I will be able to do it in time, so it's not that big of a deal. The only thing that would really motivate me to show proof is basically to provide a service to others- to show people like ECCO and data that there really is something more to this; something more than their imaginations or dreams. I don't really care about those who are hard-core skeptics though. They can go on not believing into infinity for all I care- they'll wake-up in time; even if it's not for a few millennia. I'm concerned more with the open-minded skeptic.

P.S. cute smilies Sarah. =)

[ECCO]

Another question: what drives a nonbeliever to join an astral projection forum, I'm just curious?

i've been into OBEs/NDEs for many years, even did a monroe institute course on it. i'm pretty confident i've had OBEs, it's happened ~30 times, have found myself floating over my bed etc etc.
LOL i know it sounds lame for me to come to YOUR home but even when i was a believer i always wanted to post about this. my problem is basically this: people here (just as i previously did) are justifying their spiritual claims by pointing to AP as undeniable PROOF, yet are unwilling to submit AP to the rigours of the scientific method. in several of his books robert monroe makes mention how important it is to convert "belief" about life after death into "knowing". but that AP "feels real" isn't enough, because our feelings are susceptible to self-deception etc. the human brain is the most complex technology in the known universe, it seems perfectly feasible for it to generate these phenomena without appealing to the astral plane. so although science is a religion it still can be useful  

i appreciate that numbers are hard, i guess you could do objects but then say you had a diagram of a bicycle, would you then accept the answer motorbike? not to sound facetious but how about someone saying "two circles with spokes connected by several lines" etc etc. by allowing one and only one answer you make your criteria more strict, thus avoiding any ambiguity.

the biggest shortcoming of the new-age movement is it's disinterest in scientific verification. the claim by many is that science and spirituality don't conflict, that they'll fit nicely because they approach the same thing but in different ways. ok cool, well here's one quite reasonable way to do it. people like james randi are pseudo-sceptic because they'll never consider the evidence, but without evidence, it's quite easy to be swept way by belief systems that sound really cool but haven't got an iota of veracity.

[stephen~]

Fair points, ECCO.

True, it is not and cannot be scientifically proven. I don't think there's a disinterest in scientific proof. You know people make a big assumption than none of us question these experiences. Of course we do, but what can you do? There's no easy way to prove it is real. You find that out pretty quickly, so unless you want to spend the next X years on tests you have to move on.

I think you have to be reasonable and look at what people are saying over and over again, just to list some:

I saw through my eyelids
I felt a strange movement
I heard a buzzing
There was a violent vibration
I could move my arms and legs
I could see my hands, they melted in front of me
The room looked right, except for...
I heard voices, very clear
I felt pressure on my chest
I felt my heart racing away like mad
I bounced off the celing
I moved, but it was hard
I floated through the wall
I couldn't go through the wall

I felt something pull on my ankles
I saw myself laying in bed
I rolled out
I flew out

Just some of the things that people say. I can accept it is possible to be deluded, but everyone deluded with the same delusion? If these are delusions why aren't they more erratic? There is such a continuity about people's experiences even when the experience themselves are very different. I'd expect people with delusions to be deluding other things too, like seeing Elvis or that there is someone out to get them. Why only this one quite closely matching delusion for us here?

And you can't say that all read about these things and they happened as a result. I'd never heard of, seen anything written about or heard anyone talk about astral projection when it started happening for me. There was no internet, yet I come along here years later, and people are telling the same story, a story that is very very familiar to me. How can you go on denying something very real is happening in those circumstances?

As for the bike/motorbike, well I think you can use your judgement as to how alike the drawing and your interpretation is. Two wheels and a frame, I'd think you'd allow that was pretty close, if I drew a cat then it would be way off for sure. Two wheels and a frame - proof no, common sense that it is likely to be a drawing of the same thing, yes.

Steve.

[MontanaHayseed]

Maybe a shift in frame of reference will help:  Maybe not suppose so much abou t astral projection and whether Astral realms are "real" (but, ah... what DOES that word mean afterall, eh?)  But rather that we are chunks of stuff that calls it self "counsciousness" that can have experience,  projecting into a physical world.  "Is the physical world real?  Do experiences with other people or objects mean anything there? Or is it all just illusion?  What's the point?"

If there IS any point (and it may well be that there is only a point if we (each individual) DECIDE that there shall be), the same objective probably operates in both realms.  Shorter way to say the same thing:  Astral doings are as meaningful or pointless as physical doings.  In either case, the only thing you ought to be doing is something that you have a heart for, that you feel inspired to do, that in some sense belongs to you.  The particular realm it which it happens to occur seems to be a circumstantial matter of suitability and style choice.

[David Warner]

Greatoutdoors and others

If you get the chance, read up on the original thread of mine and Selski's
card experiment. Some great stuff of Selski's.

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19831
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18497

I've been able to exercise three times the card experiment while projecting and more to come in the future. Also, been tracking this in excel spreadsheet to have the results.  To prove if astral projection is real or not, you really have to experience this yourself.

I do agree that all these feelings, emotions, repeat mechanics, events of the obe definitely something is there.

Tvos

[greatoutdoors]

Selski and VoS,

Yes, this is exactly what we need more of! Of course we are going to fail more than we succeed. This is a field that is only beginning to come into its own, and there is a lot of knowledge yet to be gained. But those are great beginnings and awesome results!

By the way, did anyone see the article in Discover magazine recently about deja vu? They said researchers were able to induce deja vu experiences by stimulating certain parts of the brain (I believe with electrodes). The volunteers reported varying degrees of the "I've been here before" feelings. An interesting point they made was that deja vu feelings tend to become more rare as a person gets older. (For me that would be true -- when I was younger I had it very frequently, but  haven't experienced it for a long time). There have also been articles that OBE experiences can also be induced in a similar manner.

Now, some folks would say the above proves that both phenomena are only perceptions, but I agree with those who say it proves just the opposite. After all, researchers have also shown that they can cause a person to lose sight, speech, and movement by stimulating certain areas of the brain. We generally accept those as "real."

I guess what I'm saying is the field of the paranormal is as real an area for scientific study as any other, and I am intensely curious about how it works!

[David Warner]

Greatoutdoors,

Yes, indeed they are. I was able to do the card experiment again, but failed. Although, the interesting aspect of this experiment was that it rained in the astral and later that day it also rained. I did not have any knowledgement that it was going to rain that day. My wife did say that weekend (2days before the exp) the news called for rain, but not until sat.

Dejavu Experiences - hmmm, that is interesting. Imagine if science was able to tap into the brain and trigger astral projection experiences. Now, that would be something to think about and look at.

Tvos

[greatoutdoors]

Tvos, I think that is just around the corner -- after all, they can induce OBEs..

ECCO, I am perhaps the worlds most definitive agnostic about nearly everything. IMO, if you hear a news broadcast on the evening news, bet money they are lying to you, no matter what they are saying! If a religious leader/preacher/whatever tells you he can save your soul and enrich your life, grab your wallet because that's where it's heading! And if someone tells you they can take pictures of your aura and you believe them; well, P.T. Barnum had a word for such a person!  

However, Stephen is right. OBE is real and telepathy is real, as much so as the pain you feel when you hit your thumb with a hammer. I have left my body while I was wide awake (standing up as a matter of fact). I have had verified telepathic dreams (just not controllable). And, I have hit my hand with a hammer.  

Where you and I agree is in the spiritual interpretation. So far I see no evidence of spiritual involvement in metaphysical abilities, and I question the reality of guides and such. I'm not saying they don't exist -- it's just that my jury is still out on those topics.

Tvos, Selski, Stephen and all, here are my thoughts on proof. IMO it is vitally important that we keep on pushing until we can in fact prove the phenomena we are experiencing. Yes it is hard -- science is fun, not easy! The reason we need proof is not just to satisfy ourselves, or to show someone else it is "real." Rather, it is to help us gain control over what we can do now in order that we can move on to whatever is next! In my mind, the abilities we are exploring are very equivalent to learning to walk, or ride a bike, or ride a horse. Once you can control the basic skills, then you can move on to even better things.

As to the card experiment, if cards aren't desired, we can always fall back on the classic symbols used in parapsychology studies: straight lines, star, square, circle, etc. But personally, I have no problem with the cards; it is just a matter of continuing to practice until we gain the control. And we will, someone will. Who knows, it may wind up being the scientists who are at long last beginning to see what has been right in front of their face for so many years! But wouldn't it be fun to do it first, then get to rub their noses in it just a bit!