-Note: Ignore the ? in the below article-
Going to Sleep
Using electroencephalogram (EEG) machines, which measure levels of brain activity, it has been seen that certain brainwave rhythms correspond to different modes of thought and activity.
Beta rhythms indicate that the mind is in an active state ?this is our brainwave up until we decide to go to sleep. This mind state assesses and makes decisions.
On settling down to sleep, you gradually enter the alpha state. This is characterized by greater receptivity and fluidity in mental functioning. It is in this state that hypnagogic images can appear ?those chaotic, often very vivid images that appear in such a half-conscious condition. It is also the state activated by Brion Gysin's Dreamachine[1] and other similar vision-inducing strobe/flicker devices.
Entering the Sleep State
As your brainwaves slow, together with your physiological functions (slower heart rate & breathing, lower blood pressure), the first stage of sleep you enter is NREM ?Non-Rapid Eye Movement ?sleep. Dreaming does happen in NREM sleep, but flittingly and not in depth. Brainwaves will eventually sink to delta, deep sleep.
The first appearance of the second stage of sleep, REM sleep, is usually after about 90 minutes of sleep. REM sleep gives similar EEG readings to those of subjects who are awake; there is increased brain activity, the blood pressure and heart rate rise, with quicker, shorter breaths. It is during REM sleep that most dreams occur. It is accompanied in men by an erection and in women by increased vaginal blood flow.
REM sleep alternates with NREM sleep at intervals of approximately 90 minutes. You normally spend 20% of your sleep in dreams.
Re-Arranging Sleep
A few good techniques make use of these facts. One is to set your alarm to wake you up either 1.5, 3, 4.5, 6, etc. hours after going to sleep, so that you are woken up during a dream, to aid recall. Another is sleeping longer. About half of dreams occur in the last quarter of the sleeping period ?and lucid dreams are more likely to happen in this final stage. By prolonging sleep, you obviously increase this final stage and increase your dreams and your chances of having lucid dreams.
Many may have had the experience of awaking in the morning from a dream, then drifting off back to sleep, usually dreaming more intensely, sometimes re-entering the same dream. A lot of great dreams are to be had in this way, and it is possible to re-arrange sleep to make use of the processes involved and increase dreaming if you haven't got time to lie around in bed all morning. Simply...
Set you alarm to wake you up about 2-3 hours earlier than usual.
Get up when the alarm goes off! Don't switch it off and have "five minutes" extra in bed. Get up and do all the things you need to do when you normally get up ?breakfast, clearing up, reading mail/newspapers, etc. Stay awake for about 2 hours.
Go back to sleep, and set the alarm for about 2 hours ahead. Dream.
This is actually a good technique even if you have got spare time when you wake up ?I had my first lucid dream by doing this. You can play around with the timings to fit your own schedule. Instead of the usual 90 minutes between going to sleep and the first REM period, going to sleep soon after waking up only involves a few minutes in the transition phase ?so you may get some good results from going back to sleep for as little as half an hour.
Sleep Paralysis
During REM sleep, all muscles are paralyzed, except for respiratory functions and eyes. There may be slight muscle movements or twitches ?these have been shown to correspond with movements made in the dream. Eye movements also correspond with movements made in the dream. Eye movements also correspond to the direction of sight in dreams (using this as a signal was how Stephen LaBerge objectively validated that a person could function in a conscious way in the dream state, dream lucidly).
The fact of sleep paralysis sometimes leads to terrifying episodes when the mind awakens but the body remains paralyzed. Whether the continuation of paralysis and waking is arbitrary and causes the terror, or the terror expressed in the dream causes the continued paralyzed state is a question whose answer will depend on the perspective you approach dreams from. The fact remains that the paralysis itself is quite natural and harmless, even if the consciousness of it is unusual and distressing. If you do awaken and find yourself paralyzed, just try to remember that no harm is being done and it will pass in a couple of minutes. Alternatively, you could utilize this state:
Sleep paralysis is not only nothing to be frightened of, it can be something to be sought after and cultivated. Whenever you experience sleep paralysis you are on the threshold of REM sleep. You have, as it were, one foot in the dream state and one in the waking state. Just step over and you're in the world of lucid dreaming.
Stephen LaBerge states:
"When you awaken from a dream, relax yourself completely ?an easy way of doing this is to progressively tense and relax each muscle group (feet, calves, thighs, etc.). Each time, feel the tension as you breath in, then imagine and feel its release as you breath out. As you fall back to sleep, affirm to yourself that you will re-enter the dream state consciously. Mentally observe body as it enters REM paralysis (remember it only takes the brain a few minutes to enter REM sleep after waking up for a while). Signs of the onset of REM sleep are: strange vibrations in the body, feelings of electrical currents passing through parts of the body, distortions in body image. When you feel the body to be completely paralyzed, attempt to release the dream body from the physical body. Move your dream body out of the bed, roll out of your physical body, try flying... Each person will find their own 'knack'. You are then in the dream, lucid."
So now understanding the phases the Brain goes through during sleep, I now ask the person who claims the experience, how real did this experience feel? What objects did you see in this Astral World that correspond to the Physical World?
its rare to view things that correspond to the physical because will and intent shape the experiance.
I think it's hard to produce scientific evidence when you're dealing with two different planes. Lets face it, if you could provide solid evidence, AP would be taught in schools and collages.
There isn't enough conclusive evidence and I doubt that current technology will allow any further proof.
The proof is in the pudding.
You need to eat your own pudding.
Sarah
How can you have yer pudding when you dont eat yer meat!!!??
Simple, feed the meat to RB's dog.
I thought you would all be more serious about this, but I guess not. Science will one day perhaps have the answers we all seek. For now I just have my opinion and so far evidence suggests that this experience is all in the mind.
Indeed Beyonder, Science one day will.
Well, there is indeed more evidence which speaks for the brain than against it, but that doesn't completely disprove OBEs as experiences outside the body, which means it remains a believe thing.
I've come to the conclusion it doesn't really matter anyway if it's a mind thing or not. The experiences are unique in both cases, and that's what counts, imo.
Just don't let these experiences dictate your life. Many cults are created this way.
quote:
Originally posted by Selski
The proof is in the pudding.
You need to eat your own pudding.
Sarah
That was refreshingly meaningful, and funny [:D]
But I think one of Beavis' more recent posts has well developed into this subject, and I think a lot of "answers" can be found there.
quote:
I thought you would all be more serious about this, but I guess not. Science will one day perhaps have the answers we all seek. For now I just have my opinion and so far evidence suggests that this experience is all in the mind.
Which evidence? Your personal experience or what someone else has reported?
And what do you mean by science? There are many different meanings for different people. I would suggest you earnestly learn more about the very large meaning of science in modern society before putting blind faith in it.
Sure, the scientific method is useful for finding out things in the physical world. That doesn't mean that it is the looking glass that any may peer through and see the untainted Truth behind all facets of the Universe.
I used to put more belief in science than anything else, but now I understand it a little bit better.
quote:
Originally posted by mactombs
quote:
I thought you would all be more serious about this, but I guess not. Science will one day perhaps have the answers we all seek. For now I just have my opinion and so far evidence suggests that this experience is all in the mind.
Which evidence? Your personal experience or what someone else has reported?
And what do you mean by science? There are many different meanings for different people. I would suggest you earnestly learn more about the very large meaning of science in modern society before putting blind faith in it.
Sure, the scientific method is useful for finding out things in the physical world. That doesn't mean that it is the looking glass that any may peer through and see the untainted Truth behind all facets of the Universe.
I used to put more belief in science than anything else, but now I understand it a little bit better.
LOL, faith. Please don't bore me with such excuses. I try never to use the word belief when speaking about what I understand to be true. To myself, an Empirical Rationalist, the word belief implies acceptance without evidence (sometimes in spite of evidence to the contrary). The word belief is often equated with the word faith. With this definition, I can confidently say that I have no beliefs. I have understandings about things, based upon the information I have. I do not accept things for which there is no evidence, or in cases where the evidence is insufficient. In such cases, my acceptance of a claim is withheld. I maintain a very high standard of evidence. In cases of extraordinary or unusual claims, such as alien abductions, ESP, and biblical miracles, the amount and quality of evidence must be higher than when considering more mundane topics.
People of faith should understand something about the way scientifically-minded people come to accept an idea as true. We accept things as true, based not on an automatic assumption of truth, but after careful consideration of all evidence, weighing all sides of an issue, after skeptical criticism and asking a lot of questions of all positions. This acceptance is a tentative acceptance, not a religious belief. Like a fickle spouse that is ready to sign the divorce papers at the first sign of imperfection, the relationship between scientific thinking and the acceptance of ideas is not a faithful relationship.
Maybe a bit offtopic, but:
Belief/Faith is a form of self-deception based on the lack of knowledge and/or on ignorance.
I often see this phrase on pages with stuff related to the occult and paranormal:
"Everyone can do it. But you need to belief!"
BS. You don't need "belief" to do anything, so don't bother with it. If something is real, then it will work (or "be there") without belief. Period.
quote:
LOL, faith. Please don't bore me with such excuses.
Ah yes, the tone of the intellectual so certain of his own mental prowess that those of differing views or diction are beneath his contempt.
quote:
I try never to use the word belief when speaking about what I understand to be true.
What you understand to be true after it has passed through your personal filter - in this case, a filter conforming to the "Empirical Rationalist" blueprint.
quote:
In cases of extraordinary or unusual claims, such as alien abductions, ESP, and biblical miracles, the amount and quality of evidence must be higher than when considering more mundane topics.
Yes, Sagan's "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". Sounds sensible enough.
quote:
People of faith should understand something about the way scientifically-minded people come to accept an idea as true.
I'm already well aware of how scientifically-minded people come to accept an idea as "true" (although there never really can be absolute certainty from this mindset). After all, I used to adopt this dogma as my own.
quote:
We accept things as true, based not on an automatic assumption of truth, but after careful consideration of all evidence, weighing all sides of an issue, after skeptical criticism and asking a lot of questions of all positions.
You mean you
ideally do this. This, unfortunately, is rarely the case.
quote:
the relationship between scientific thinking and the acceptance of ideas is not a faithful relationship.
Again, ideally, but rarely the case.
Don't get me wrong, science is great (I love it), it's very useful, but it's also extraordinarily difficult for humans to apply properly. Even then, no human is capable of interpreting the results without some level of bias.
But to ask proof be handed to you about things like OBEs? Consider this from Michael Shermer (Editor of the
Skeptic magazine):
quote:
Mystical "truths," by their nature, must be solely personal, and they can have no possible external validation.
This also brings up another issue I find troubling: the constant need for external validation, this obsession with the fantasy of pure objectivity. For us, there can be no such thing.
You want evidence for OBEs? Good. You doubt they are real? Good. It's better you provide yourself with understanding through your own personal experience anyway - far more useful than asking someone who has experienced it to provide you with evidence of the mystical using rules designed to test the material.
Hmmmmm....I wonder if the bumble bee flies because it believes it can...or if it believes it can fly because it does.
Just thinking out loud.
Giselle
quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Hmmmmm....I wonder if the bumble bee flies because it believes it can...or if it believes it can fly because it does.
Just thinking out loud.
Giselle
Does a Dog walk because it believes it can or does it believe it can walk because it does? That is the dumbest question I have ever heard of. It is a natural instinct. No thought process involved.
Giselle Said:
"I wonder if the bumble bee flies because it believes it can...or if it believes it can fly because it does."
Well Giselle I wonder if a frog had wings would it bump its a** every timed it hopped? If a worm had a machine gun do you think birds would F***with it? I say that I agree with Beyonder[^].
as an "empirical rationalist" how about you shut the h*** up whining, and do it yourself? we all do astral projection already, so either get some experiance or shut your hole and listen.
Beyonder, I used this analogy based on the well-known folklore about the bumble bee not being able to fly. It was merely an attempt at a little humor. I realize that bumble bees actually can fly. Now I'm wondering if maybe you are too young to have heard the story of the bumble bee. So I'm posting a synopsis for anyone who has not heard this often quoted piece of unscientific trivia:
Flight of the Bumblebee
"Like the bumblebee, they said it could never fly."
This statement appears in a recent issue of Popular Science, starting off an article about drag racing.
Indeed, the venerable line about scientists having proved that a bumblebee can't fly appears regularly in magazine and newspaper stories. It's also the kind of item that's bound to come up in a cocktail party conversation when the subject turns to science or technology.
Often, the statement is made in a distinctly disparaging tone aimed at putting down those know-it-all scientists and engineers who are so smart yet can't manage to understand something that's apparent to everyone else.
Obviously, bumblebees can fly. On the average, a bumblebee travels at a rate of 3 meters per second, beating its wings 130 times per second. Quite respectable for the insect world.
So, how did this business of proving that a bumblebee can't fly originate? Who started the story?
It apparently first surfaced in Germany in the 1930s, and the story was about a prominent Swiss aerodynamicist. One evening at dinner, the researcher happened to be talking to a biologist, who asked about the flight of bees. To answer the biologist's query, the Swiss engineer did a quick "back-of-the-napkin" calculation.
To keep things simple, he assumed a rigid, smooth wing, estimated the bee's weight and wing area, and calculated the lift generated by the wing. Not surprisingly, there was insufficient lift. That was about all he could do at a dinner party. The detailed calculations had to wait.
To the biologist, however, the aerodynamicist's initial failure was sufficient evidence of the superiority of nature to mere engineering. The story spread, told from the biologist's point of view, and it wasn't long before it started to appear in magazine and newspaper articles.
Unfortunately, the wrong lesson emerged from the story. The real issue is not that scientists are wrong but that there's a crucial difference between a thing and a mathematical model of the thing.
The distinction between mathematics and the application of mathematics often isn't made as clearly as it ought to be. In the mathematics classroom, it's important to distinguish between getting the mathematics right and getting the problem right. It's quite possible, for instance, to calculate correctly the area of a rectangular piece of property just by multiplying the length times the width. Yet one can get the "wrong answer" because the measurements of the length and width were inaccurate or there was some ambiguity about the boundaries.
The word problems typically found in textbooks also serve as rudimentary models of reality. Their applicability, however, depends on the validity of the assumptions that underlie the mathematics.
So no one "proved" that a bumblebee can't fly. What was shown was that a certain simple mathematical model wasn't adequate or appropriate for describing the flight of a bumblebee. Insect flight and wing movements can be quite complicated. Wings aren't rigid. They bend and twist. Stroke angles change.
Yet the myth persists that science says a bumblebee can't fly. This tale has taken on a life of its own as a piece of "urban folklore" on the Internet, passed on from one browser to another.
Copyright © 1997 by Ivars Peterson.
_____
Life is too short to take it too seriously. (Also not scientific)
Giselle
quote:
Originally posted by BurningAngel
as an "empirical rationalist" how about you shut the h*** up whining, and do it yourself? we all do astral projection already, so either get some experiance or shut your hole and listen.
What evidence do you have of such an event? NONE! Why does it happen, is it because you say it does or what? You fail to provide evidence. You are just one of those religious nuts that need to be silenced. He who makes the claim must also provide evidence.
hey beyonder, your sig is a lil to long dont you think?
quote:
Originally posted by Beyonder
What evidence do you have of such an event?
Beyonder, OBEs are real, even Stephen LaBerge admits that. The "problem" is, there is NO evidence that the experience takes place outside the body.
If you read the experiences posted on this forum, you will see that most (if not all) of them can be explained as a form of WILDs or regular LDs, which is nothing paranormal.
Beyonder,
i'm just wondering how well your 'empirical rationalism' deals with new areas of science such as quantum physics and more specifically 'string theory' (www.mkaku.org)? string theory attempts to summarize all physical reality with an equation which is about one inch long. the idea of finding such an equation goes back to einstein, who was unsuccessful. string theory is currently the only working solution to the famous 'cat problem' (also known as 'many worlds' theory). although string theory has nothing to do with the out of body experience and in no way validates it, its multi-dimensional approach to the universe certainly makes ideas about OOBE seem more approachable.
it might also be helpful if you define what exactly you are disputing about the out of body experience? are you disputing whether people have such experiences, or the meaning that people assign them? i wouldn't think there could be too much doubt that people have these experiences, even susan blackmore well known skeptic accepts that they happen (she has induced them herself). she simply disputes that a person is actually 'leaving' their body in any useful sense. i'd like to know what you think the function of such an experience could be, since you obviously disagree with the meaning people have assigned to the experience on this board. surely there must be a reasonable explanation for this experience which does involve some kind of 'random neurons firing' theory. i'm yet to experience the human body doing anything truly 'random' and think this is a weak explanation.
in my own research i've not found anything truly concrete as evidence for the out of body experience. there are a few papers in academia which come close, yielding results of interest (just not the results they were looking for). thanks to string theory and those involved in high level physics one day there might be an expansion of our currently limited scientific method which is able to explain or account for the out of body experience.
Beyonder, I have come accross nuts like you before, and in fact have been one myself. You'll get over it eventually.
One thing I notice about your signature is the massive amounts of references to the bible. Are you confusing metaphysics with organised religion?
quote:
Originally posted by manuel
hey beyonder, your sig is a lil to long dont you think?
Yeah it is, I am thinking of slimming it down...
quote:
Originally posted by epoq
Beyonder,
i'm just wondering how well your 'empirical rationalism' deals with new areas of science such as quantum physics and more specifically 'string theory' (www.mkaku.org)?.......
I agree with the string theory. I prefer the theory of Quantum Consciousness myself.
http://home.infionline.net/~jforberg/index.html
I have no doubt OBE's or whatever you people call them happen. The question is whether it happens inside or outside the mind. The other question is when. When did it happen? The other problem I have is the religious nuts in this world that want to connect Christ all mighty to this experience. It always seems whenever science discovers something new; the church is there to stick something in.
quote:
Originally posted by Veccolo
quote:
Originally posted by Beyonder
What evidence do you have of such an event?
Beyonder, OBEs are real, even Stephen LaBerge admits that. The "problem" is, there is NO evidence that the experience takes place outside the body.
If you read the experiences posted on this forum, you will see that most (if not all) of them can be explained as a form of WILDs or regular LDs, which is nothing paranormal.
Interesting....
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
Beyonder, I have come accross nuts like you before, and in fact have been one myself. You'll get over it eventually.
One thing I notice about your signature is the massive amounts of references to the bible. Are you confusing metaphysics with organised religion?
I am not a nut, but people who have an invisible means of support are. LOL. Sometimes I just kill myself. LOL LOL LOL LOL.....
Beyonder- you bring up several valid points; but, if you wish to start an actual conversation here that doesn't dissociate into inane ramblings about opinion and asinine interjection, you must not invite it through open beligerence. That is a virtual "kick me" sign.
As to your statements, they have weight, and should not be dismissed without due evidence to the contrary. I personally believe in OBE's, but I am still debating their nature myself.
You embrace Empiricism- that is honorable- although Descartes himself spoke volumes about how the senses can decieve us, as every sensory input is subjective, leaving us bereft of any concrete basis on which to place objectivity, as fact (reality) cannot be fully understood through hearsay (the senses).
To truly learn, we must step beyond the shores of "proven" fact, with a tentative exploratory attitude. Of course we shouldn't believe everything we hear, but we shouldn't dismiss anything either, until there is irrefutable evidence to the contrary.
Several things about OBE would lead me to doubt their metaphysical nature, but I have not obliterated the notion that they could actually be transcendental: they only seem to occur with the increased melatonin levels associated with the latter sleep cycle, and only then when we force the body into the normal sleep patterns; they consist of dream-like experiences similar to those recalled from REM cycles, and they are sometimes completely non-lucid; the brain produces signals in the time of REM which could be responsible for OBEs.
IN SPITE OF ALL OF THIS NEGATIVE EVIDENCE, THERE STILL REMAIN SHAKY ANOMOLIES.
Several mystics and adepts at OBE have obtained information that they could not have obtained by any known bodily faculty, such as an inaccessible number, or, as in the case of the U.S. government's program codenamed "Stargate", information about remote locations later confirmed accurate, which statistics would oppose being guessed. Others have obtained statements from "dead" persons whose confirmation could ony be gained from other living individuals not initially involved in the situation, such as a spouse's unique mannerisms which only the other could tell.
I hope this helps- I feel for you, beyonder, I really do.
Thank you,
Stillwater
The statement in your signature, Beyonder, ""No one knows and no one will ever be certain," is a statement of faith. It relies on the "invisible crutch" of nebulous epistemology and astonishingly empty assumptions about the future.
You might recognize it as Agnosticism, which is just as much a belief system as Atheism, "New Age"-isms, Unitarianism, Buddhism, Christianity, etc. Just as Neo-Thomist Catholics can assert that all Truth is knowable, you can assert that it isn't on the same grounds.
Lots of good stuff in this thread - just want to thank everyone.
quote:
Originally posted by Phong
The statement in your signature, Beyonder, ""No one knows and no one will ever be certain," is a statement of faith. It relies on the "invisible crutch" of nebulous epistemology and astonishingly empty assumptions about the future.
You might recognize it as Agnosticism, which is just as much a belief system as Atheism, "New Age"-isms, Unitarianism, Buddhism, Christianity, etc. Just as Neo-Thomist Catholics can assert that all Truth is knowable, you can assert that it isn't on the same grounds.
Lots of good stuff in this thread - just want to thank everyone.
You must be one of those people who think everyone believes in something and everyone has faith. Bull.... I am an Atheist. ATHEISM IS NOT A RELIGION OR A FAITH, but the happy freedom from them. Declaring it to be otherwise, sadly, will not make it so.
If atheism is religion, "albino" is a suntan.
quote:
What evidence do you have of such an event? NONE! Why does it happen, is it because you say it does or what? You fail to provide evidence. You are just one of those religious nuts that need to be silenced. He who makes the claim must also provide evidence.
im not religious at all you moron.
http://english.ytmnd.com/
i write AI for a video game company and most likely know more about science than you so shut your hole. Iv DONE astral projection and i know ALL the theories behind it....iv personally spoken with micheal persinger and steven leberge...there is nothing your saying that we have not heard before....so why do you even bother?
As far as evidence for astral projection yes i do have evidence for it. iv personally validated it in my own personal experiments. Im willing to wager that from the way you sound you dont know ANYTHING about science or neurology. do you even understand the aspects of the brain that play a role in the experiance? Iv heard ALL the theories from the scientific community and the spiritual community, and NEITHER side has a good one. either deal with that or take a hike, no one cares.
Now is where I quote the American Heritage Dictionary. Atheism is "Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. The doctrine that there is no God or gods." Note the words "doctrine" and "disbelief" (as "disbelief" is the belief of that which is not)
If you want to claim that you have no religion, and are bereft of a belief system, don't say you're Atheist - if you do you give them a bad name. Atheism is a firm declaration that God does not exist, not indifference. Many of them take pride in their ability to defend this belief. If you neither believe nor disbelieve in God, claiming that you don't know (and can't know), you're not Atheistic - you're Agnostic, which is the declaration that you can't know.
If you have no belief system, as you claim, why are you trying to defend one? Shouldn't you just be sitting quietly, listening, and gathering empirical evidence (which would be a wise and noble thing to do)?
this is going nowhere people, I wouldn't waste your energy. People like Beyonder are simply encouraged by argument.
Quote from Bystander
"If atheism is religion, "albino" is a suntan."
Love it! [:D]
Sarah
ok the spin stops here.....when you boil religion down what you have is "worldview". atheism IS a "worldview" just like "religion" is a "worldview". Both make assertions...if neither were making assertions they wouldnt exist....give me a break. Im an atheist and even i know that. I hate being an atheist because most atheists are stupid anti-war hippies. A major tenent of atheism should infact include killing hippies.
- i think critical thinking has officially died.
I think i can understand Beyonder. It is boring when you ask for proofs but people will only give answers like "If you believe that it´s real it is real", etc,etc. This are vague answers that do not answer in the pretended manner.
When i seek for answers i like to see rea ans solid answers. For example, at a few time ago when i was doing what Beyonder it is doing now (searching for evidences of AP), people gabe me nice answers: they told me about proofs that they had in their own experiences (i must trust them) and that it´s enough.
I will not ask for scientific evidences because they just care in about proof that obes just happens in our minds, that thei are illusions. Well, since i know that scientist only care about that i start searching for proofs on the experiences of people in AP forum. They reported me nice proofs that shows that AP are more than just mere hallucination.
Now i am learning obe to study it by myself. In the worst case, i will discover that Obes are just very lucid dreams and that they are funny. In the other hand i can find that there islife after death and that it is possible to get out of our bodys! I will not become insane for doing it, neither i wil get a disease of some kind. So, even if they are not real, i only have positive things to learn with obes.
quote:
I am not a nut, but people who have an invisible means of support are. LOL. Sometimes I just kill myself. LOL LOL LOL LOL.....
Nice way of avoiding the question though, mr-I-Have-Proof-That-Metaphysics-Do-Not-Exist LOL LOL LOL LOL.....
This makes me a hippocrite, having just advocated ignoring you - a frustrated comment said in a moment of weakness (I remember having a very similar argument to this one long ago, and I couldn't be bothered participating at first), but you are making an unjustified sweeping generalisation about what it means to be spiritual. I'm not asking you to believe in what we do here, but I do think someone needs to teach you some kind of respect for human beings, even if you don't agree with their point of view.
Unfortunately your attitude of treating a group of people who have generally
similar interests as if they are a single homogenous entity is destructive and dangerous. Some of us may be living in a fantasy, believing in all sorts of crap that gets sloshed around the net these days, others are down to earth regular people trying to find out what spirituality is all about. I don't think any of us would ever do anything to harm another living being, and in fact most of us would not fight back if you were to take a gun and start executing us, because it is against our nature to hurt others.
In any paradigm there are always extremes. You will find that extremists are generally the minority. Spirituality has its extremists, but they are usually individuals who have used their religion or belief to justify antisocial behavior and psychopathy. This trend is also true for the paradigm of science. Most scientists are capable of comprehending (not necessarily believing in) things that may exist but which haven't yet been proven to exist. That, in my opinion, is the rational way to behave, as it gives science room to accept new logic, new ideas, test new hypothesis, and move forward. Some scientists, like you, the extremists, generally don't have the vision to drive science forwards, and typically spend your lives preaching science (the type you grew up believing in) in classrooms and lecture theatres, or having these saddening, egotistical arguments with people you don't even know in an attempt to justify your self worth by mocking others. You will justify that you are trying to save us from wasting our precious hours with a "dogma" which is as yet unproven. I'm not saying you're closed minded. You are just selfish, in that you ask others to prove their position to you, rather than actually getting off your (presumably) lazy arse and finding out for yourself.
When you study Physics, you don't go into the lab and start grilling the lecturer to justify his belief in vector motion... you actually do the experiments, or watch someone else do it, to find out for yourself. You can read all the books and get a theoretical knowledge, but not really understand until you experience it in practice.
Unproven doesn't equate to UnprovableJust because we are studying spirituality doesn't mean we've abandoned science, but you seem to think the two are mutually exclusive. The only difference between a physics lab and the spiritual lab is that spiritual experiments (apparently) aren't able to show any external evidence to others. At least I haven't seen any compelling research with results to that effect, however there is some suggestive research if you can be bothered looking for it. Anyway, there are still experiments out there if you can be bothered trying them, the exercises take minutes to do, and they won't turn you into a brainwashed zombie. You can accept or reject whatever you experience. We won't judge you.
Personally, spirituality is a hypothesis. Its unproven, yet circumstantial evidence from personal experiments as well as the large amount of testimony from people who claim to have witnessed proof has encouraged me to at least try out some more of the experiments. I haven't devoted my life to it, it hasn't destroyed my rational mind, and it definately doesn't make me want to crash a building into an airoplane(sic), or whatever.
You ask for evidence, but in the process of doing so you have ignored the testimony of some experienced AP'ers, and you refuse to undertake the experiments for yourself. Maybe you're scared you'll become a raving lunatic like us astral-zombies!!!
Join us....
Jooin uss....
he he he
Anyhow take it easy, take care, and good luck to you! (I eagerly await your total ignorance of this post, or your disecting it into one sentence quotes, or your witty comeback that trys to make fun of some aspect of myself. If I actually get a reasonable reply I will be happily surprised :) )
Kazbadan,
quote:
I will not ask for scientific evidences because they just care in about proof that obes just happens in our minds, that thei are illusions. Well, since i know that scientist only care about that [...]
So, you _know_ that _every_ scientist wants to disprove obes? Where did you get that knowledge from? In fact, many people who _believe_ in experiences outside the body are close-minded about scientific facts. They say scientific proofs are irrelevant, which they're not.
Personally I think it's sad. There _might_ be people who can do this, yet they refuse to prove it. That's just as dumb as the "rule" from magick to not "show off" your skills, or the "rule" in martial arts to never use your "deadly" skills you've exercised all the time.
If they did prove it to mainstream science, they'd reach far more people this way.
[conspiracy mode]
Wait, I forgot ... the gouvernment will not allow that. That changes everything of course.
[/conspiracy mode]
[...]
quote:
Now i am learning obe to study it by myself. In the worst case, i will discover that Obes are just very lucid dreams and that they are funny. In the other hand i can find that there islife after death and that it is possible to get out of our bodys! I will not become insane for doing it, neither i wil get a disease of some kind. So, even if they are not real, i only have positive things to learn with obes.
Very true, especially the last sentence. I completely agree.
Veccolo, i said that about scientists because when i see, for example, scientists explaining ufos, they will always say "Oh, it´s nothing special, blablabla", etc, even if it was a really strange ufo.
I mean, all the time that e see a scientist in TV, speaking about paranormal stuff, they will act in a manner that seems that hey want insult and consider abnormal all the people that believes in paranormal.
I think i can count by the fingers of my hand the scientists that i know (portuguese) that dont act like that, instead accepting paranormal as a possibilitie to studie.
Beyonder, why did you come here, on this forum, if you just think all this is bullsh*t...?
Did you come here to enlighten us all with your wisdom?
I thought the best place to start learning about Astral Travel was to ask the people who experience it. I am very skeptical about many things. So for those who make the claim to have such an experience, I ask what evidence is there to support such an experience?
Beyonder, OBEs are real, even Stephen LaBerge admits that. The "problem" is, there is NO evidence that the experience takes place outside the body.
If you read the experiences posted on this forum, you will see that most (if not all) of them can be explained as a form of WILDs or regular LDs, which is nothing paranormal.
What are WILD's or LD's? Does it imply that OBE's are not real?
QuoteYou are just one of those religious nuts that need to be silenced
I think this would go against free speech.
Quote from: Beyonder
I have no doubt OBE's or whatever you people call them happen. The question is whether it happens inside or outside the mind. The other question is when. When did it happen? The other problem I have is the religious nuts in this world that want to connect Christ all mighty to this experience. It always seems whenever science discovers something new; the church is there to stick something in.
lol so typical of clueless, trollish, athiest science worshippers. Always thinking small. Of course "it" happens in the brain, you butthead. But who the hell is one to say that what this "it", the mechanical processes that are going on in the brain, does not have associated external information (higher dimensions/spirit realms)? The processes in the brain does not prove that they are the Ultimate cause of OBE. Saying "it" is the cause, is just wishfull thinking by scientists who's job is to find answers, and the morons that follow them. Science doesn't know everything, and when they can't come up with the true answers they just make B.S. up. Deep down inside they are just going "just leave me alone so that I can get back to my real work of finding fossils and collect my funded/paid paycheck."
Quote from: DonalBeyonder, OBEs are real, even Stephen LaBerge admits that. The "problem" is, there is NO evidence that the experience takes place outside the body.
If you read the experiences posted on this forum, you will see that most (if not all) of them can be explained as a form of WILDs or regular LDs, which is nothing paranormal.
What are WILD's or LD's? Does it imply that OBE's are not real?
Hes basically saying that they are not paranormal because they are dreams with different levels of awareness.
which is like saying all paranormal experiences can be explained as a form of "ghosts". nothing paranormal there right :roll:
Ap Friends,
The problem that I see is that science is trying to prove oobe's if there are real or not. They can run all the tests, eeg, video tape, measure blood flow, heart rate etc... and narrow it down to lucid dreaming. But what science can't do is give a strong definitive answer why people are able validate these experiences. Ingo Swann is a remarkable remote viewer and projectionist that was able to leave the body and validate targets in other rooms. -- what more proof does science need?
The biggest question is this - Near Death Experiences. People who've validated their experience while their body was 100% dead. Giving concrete solid evidence of their testimonies during a surgery, or the nde accident. Science can't explain this or give a hard core answer.
I believe that consciousness does filter through our physical bodies and are able to tap into the higher awareness through oobe.
something is deffinitely there!
Tvos
Science is restricted to trying to explain this physical dimension ... the best it can do with OBEs is describe what is happening to the physical body. Science is blind to the mystical. It is a great tool, and language, to describe the fabric of this reality, but beyond that ...
You can trust science to tell you how a car works or why water evaporates, but you can't trust it in any part of anything philosophical, metaphysical. Science is grounded. Anyone who tries to push it as the right and only truth to how to interpret everything that is, is pompous and far more religious that he would ever admit to - not to mention utterly blind.
Hi Beyonder and the rest of people, as some of you already know, in a Spanish Science forum we have developed a method to try to verify if these experiences are real or imaginary, and we believe this method is a valid one in order to obtain that verification.
In Spain we have recently started to work with an experienced projector who believes he can read them... at least he is going to give it a try. After many delays due to different circumstances external to the experiment itself, we are now (16-dic-05) almost ready to start doing some serious testing. So, we'll see how things unfold in the months to come.
We encourage all of you to do similar tests, either all by yourselves at home, or with the help of your friends or family members. And if anybody feels ready enough to read the correct words of the Agnostic Method, we will be glad to engage into further talks with you in order to do an experiment in a controlled environment (lab, etc.)... and if everything goes well, we would love to be able to publish it in a scientific journal.
You'll find lots more information about this experiment in the following links:
- Whats Your Proof?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21011
- Method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20907
The following one is somewhat related to the above and it is also interesting:
- Can you move a physical object from the astral plane?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21202
Un saludo, qbeac.
P.S. This is the same information in the original Spanish Science forum:
- Post #301 y #302. pag. 31. Instrucciones del Método Agnostic de verificación astral.
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=38484#post38484
I think you guys are forgetting that science isnt some institution but rather a way of thinking. it will get around to OBEs eventually but until then there are two types of people in the world. those who believe in them and those who dont. the ones who believe are trying with all their might to spread their belief while the ones that arent are willing to go through hell to disprove it.
Its not a battle of facts, nothing ever is. its a battle of beliefs.
sci·ence
n.
1a. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
1b. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
1c. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
No, science isn't supposed to be a way of thinking. I hope qbeac has lots of success, I even wish I could contribute by experimenting, but my feeling is ... the best science will ever manage is to show that a person in a certain state of relaxation has a certain likelihood of correctly guessing remote information.
I'm more interested in definition 2 above - inducing an OBE down to a science. :wink:
its all semantical nonsense. science is a way of doing things, a way of thinking. anyone will tell you that.
OBEs are never going to be proved. There is no such thing as "proof". You either believe or you dont. You can get your hopes up that some magical device will come out or some magical study will be performed but its never going to happen. There will always be people who believe OBEs are "fake" just like there will always be people who believe in god.
Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.
-Carl Sagan
Quote from: Ben KOBEs are never going to be proved.
That's a
massive statement. Do you want a bet? I bet you the equivalent of '5 physical years of sheer boredom' that one day OBEs are proved.
Granted, we may both no longer be of this physical world, but if we remember this bet, we'll find each other easily and pay our dues.
Are you game? :wink:
Sarah
definitly game ;)
keep in mind the difference between "accepted" and "proved". God has never been "proved".
There IS no such thing as "objective fact". only beliefs. and i will bet you my LIFE that there will never be a time when every human believes OBEs are not somehow "fake". There will ALWAYS be beliefs that contradict the OBE experience, no matter how foolish those beliefs may be. I do believe, however that quite soon the whole notion of "astral" travel and other areas of consciousness will become more accepted.
Hell, we can "prove" obes right now. There are NUMEROUS studies and reports on people doing the playing card trick and similar things. Its not about "proof" its about belief.
edit- this topic reminds me of a post by frank i read a while ago. il try to find it.
edit- here it is:
Hi:
As I've said a number of times, one of the most frustrating things about this whole thing, for me, is I cannot actually prove any of it to any semblance of a scientific standard.
I am hoping that between all interested parties we can at least bring this topic into the 21st century, by clearing away this Dark Age legacy that forever seems to haunt this topic. Plus, we can at least get something down on paper, written in a way that makes logical sense. Given that this is the 21st century and all that.
Also, I am hoping that in a couple of years we will have a number of people here who have steadily worked through all the various stages and pitfalls to the extent where we will be able to come to some kind of common consensus as regards our experiences. Perhaps by then we will be able to report some kind of actual meeting within Primary Focus 3 of consciousness and develop some kind of objective proof of that fact. Perhaps not to the standard required of science in a strict sense, but more in an objectively held group-consensus sense.
Personally, I believe the wider reality will never actually be proved. As I've said before, for example, that unless you are some kind of engineering scientist no-one ever actually "proved" the existence of electricity before you used it. People simply switch on a light or plug the kettle in. It's there simply to use as you see fit. I think that is how knowledge of the Wider Reality will start to become. The more people have these experiences then the more people will start to accept them, and so the more people who will have them, and so on.
To my mind, it all boils down to getting this topic wrapped up in an air of public acceptability. People generally still think it's all very freaky and mystical, or on the other side of the coin they think it's dangerous. But the more we try to explain it in a sane and sensible fashion, then the more people will come to accept it, and the more they will want to give it a try.
Yours,
Frank
Quote from: Ben Kdefinitly game ;)
Cool.
Frank or no Frank, you've lost. Because you said "OBEs are never going to be proved". And that was the bet you agreed to.
Well, it doesn't specify
when they are going to be/not going to be proved, therefore if we go on for infinity, you never win your side of the bet, because there's always the possibility that they will be proved at some point.
Only I can win this bet. When you find me in the mass of realities we would be living in, say a squillion years from now, and say, "
Hey Selski, you owe me that bet we had during that strange existence on the planet called earth, because OBEs still haven't been proved."
And I'll say, "
Well Ben K, there's still another squillion years to go at least, so sit back and keep an eye on them scientists - they'll get there eventually..."
:grin:
Sarah
Hi Ben K and rest of participants,
In order to obtain scientific proof of these experiences we need four "ifs":
1) "If" there are some experienced projectors who are willing to collaborate with scientist in laboratory experiments according to all the control and security measures of the Scientific Method, and...
2) "If" there is a strong enough connection between the astral plane and the physical plane (not too much distortion, maybe a moderate distortion but not a high one), as to allow those experienced projectors to read two words correctly, and ...
3) "If" those positive results can be published in a prestigious scientific journal (Ex: Science, Nature, The Lancet, etc.). This point is VERY important, it will make the big difference, and ...
4) "If" the same experiment could be replicated by several other independent scientists...
... if thoses four "ifs" happen, "then" we will be able to obtain scientific proof for all humanity about the reality of these experiences.
We have started that process in Spain with an experienced projector. We are about to start doing some serious tests, and our intention is to go for it till the end of the road. The more experienced projectors who participate in this process, the sooner we will be able to obtain that proof for all humanity.
Similar things have happened through out the history of human kind. For instance, during many centuries (even thousands of years), humanity thought the Earth was the centre of the Universe, until Galileo came along with a small and rudimentary telescope and saw for the very first time a few small satellites (I think Jupiter's satellites) that did not circle the Earth... he told about it, encountered a lot of opposition based on the scientific paradigm that most people believed at the time, went through all the above process (the four "ifs" of his time), and finally his observations became "the new paradigm." A paradigm shift is not only possible, it is necessary.
Paradigm change, scientific revolution (wikipedia):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
So, it is going to be difficult, but it is NOT impossible. All we need is a lot of people working together towards one goal: to improve the future of humanity, to work together for a better future for every human being.
We encourage all of you to think about it and to help out, because it is worth the effort.
We have extensively talked about this issue at links:
- Whats Your Proof?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21011
- Post #8, pag. 8. Comprehensive and complete explanation of the Agnostic Method:
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=180207#180207
- Method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20907
- Can you move a physical object from the astral plane?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21202
Un saludo, qbeac.
P.D. By the way, one of our biggest doubts right now is if it is possible to obtain a good enough connection between the astral and the physical planes, without too much distortion, so that the two words can be read correctly... I believe that's what you call the RTZ (Real Time Zone)...
Do you think it is possible to obtain that good connection? Is there any thing you could do or should do to improve that connection? Thanks.
QuoteScience is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.
-Carl Sagan
A religious quote from a religious man. Science is a
method. Once it becomes a way of thinking, of living, it becomes a religion.
It is true, there is no such thing as objective proof, just acceptance by academia for what goes in the textbooks as being reality. Since proof isn't possible in the absolute sense, what we, normal people, term as "proof" means something different. Ben K demands proof to be something that isn't possible, knows it isn't possible, and therefore states that everything is a matter of belief (which is true). It's not proved unless everyone believes it, as far as Ben K is concerned.
As far as the card experiment, all it shows is that a person can guess what a set of cards will be against some probability. It does not prove
how the person does this, and science probably never will. Science is incapable of proving the wider reality, it is
grounded to this one. The best it can do is say, this person can do what he claims (as long as what he claims to do has some relation to this reality), but there is no evidence whatsoever for how he does it.
Simply, OBEs never will be proved, only accepted (or not) by what evidence can be shown.
Quote from: SelskiQuote from: Ben Kdefinitly game ;)
Cool.
Frank or no Frank, you've lost. Because you said "OBEs are never going to be proved". And that was the bet you agreed to.
Well, it doesn't specify when they are going to be/not going to be proved, therefore if we go on for infinity, you never win your side of the bet, because there's always the possibility that they will be proved at some point.
Only I can win this bet. When you find me in the mass of realities we would be living in, say a squillion years from now, and say, "Hey Selski, you owe me that bet we had during that strange existence on the planet called earth, because OBEs still haven't been proved."
And I'll say, "Well Ben K, there's still another squillion years to go at least, so sit back and keep an eye on them scientists - they'll get there eventually..."
:grin:
Sarah
Im fine with never winning as long as I never lose :smile:
Quote from: mactombsQuoteScience is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.
-Carl Sagan
A religious quote from a religious man. Science is a method. Once it becomes a way of thinking, of living, it becomes a religion.
Correct me if im wrong but isnt a method just a set of ideas, which in turn are THOUGHTS or WAYS of thinking?
QuoteIt is true, there is no such thing as objective proof, just acceptance by academia for what goes in the textbooks as being reality. Since proof isn't possible in the absolute sense, what we, normal people, term as "proof" means something different. Ben K demands proof to be something that isn't possible, knows it isn't possible, and therefore states that everything is a matter of belief (which is true). It's not proved unless everyone believes it, as far as Ben K is concerned.
Not that hard of an idea to accept, is it?
QuoteAs far as the card experiment, all it shows is that a person can guess what a set of cards will be against some probability. It does not prove how the person does this, and science probably never will. Science is incapable of proving the wider reality, it is grounded to this one. The best it can do is say, this person can do what he claims (as long as what he claims to do has some relation to this reality), but there is no evidence whatsoever for how he does it.
Again, proof means different things to different people. To me the odds of someone guessing a card are so high that with so many successful attempts, i would believe OBEs are "real" based on this data alone. But others will just bring up contradictory beliefs and justify themselves.
QuoteSimply, OBEs never will be proved, only accepted (or not) by what evidence can be shown.
Egg-zactly. The trick is to get so much "evidence" that they cannot think up beliefs contradictory to your "evidence". They will then concede and either change their beliefs or bovine excrement their way out of the conversation and go back to their old beliefs.
Quote from: qbeacHi Ben K and rest of participants,
In order to obtain scientific proof of these experiences we need four "ifs":
1) "If" there are some experienced projectors who are willing to collaborate with scientist in laboratory experiments according to all the control and security measures of the Scientific Method, and...
2) "If" there is a strong enough connection between the astral plane and the physical plane (not too much distortion, maybe a moderate distortion but not a high one), as to allow those experienced projectors to read two words correctly, and ...
There IS no "connection". The "connection" is a constant thing. The only thing stopping these "experienced projectors" from reading the right words is belief.
Quote3) "If" those positive results can be published in a prestigious scientific journal (Ex: Science, Nature, The Lancet, etc.). This point is VERY important, it will make the big difference, and ...
You will be laughed out of the universe if you give a legitimate scientific journal a study on such an esoteric topic. science simply isnt ready yet.
Quote4) "If" the same experiment could be replicated by several other independent scientists...
Geez thats the toughest one of the group! Its like trying to take LSD and experience the same thing twice!
Hi Ben K, one of the reasons why we "believe" there must be some type of connection between the physical plane and the astral plane is because of what they call the "verifiable NDEs" or "veridical NDEs". Also, some prestigious scientists have started to investigate this topic using modern means (EEG study, etc.) and have already published several very interesting articles in prestigious scientific journals... so, that's the first step in the road and we think there are going to be many more.
Let me give you just one example:
Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands,
Dr. Pim van Lommel (cardiologist), et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001 , 2039-45.
http://www.thelancet.com/search/search.isa
http://profezie3m.altervista.org/archivio/TheLancet_NDE.htm
This is an example of a "verifiable NDE" from that article:
During the pilot phase in one of the hospitals, a coronary-care-unit nurse reported a veridical out-of-body experience of a resuscitated patient:
"During a night shift an ambulance brings in a 44-year-old cyanotic, comatose man into the coronary care unit. He had been found about an hour before in a meadow by passers-by. After admission, he receives artificial respiration without intubation, while heart massage and defibrillation are also applied. When we want to intubate the patient, he turns out to have dentures in his mouth. I remove these upper dentures and put them onto the 'crash car'. Meanwhile, we continue extensive CPR. After about an hour and a half the patient has sufficient heart rhythm and blood pressure, but he is still ventilated and intubated, and he is still comatose. He is transferred to the intensive care unit to continue the necessary artificial respiration.
Only after more than a week do I meet again with the patient, who is by now back on the cardiac ward. I distribute his medication. The moment he sees me he says: 'Oh, that nurse knows where my dentures are'. I am very surprised. Then he elucidates: 'Yes, you were there when I was brought into hospital and you took my dentures out of my mouth and put them onto that car, it had all these bottles on it and there was this sliding drawer underneath and there you put my teeth.' I was especially amazed because I remembered this happening while the man was in deep coma and in the process of CPR.
When I asked further, it appeared the man had seen himself lying in bed, that he had perceived from above how nurses and doctors had been busy with CPR. He was also able to describe correctly and in detail the small room in which he had been resuscitated as well as the appearance of those present like myself. At the time that he observed the situation he had been very much afraid that we would stop CPR and that he would die. And it is true that we had been very negative about the patient's prognosis due to his very poor medical condition when admitted.
The patient tells me that he desperately and unsuccessfully tried to make it clear to us that he was still alive and that we should continue CPR. He is deeply impressed by his experience and says he is no longer afraid of death. 4 weeks later he left hospital as a healthy man."
----------------------
For more examples of "verifiable NDEs", or "Veridical NDEs**" see this link:
**experiencer acquires verifiable information that they could not have obtained by any normal means
- The Division of Perceptual Studies (DOPS) is a unit of the Department of Psychiatric Medicine of the University of Virginia's Health System.
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/personalitystudies/case_types.cfm#OOB
Un saludo. qbeac.
Hi Ben K, you can also check this interview with Dr. Bruce Greyson about a similar experiment they are now doing in the operating rooms of the Hospital of the University of Virginia:
http://readthehook.com/stories/2004/09/08/facetimeDrNeardeathGreyson.html
FACETIME- Dr. near-death: Greyson's heart-stopping study
Published SEPTEMBER 9, 2004, in issue 0336 of the Hook
BY LAURA PARSONS ART@READTHEHOOK.COM
A woman hovers above her own lifeless body, detached and at peace, before moving through a dark tunnel toward a dazzling light.
Whether a believer or a skeptic, chances are you recognize the standard markers of a near-death experience. But in 1975, when Bruce Greyson was a newly minted psychiatrist, this was new terrain.
At the time, Greyson was working in UVA's emergency room with a psychiatric resident named Raymond Moody, who had just published the soon-to-be-runaway bestseller, Life after Life, in which Moody coined the now familiar term "near-death experience" (NDE).
Greyson, who was already exploring brain-mind anomalies, became fascinated by the countless letters Moody received from people relating to the surprisingly consistent reports of what clinical death survivors recalled about their flat-line time.
"They were astounded and often relieved to find out they were not alone," he remembers.
Almost three decades later, Greyson, 57, is still fascinated. This director of UVA's Division of Personality Studies began a new project earlier this year designed to verify reports of out-of-body NDEs. Greyson, in collaboration with UVA cardiologists, is conducting an investigation that focuses on patients receiving automatic heart defibrillators who must endure a brief cardiac arrest to ensure that the units are functioning.
Wearing a conservative yellow tie as he leans back in his chair, Greyson says there's nothing to report yet, but he smiles and mentions he's considering extending the two-year study.
"Bruce is a very careful, cautious researcher," says Dr. Michael Sabom, an Atlanta-based cardiologist who also studies near-death experiences.
Greyson points out some of the anesthetics used on the cardiac patients interfere with memory, so he rigged a computer to generate images visible only from the ceiling.
"If people can remember what's going on," Greyson says, "then that's very hard to explain."
Scientifically proving NDEs' occurrence, however, is not what most interests Greyson as a psychiatrist. He's excited by how near-death experiences change people's lives. According to Greyson, near-death survivors share no distinctive traits prior to their NDEs, but afterward they generally become more spiritual, more altruistic, and less materialistic.
Having pioneered a path-breaking study of suicide survivors who reported having NDEs, Greyson discovered that, unlike other failed suicides, his subjects were less likely to repeat their attempts. According to Greyson, "What they tell you is once you're not afraid of death, you're not afraid of life."
Unaware of any chemical capable of creating such a life-altering effect, Greyson suggests NDEs have important implications for psychiatry, noting, "We work very hard for a long time to make very small changes."
Has his research has affected his own outlook? "It's given me a different perspective on what's important in life," Greyson says. "It's also made me a lot less willing to dismiss crazy ideas out of hand."
i am happy to know that these discussions still exist, they give some life to these almost dead forums :(
Lately i have so much much work that i dont have any time or spirit to come to AP forums.
Coming back on topic, it sems that the only way to proof obes its to prove it to yourself. Nobody cares. Lets take my example: last days work is so hard that my mind really dont care if obes are real or not. Why ordinary people ( i mean, people that dont like paranormal stuff) would even bother about such things?
If i read something interesting about another topic that is not innteresting to me, i will just think on that for some minutes, but then, puff. For example, if i read that there a japonese guy that moves faster twice than Bruce Lee and that no body beat him i will say "Wow!!! amazing!" but some seconds later its gone, i forget that.
It sthat that makes me worried about OBEs: none of of my friends, family, colleagues would ever accept to learn OBE and then do the experiments for themselves. Even worst, i tell these things to my friends and they think that i am crazy. The few ones that get interested will answer me that such things (obe) are dangerous and they are not prepared for that.
What can i do to change such mentality?
Quote from: qbeacHi Ben K, one of the reasons why we "believe" there must be some type of connection between the physical plane and the astral plane is because of what they call the "verifiable NDEs" or "veridical NDEs".
We inhabit ALL areas of consciousness ALL the time. The only differences are differences in perception. You can call it a "connection" if you want but thats really not whats going on. I can give you a very simple way of observing the "astral" realm. simply imagine something! when you do this you are accessing F2oC. This is where most people switch their perception when they have "astral projection" experiences.
The closest "connection" i think would be the brains middle region, with the pituatary gland and thalamus/hypothalamus region, which converts your subjective energy into objective reality, ie your senses.
Ive read alot of these NDE reports and i have to say they are really interesting. I really dont see how an intelligent person can look at those and still believe that death is "it" or "game over". But like i said, its not about facts, its about BELIEF. Im sure in the coming years science will discover more and more and the religous beliefs will start to finally get out of here.
I guess im just suggesting to you that you work not only on objective "facts" but changing peoples BELIEFS as well. Because that will do much more than just ANOTHER paper about someone who was verifiably dead and saw his surgeory happen or ANOTHER paper about someone having an "OBE". But just a suggestion. I mean i can give you 2,000 more examples of verifiable NDEs and people doing the card trick, etc. but people are simply not going to believe it.
Hi Ben K, I understand what you are saying, but in my opinion, one of the key elements that are still missing is serious research studies about this topic published in prestigious scientific journals such as Nature, Science, The Lancet, etc., etc., etc.
It is true that right now there are plenty of anecdotal evidences about these types of experiences, but at the same time, there are not very many serious studies published in those types of prestigious journals. And no matter how many anecdotal evidences there are, they will never be enough in comparison to a few very rigorous articles published in those scientific journals.
The article in The Lancet from Dr. Pim van Lommel (year 2001) has been one of the pioneers of its kind, but there need to be more similar ones, which all together will be more conclusive. That's what happens in science with new findings, that a single study is usually not enough... the scientific community needs time and very solid proof to rethink the current paradigm (the current body of knowledge they think is the right one at their time) and consider the possibility of a paradigm shift (a new paradigm based on the new findings and discoveries).
And in my opinion, those serious scientific articles have not been published yet in those scientific journals for different reasons, but at least one of them could be because of a lack of the necessary strong and frequent collaboration between the scientific community in general and experienced projectors. I think there has been "some" collaboration, but maybe not enough.
Therefore, one key element in these types of situations is what they call "appeal to authority." Scientific prestigious journals do have enough "authority" among the scientific community, but anecdotal evidences do not.
We have talked extensively about this matter in the following link:
Pag. 8, starting from the top of the page or in Post #4:
(Thread: Whats your proof?)
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21011&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=70
Un saludo, qbeac.
Hi All,
What I am noticing by reading through this and other forums on AP/OBE's is that most of the people who OBE are satisfied with their 'journeys' without deepening in them. It's like having a dream and believing that what happened in it was 100% REAL, when it was just a elaboration of the mind.
Some say here that one's reality has not to be my reality. I can accept that POV, but everyone should understand that mine and your reality (seen like this) is not the REALITY.
I think it was William Buhlman who said in one of his books that he saw deceased people in certain planes doing things like the ones they used to do when they were alive, most of them not realizing that the were not alive anymore... You can say: 'Yes, this is their reality'... Of course! But they are living an illusion, a fantasy, and what they should do is to wake up from that fantasy to move on, to evolve... (lets take as example twp Hollywood movies: The Others and The Sixth Sense) And that's why I think it's very important to investigate about the reality/validity of the OBE/AP, not only for scientific results, but for the own growth as a human being.
I think one can waste their time 'projecting', flying around, talking to different beings believing that every experience is REAL when they are only letting their mind go playing tricks...
J.J. Benitez, a Spanish writer, did once an experiment with a drug in the Amazonian jungle. Being there, he phoned her wife (I think they used to live in the Basque Country by then) and told her to put something underneath their bed. He also phoned a friend of his who lived in Madrid and told him to do the same but on his living room's table this time. After taking the drug he found himself out of his body and then he flew to his apartment and found out that his wife put a framed photo of them under the bed. He flew to Madrid and saw something unusual on the table on his friend's living room (I don't remember what exactly) and the very next day he phoned to his wife and friend and found out that what he saw during his OBIE was exactly what his wife and friend put under the bed and on the table...
From here, once one knows that what happens in the astral is real, one can move on checking always the validity of the experience...
Of course the more subtle the plane, the harder to check its validity taking the physical as a reference but I guess that, one has checked many times with the physical, moving on becomes easier.
Sorry for the length of the post, but I just wanted to make myself clear about my POV of this topic.
Hi Neo and everyone else
I thought I'd stick my oar in again – just for another point of view. :smile:
I suppose I could be termed as an experienced projector, as I have had over 100 "RTZ" OBEs, however I don't see myself as experienced at all. The reason I say this, is that I don't have enough of an idea as to exactly how I manage to have them. I have theories and ideas, but that's about as far as it goes. So I could never be a "guinea pig" because I can't will them to happen.
You say things in your post that beg for explanation. For instance, 'deepening' ones journey. What do you mean? How would you deepen yours - please expand? And you say that dreams are "just an elaboration of the mind". That's your belief. Have you never explored your dreams? Have you never had a dream where it has revealed a "truth" about your physical life? If you believe dreams are "just an elaboration of the mind" then you probably haven't.
And then you talk about reality, as if you know what reality is. What is THE reality then? I'm not being pompous or anything, just curious. And what is illusion? Is our physical world THE reality and everything else illusion? Really? You even use two Hollywood movies as examples. Hollywood movies? Come on.
I don't claim to know what it's all about. But I do believe there is more to physical reality, or reality in general, than what is at first perceived. And since I had my first OBE 3 years ago, I'm open to the possibility of other worlds.
And just what do you mean by "own growth as a human being". Seriously, I'm sincerely interested as to what you interpret as "growth".
Because personally, having a lot of RTZ OBEs I wouldn't term as growth. Of course, when I first had them, it expanded my mind to thinking "outside of the box" so to speak (which I believe is a good thing), but it didn't prove anything. I even did the playing card experiment which did validate that these weren't dreams (to me). And before you say it, I didn't guess the card, I saw it. :lol:
In the last 6 months, I have moved away from RTZ OBEs. I still find them fascinating when they happen, but I am more interested in lucid dreaming and meditation, or what you might term visiting the more subtle planes. This is where I find I can grow as a human being. But it's very personal and singular. I find that I am "evolving spiritually" through my dreams, be they lucid or not, and more so via meditation, far more than via the RTZ OBEs (which seem to occur much closer to our physical reality).
My own viewpoint is that for humanity to grow spiritually, as a group, and individually, is for us to experience these personal happenings for ourselves and learn from them. Each and every person has to become "open" and "accepting" of the possibilities out there. So as we (on an individual level) evolve into more of a "knowing" and "understanding" human, so the human race collectively evolves into a more "knowing" and "understanding" group.
Blimey, where did that last paragraph come from? That's not like me. Must have come from deep inside of me. :grin:
I would love to see OBEs taken seriously by scientists and I think it's great what gbeac and TVOS are doing (amongst others). I would also like OBEs to be proved by scientists, then I can win the bet I had with Ben K. :lol:
However, for me, I am more micro-orientated than macro-orientated and I just love to learn things for my own development. So, that's my viewpoint and may help you to understand why some seemingly "experienced" projectors are not jumping up and down for proof, and instead are sitting quietly in the background getting on with their own growth.
Finally, you can learn a hell of a lot by your mind "playing tricks" as you say.
I hope this was of interest.
Sarah
Read Robert Bruce's experiences and you probably wont be skeptic anymore.
Hi Sarah-Selski and Brettb,
Thanks for replying.
I seems that I didn't make myself clear :confused:
I never said that I doubted the possibility of having OBE's, I believe lots of people have them (I never had one though)!
That's why I described J.J. Benitez as an example of investigating an OBE.
I also believe in Spirits, I have read lots of book about this topic and that's why I mentioned Hollywood movies as an example of what I meant because, yes, they are movies, but they describe very well what happens to lots of spirits who after dying, they don't want to face it and 'create' their 'reality' living in a fantasy...
I repeat, I do not doubt of OBE's, I believe in them, I believe in the existence of other planes, other intelligent beings apart from human beings, etc...
What I doubt is the experience of many people here in this and other forums on OBE/APs.
An example: Someone said here something like that Spirit Guides don't exist, that people are deluded because the only spirit guide who helps people in their OBE's is Jesus Christ... :shock: That's his reality according to the philosophy of many people here on this board... To me he is the deluded one and needs to deepen his OBE's.
I hope you guys understand now my POV.
Neo
Quote from: Selski... However, for me, I am more micro-orientated than macro-orientated and I just love to learn things for my own development....
Sarah
Hi Selski (Sarah) and everyone else,
Well, Selski, I thought it was a very good description what you said about being more micro-orientated than macro-orientated. In my case, I guess I must be more macro-orientated than micro-orientated, and perhaps that's why I am so much interested in obtaining scientific proof.... although participating in this forum, and even more, administrating it, is also a macro-oriented activity :smile:
But please, let me clarify a few things about my point of view:
To begin with, I must say that I already believe these experiences are real, among other reasons because I have had several ones myself, and I don't need further proof "for myself" (I have my "Level 1 validation" and that's good enough for me). Also, when I say "real" experiences as opposed to "imaginary" experiences, I mean it from the stand point of the scientific community, which only accepts as "real" the physical world (Ex: there could be many other "real" planes other than the physical plane). So, when I say "real" I mean "real from the reference point of the physical plane."
But if these experiences were to be "real from the reference point of the physical plane", that would have a tremendous importance for the scientific community, because it would imply that a human being can do things that they thought were IMPOSIBLE according to current scientific knowledge. Therefore,
they would have to change, modify or update current scientific books. And that's a VERY big deal for modern science (for medicine, psychology, psychiatry, physics, etc.)! Further more, in the case we could obtain scientific proof that AP are "real" experiences, and considering that nowadays just about everybody can have easy accesses to this "new" knowledge via the modern means of communication (specially via Internet, forums, etc.), it seems to me that
we may be on the verge of an evolutionary change in society, or an evolutionary leap forward, and I mean a positive change. In other words, we may be on the verge of a huge paradigm shift, probably bigger and better than the previous ones (Ex: Galileo, Newton, Einstein...). But in order for that change to happen, or to not be blocked, or to proceed, or to happen with a greater speed, or to consolidate itself, in my opinion, it is necessary to obtain empirical proof, or scientific proof, or
conclusive proof that these experiences are "real" and not imaginary (please, remember, "real" according to the physical plane).
The scientific community has the key to facilitate or to promote that change, or the contrary, to block it or delay it.
Because if the scientific community officially validates these experiences, that will open the door for the public recognition and acceptance of these experiences by the rest of humanity, and vice versa. This situation is kind of similar to what happened in Galileo's time: first a great deal of opposition and rejection, but later on, and as the evidence kept piling up, it was simply impossible to deny it.
Therefore, if the final goal we all seem to agree upon is for just about every body in the world to have access to this new knowledge and to try to AP for themselves, so that they can
spiritually grow and together build a better world, a happier world, with more justice, more tolerance, more solidarity, more love, etc.... if that's what we all want, it seems to me that the scientific community, for better or worse, has an important role to play in this process right now, because
if the scientific community validates theses experiences as "real", the process will accelerate and more people will be able to practice AP sooner. But if the scientific community keeps on believing these experiences are "imaginary", the process will slow down or even be blocked during who knows how many more years or decades. So, that's why I am personally so much interested in the scientific proof, more for macro-reasons rather than for micro-reasons. Scientific proof could facilitate or even speed up the whole process. But, that's only my personal opinion, and I might be wrong, I am not sure.
I would like to add one more thing:
Regarding the experiments we are doing,
we are willing to adjust every single experiment to the circumstances and particularities of any projector, since we are very much aware that this is an experiment with "human beings", and each person may need a different environment to feel comfortable. Also, we believe natural phenomenon does not need to adapt to Science, on the contrary, it is Science the one that should try to adapt to natural phenomenon.
Un saludo, qbeac.
[quote="qbeac
To begin with, I must say that I already believe these experiences are real, among other reasons because I have had several ones myself, and I don't need further proof "for myself" (I have my "Level 1 validation" and that's good enough for me). Also, when I say "real" experiences as opposed to "imaginary" experiences, I mean it from the stand point of the scientific community, which only accepts as "real" the physical world (Ex: there could be many other "real" planes other than the physical plane). So, when I say "real" I mean "real from the reference point of the physical plane."
[/quote]
Hello qbeac,
Do you mean that you have passed the agnostic test?
What evidence experimented for yourself takes you to believe that they were "real" (physical) experiences?
Please, I am very interested in your opinion.
Hi astralway, well, I think I need to explain that a little better. No, I have not tried the Agnostic Method because I have no control over the experiences I have. I have had several ones but spontaneously and without being able to control what happened in them, other than thinking, being alert and making "mental" decisions once I was already having them. For instance, I wanted really bad to remain having that experience but I was "pushed back" or something... I could not control it.
The reason why they are a good enough proof for me is because of what I have "experienced" and "felt" in at least one of those experiences: I had VERY powerful feelings that were totally clear (the intensity of those feelings was overwhelming), I had a clear conscious through out the whole experience, I could think, I could reflect upon what was going on, I had doubts, I was curious about what was going on, a had sense of wonder... I don't know how to explain it. For instance, imagine you start running against the wall and you hit yourself in the head very hard, and you can perceive the hardness of the wall, and feel the pain in your head, and realize you were kind of foolish for attempting such a thing, etc., etc... you don't need further proof that you in fact hit the wall and that your experience was totally and unfortunately "real".
So, we have classified the proof a person needs to be convinced of something in three different levels: Level 1 (personal level), Level 2 (for small groups of people), and Level 3 (proof for all humanity). We have talked more in depth about all this at links:
Method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences (See Post #1 to Post #4)
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20907
- Whats Your Proof?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21011
Chao. qbeac.
Quote from: manuelHow can you have yer pudding when you dont eat yer meat!!!??
lol..nice floyd reference