http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8327304/AAAS-Out-of-body-experiences-are-just-the-product-of-a-confused-mind.html
QuoteThroughout history people have described how they have floated from their bodies and looked back at themselves, often when close to death or on the operating table.
The accounts have been so vivid that they are often cited as proof of the existence of the soul or Heaven.
But scientists now claim they have dispelled this myth by artificially creating an out-of-body experience using computers and cameras.
They believe the feeling of detachment occurs when the brain becomes confused by conflict between the senses - and is not proof of any "spiritual dimension" to existence.
Professor Olaf Blanke and his team at University of Geneva said they had "immersed" volunteers into the body of an avatar - a computer generated version of themselves.
Volunteers were asked to wear virtual reality goggles and then stand in front of a camera.
The subjects saw the cameras view of their back on screens in the goggles, computer enhanced to create a 3D virtual version or avatar.
When their back was stroked with a pen so was the virtual avatar in front of them, making them think that the virtual body was in fact their own.
In this way people became confused about their real and the virtual self - even though they were effectively two metres apart from each other.
Prof Blanke, who presented his findings at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) conference in Washington, said: "Through vision and touch they lost themselves.
"They start thinking that the avatar is their own body. We created a partial out-of-body experience.
"We were able to dissociate touch and vision and make people think that their body was two metres in front of them."
He said by inducing the out-of-body experience it proved it was more like a brain malfunction when sight, touch and balance become confused.
Dr Blanke said: "Instead of it being a spiritual thing, it is the brain being confused. Why do we think that it is spiritual when we don't think a phantom limb when one is lost is an example of the paranormal."
To take the research further they used sensors connected to the skull to find the areas of the brain most involved in deciding where it belongs.
These were found to be temporo-parietal and frontal regions - parts at the front and right side of the brain responsible for integrating touch and vision.
If these were damaged or somehow short-circuited it could account for the feeling of floating above your body often associated with an out-of-body experiences.
Aside from explaining out-of-body experiences, the work could have more commercial applications, said the researcher.
The technique could be used to make computer games even more exciting or projecting people into robot soldiers or surgeons.
They could even be used to treat eating disorders linked with a flawed body image, such as anorexia.
Out-of-body experiences most often occur during sleep or waking as well as through drug use, trauma and under anaesthetic.
They effect around one in 10 of the population
What do you believe Fresco?
Quote from: The_One on February 20, 2011, 15:05:20
What do you believe Fresco?
Until I project more I cant really say for sure. However, I lean towards OBE and AP being real, as opposed to a product of our imagination.
So in that respect I think the article is wrong, and a typical reaction to a phenomenon science cant really explain, so they come up with the usual "its all in your head" excuse.
Doctors gave the same explanation when CFIDS and Morgellon diseases first appeared, their explanation was always "its all just in your head, try to be more positive". But now they finally had to acknowledge these are real diseases and not product of imagination
The "all in your head" excuse can be transgressed into an interpretation of "it's all in your mind" excuse for the modern western society. From that you can theorize basically anything pertaining to the nature of OBE's and AP.
Postulating as whether different objective hypotheses and their "wrongness" is the exact same thing as postulating various subjective beliefs and their "rightness". The problem is that you can only prove what's "true" to yourself and not to others; go beyond that and you're just asking to be proven wrong. The article is not wrong nor right and is only a reaction to this phenomena from the scientists perspective. It's the exact same thing as anyone else's perspective reaction in the sense that it's something mystical/"beyond us".
The only thing an individual can do objectively is look at it and consider the possibilities. Anything else goes into the speculation department...
The End :-P
This is an old hat. They did this already years ago.
If this experiment is new then this is not the first time that they have done this camera optical/sensorical illusion thing. This is stupid.
Because that's what it is: just a sensorical / optical illusion. Of course you can do that. It has nothing to do with OBEs.
Last week I was sitting in the train at the station. I stared out of the window at other trains/platforms. Then I thought "oops, my train is leaving a bit too early now". Only to notice a few seconds later then that it was the train on the opposite platform that was arriving. Optical-sensorical illusion. Happens all day.
Scientists ... so that's what they waste their budgets for ... :roll:
It is also very ironic that skeptics and materialist scientists (or both in one) who have NEVER in their life experienced any 'real' OBE or similar spiritual events know it all best and can 'explain' (or 'explain away') to us (more or less skilled) experiencers what's the (materialist) basis of an OBE and what it is "like".
And how does the virtual camera "trick" work when you're flying out of your house, visiting friends, witnessing events, did they simulate that one, too? :-D :-D :-D
And how do all these observed verifications take place? Oh no, of course, we have another debunking strategy for that one: it's all made up or just mere coincidence and accident or the brain draws together some clues, etc... This is getting all so pathetic!!!
Again: this is not new but a few years old.
Fresco, relax and don't worry: it is plain to see they are plain wrong - with almost everything. In the first place, they did not at all create an OBE with their participants. Moreover, their explanatory bases do not even hold up to modern physics at all. So what's this (repeated!) fuss all about? And why does The Telegraph of that dubious AAAS club warm it up now, again?
Meanwhile to me, it's clear:
This is DISinformation spread to keep the public imprisoned in their illusion of a materialist world.
It is annoying that most sheeple .. er .. people .. swallow this belief system - hook, line and sinker. Every day. Because it seems, they also want to.
I really start to think that David Icke is right about the "mainstream" media and "mainstream" science - it "mainstreams" the people, which is easy to do due to their herd instinct. Now they even start to warm up old stories. Poor, very poor. Don't fall for it. They will lose in the end ... maybe very soon.)
Ok, sorry for the offtopic rant now, just saw a D. Icke presentation on youtube recently. The man is probably too far out on some topics, but his core message is true.
I would even argue is our present physical life for real??! I can see, smell, hear touch...etc. But how do I prove that it is real?!
You cant, right?! You can only say it feels and appears real to me
Quote from: Fresco on February 20, 2011, 16:49:04
I would even argue is our present physical life for real??! I can see, smell, hear touch...etc. But how do I prove that it is real?!
You cant, right?! You can only say it feels and appears real to me
I think it is REAL because it is one REAL-ity ... of many realities. You experience it by receiving and processing vibrational data. Likewise you experience other realities using other inputs and sensors to receive an process the information.
Fresco,
OBEs are real, just as the physical world we reside in is real. This happens to be old news that a reporter just found on the Internet deciding to write the article.
In all honesty, one can't say that this is final proof without further research, three control groups 1. Non-Projectors 2. Experienced Projectors 3. Near Death Experiencer's. I do not see anywhere in these studies even discussed or admitted to the testing. Also, people who write these articles and the scientists need to really sit down and learn the art of having the OBE. Having book knowledge and science is awesome - always test it but be also willing to experiment and have the experience yourself, not just a few times but couple hundred times.
I am not slamming the author of the article - it just needs more attention of the variables I just listed vs. putting a claim on validation.
When you have time, I like for you to research Near Death Experiences and read up at this site:
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF_NDEs.htm. Also, you might want to review the book that Jeffrey Long (author of the web site NDERF) wrote.
Thank You,
DW
QuoteBut scientists now claim they have dispelled this myth by artificially creating an out-of-body experience using computers and cameras.
Not true! They are not real scientists and they give science a bad name. what those morons have managed to create was an illusion and nothing like the OOBE.
Science (real science) recognises OOBEs and NDEs to be a real phenomena. Their nature, however, is as enigmatic as consciousness itself.
I really feel sorry for the people who wrote that article :( and all people who come to conclusions like this because they want us to fear death like them....They cant stand the fact that they no nothing about why are we here?? where do we go when we die?? and How big is the universe really?? and that there is other people out there who may have some insight...
sometimes ignorance isn't bliss, it's just ignorance...
LOL! True say that! ^^^
The problem with many scientists is they go into an experiment like this with basically their inside-the-box, closed minds already made up that its not real. They come from universities where like-minded profs scoff at OBE's, afterlife, AP...etc because science so far hasnt been able to prove it.
For them no scientific proof = its all baloney. Which is narrow-minded, stupid thinking IMO
Quote from: Fresco on February 21, 2011, 11:01:10
The problem with many scientists is they go into an experiment like this with basically their inside-the-box, closed minds already made up that its not real. They come from universities where like-minded profs scoff at OBE's, afterlife, AP...etc because science so far hasnt been able to prove it.
For them no scientific proof = its all baloney. Which is narrow-minded, stupid thinking IMO
I've made mention of this before, but I'll mention it again... if Thomas Campbell's TOE is correct, then science has more wrong with it than anyone even thought possible!
IDC what they think. Just becuase its "In your head" Doesnt mean its not 'real'.
Quote from: Xanth on February 21, 2011, 13:23:03
I've made mention of this before, but I'll mention it again... if Thomas Campbell's TOE is correct, then science has more wrong with it than anyone even thought possible!
I believe that too. Dont get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with science so long as its good science. But in an ever evolving universe its quite possible that science itself evolves with it. And if thats the case we can never know it all because evolution is infinite.
Having said that I'm not against science at all, I'm only against science thats narrow-minded in its thinking
http://vimeo.com/1989597
Bad science.
This is old and largely meaningless research by our old friend Olaf Blanke. We have known, since the time of Mesmer, that people are suggestible. This is the only conclusion that can be drawn from the research as described in the article.
Describing these results as creating an "out of body experience" is laughable. The effects described are totally atypical of the OBE experience spectrum. The conclusions drawn are utterly unwarranted:
Quote
"We created a partial out-of-body experience"
"He said by inducing the out-of-body experience it proved it was more like a brain malfunction when sight, touch and balance become confused"
"Aside from explaining out-of-body experiences, the work could have more commercial applications, said the researcher"
I really can't believe that this was presented to a scientific conference and taken seriously. The stated conclusions are not justified by the experiment. This is clear to anyone with any knowledge of "scientific method".
Science, literally, at its worst.
I wrote the last post before reading the replies on this thread. Having read them now it seems that you guys have a much better grasp of this experiment than the learned professor. The experiment is a trivial optical illusion, not an OBE. That is clear to everyone on this board, but apparently not the learned professor.
Volgerle, your rant was on the mark.
With science like that, I think it's time we take our children out of schools :-D
Quote from: Highergoals on February 24, 2011, 02:14:47
With science like that, I think it's time we take our children out of schools :-D
This is why I laugh at most of these "studies".
Today Vitamin A prevents cancer, tomorrow it causes cancer and next week they'll have another study that says it prevents cancer again
I just heard that mild to moderate alcohol consumption significantly lowers the risk of heart disease. Yeehaaaaaaa.....
Quote from: Fresco on February 24, 2011, 07:15:26
This is why I laugh at most of these "studies".
Today Vitamin A prevents cancer, tomorrow it causes cancer and next week they'll have another study that says it prevents cancer again
lol... Still disappointing though that so many people hang on every scientific report and then moments later record it in their memories as fact without even attempting to give it some reasonable thought.
Everything is real within that concept.
I understand what the OP means by real.
In fact, no Astral Projector in the entire world was able to do simple verifications while "projecting".
I suspect that OBEs are not "real" (real as my body, my computer etc; but they are real as dreams).
I find interesting that almost no projector will try to prove to itself that OBEs are real. Often, they will say that
while OBing one will not care about such "mundane" things...
Kazbadan, I agree that there aren't many reports of OBErs consciously performing verifications. However, there are many reports of NDEs in which information is brought back about physical surroundings, including things going on in rooms nearby, which later proved to be highly accurate.
Dr Sam Parnia is currently heading up a mult-centre study into NDEs in cardiac arrest patients, by asking them if they can report the contents of a card placed out of view of the cardiac arrest subject's bed. It is due to report later this year I think. It will be interesting to hear the results:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7621608.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7621608.stm)
Quote from: Kazbadan on February 27, 2011, 15:14:48
I find interesting that almost no projector will try to prove to itself that OBEs are real. Often, they will say that
while OBing one will not care about such "mundane" things...
Agreed, it is quite irritating.
QuoteI find interesting that almost no projector will try to prove to itself that OBEs are real
Well said.
"Almost"! In the Astral Viewers forum people are keen to get verifications and we've had quite a few. I myself have been conducting an OOBE study whereby I've been visiting people that I both know well and don't know. So far the hits are more apparent than misses. It seems that such OOBE visits make more sense to the visited than the experiencer. Regardless of whether they are here-now projections or metaphysical realm ones, it seems that when we visit someone we turn out to see what they are doing at the time (accurately or slightly inaccurate)...OR...we see what is on their minds as thought-form representations.
The OOBEr is sometimes able to have conversations with the visited which the latter doesn't remember. I posit that we are talking to their
unconscious selves while we're in the OOBE-state. However, on one occasion, one of my friends which I visited reported to his girlfriend at the time that he felt funny, as though he was supposed to remember someone or something. He was sitting on the floor and meditating at the time and had his CDs out on the floor which is exactly how I saw him in my experience. He also spoke to me and told me that he wanted to remember the conversation. I urged him to try to remember. He's a member of Astral Viewers now. His name is stoneZoMbIe.
I have a theory as to why he felt "funny". While meditating his brain waves must have gone from Beta to Alpha. This indicates the daydreaming mode and in theory this must have made him more receptive to my frequency. He lives across town from me and one might wonder how I got there just by thinking about him. Well, I posit that once focusing in the metaphysical realm, physical distance is irrelevant to the individual consciousness.
The thing is, nothing can ever be regarded as concrete proof because the hardest sceptic will put such "verifications" down to amazing coincidences or just lies. This is why I simply urge people to get acquainted with a method and project in order to get their own conclusions.
Personally, I've had enough proof for myself.
On the dream note, they are just as elusive. I used to think that all dreams were generated from the dreamer's mind (I even used to interpret dreams) but I've found that even some dreams, particularly the vivid ones, have the potential to be telepathic and/or precognitive. Twice already me and my girlfriend seemed to have shared dreams. Either that or our dreams coincided and we happened to see the same ambient setup and happened to remember the same conversation. I can honestly say those dreams were the oddest ones in my life.
Explore first before coming to the conclusion that it all happens in the brain. Even this, as sound as it seems, is merely an assumption. An assumption that is usually regarded to be the most acceptable because people fear ridicule.
I don't need to prove anything, least of all to myself. The OBE is the proof. That's all I need personally. The fine folks at Astral Viewers can take on the job of trying to prove it to the skeptics. Somehow I doubt a "funny feeling" at the right time is going to shake their belief systems.
For the record, I'd rather read about someone's journey into the higher realms than about Billy guessing the correct combination of dunkin donuts Patty will purchase on Wednesday.
Hi Summerlander, those were very interesting validations. There is a validation thread on the board, perhaps you could add some of your validations? Personally, I have had enough 100% validations to know that at the very least, ESP exists.
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_permanent_astral_topics/validation_thread-t25607.0.html (http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_permanent_astral_topics/validation_thread-t25607.0.html)
Science doesn't have the antagonistic relationship towards OBE's that you are imagining. Of course some scientists will dismiss it right away, but you don't have to be a scientist to do that, most people on the street will do the same thing.
They're not being closed-minded: there is a difference between saying something is false and saying there's not enough evidence to believe that it's true. Just like you don't have any reason to believe that Zeus, the thunder god, is watching you from a mountain in the sky, they don't have any reason to believe that you can send your spirit or whatever out of your body.
They can't believe in something based on insufficient evidence because they have to follow the scientific method. If they didn't follow the scientific method we'd still be in the dark-ages regarding medicine, physics, computer science, pretty much all the advances you take for granted. Don't mock them for being scientists, how they think is defined by what they do. You don't work in a scientific field, therefore you can be more "open minded" about this stuff and still do your job.
Thanks for your answers guys :)
My objective when saying that was to provoke and make you react. :)
And now i see some good answers. :)
Quote from: bluremi
Don't mock them for being scientists, how they think is defined by what they do. You don't work in a scientific field, therefore you can be more "open minded" about this stuff and still do your job.
I have two engineering degrees, and I don't mock the scientific method. As you say it has dragged us out of the dark ages. However, this thread is about a particular piece of research by Olaf Blanke, which IMO is laughable, both in its construction and conclusions.
Quote from: bluremi on March 01, 2011, 17:38:54
Science doesn't have the antagonistic relationship towards OBE's that you are imagining. Of course some scientists will dismiss it right away, but you don't have to be a scientist to do that, most people on the street will do the same thing.
They're not being closed-minded: there is a difference between saying something is false and saying there's not enough evidence to believe that it's true. Just like you don't have any reason to believe that Zeus, the thunder god, is watching you from a mountain in the sky, they don't have any reason to believe that you can send your spirit or whatever out of your body.
They can't believe in something based on insufficient evidence because they have to follow the scientific method. If they didn't follow the scientific method we'd still be in the dark-ages regarding medicine, physics, computer science, pretty much all the advances you take for granted. Don't mock them for being scientists, how they think is defined by what they do. You don't work in a scientific field, therefore you can be more "open minded" about this stuff and still do your job.
But many scientist DO say that OBE etc. is nonsense instead of just stating that they have not enough evidence. That is a big difference. A "real" scientist would not negate any hypothesis on this. But this is exactly what they do. And guys like Blanke seem just keen on "debunking". They do not even look for "the real thing" because metaphysical models don't fit their world-view based on scientific materialism with sheer reductionism as the only epistemological way.
Moreover, there are other scientists who actually ARE open-minded. And they get more and more I like to say. They do even draw up theories on how it all could work within a scientific framework, even though it some things remain speculative assumptions. but modern science and progress in science was always based on assumptions and daring hypotheses. So I cannot share your view on the "dark ages" we would be in. Yes, science has helped to move us on. but also to throw us back in some fields - whoever said this: "building the atomic bomb is a clever thing to do - but not wise" isnt right?). I even daresay that the strict scientific method, which is nowadays applied in some circles of the scientific "establishment", keeps us in some dark age we are currently in. That "establishment" is an "old boys club" with power structures attached to it. Any "renegade" scientist with daring theories and experiments gets systematically ridiculed, and they get no money!
Btw, Dean Radin (an excellent and opposed to Blanke and open-minded "real" scientist) has a lot to say in this recommendable talk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew
The comparison with Zeus, etc. or any "specific" metaphysical entity is also not quite fair in my view. OBE and other realities/dimensions is a more general concept, which now even more gets justified by new physics, than just any proposed "fairy tale figure".
Btw. I like Juergen's "air bubble" explanation that shows why verifications are so difficult. Of course R. Bruce also has talked a lot about it regarding "reality fluctuations". Juergen is also on this forum (*waves hands*).
http://www.multidimensionalman.com/Multidimensional-Man/Mechanics_of_Out-of-body_travel.html
And whoever is interested, a while ago I had started to collect OBE-verifications on this little page (I know, it looks cheap and it is ... but therefore it's cost-free and ad-free - hard to find nowadays!). It is all about posts that you find elsewhere on the internet anyway (mostly forums), so it is just a kind of "hub". Possibly some here will find their own post? :-)
It is (still) a small collection, but it might grow. And it does (not yet) include the vast (!) corpus of evidence we got from NDEs and Remote Viewing or related Clairvoyant techniques.
I have drawn a good amount so far from one of the threads here. Hope you don't mind getting quoted without nickname reference, at least you get "linked" and therefore indirectly quoted. If you have more links to posts in forums with verifications, you may please tell me if you like. Then I might include some reports and the links to it. I think it might become a nice page to at least slightly 'unsettle' a few close-minded skeptics ... for a little while. :wink:
http://reconnection.lima-city.de/OBE-Verification/index.html
Best post I have read for a while Volgerle
And the Dean Radin link is superb
Thank you for the Dean Radin link, that was a refreshingly honest and empirical discussion. I'm truly agnostic about those experiments he talked about, especially the Ganzfelt and presentiment (random picture) experiments. I can't think of a flaw in the studies, and while that doesn't mean one doesn't exist, for now there does actually appear to be something strange going on. Inexplicable!
That said, there's a huge temptation here to create a deductive link where none exists, ie if there is a statistically significant result showing small signs of presentiment or telepathy, this somehow relates directly to OBE experiences. I think they are categorically very different experiences from the tests Radin described. The degree of statistical significance is worlds away from anything that would cause a reasonable person to think they were actually leaving their body during an OBE. If the receiver of a Ganzfelt experiment does 7% better than chance would suggest, this only tells us that only about 7% of an OBE experience has anything to do with objective reality. The entire experience might be generated by the brain and only a single detail, like the color of a dream character's dress, would have any relation to the world at all, and without an experimental context to interpret the results (such as a group of four pictures from which to choose) the results are almost meaningless. Maybe even then it would only apply to a small percentage of people who have OBE experiences, the talented pool, for which these experiments preselected. It becomes impossible to separate validations from coincidences, no matter how convincing they appear to be.
Is it better to be utterly credulous, or to have a skeptical attitude? (by skeptical I mean requiring evidence before reaching a conclusion, not having pre-defined expectations leaning one way or the other) We can't simply choose to believe something: exhortations to have an "open mind" are meaningless to a skeptic. An idea must appear to be true before we can identify with it and adopt it as a belief. In this sense a belief about reality is analogous to a belief about moral values.
Anyway, great post, Volgerie.
The validations list is interesting:
In one of my projections, some years ago, I decided to go to visit my parents' house, which is 15 km far away. It was 10:00 in the morning. I overflew my city, following the way to the hose of my childhood. I could recognize all the details, the highway, the fields...
When I arrived the house and I went into it, I see my mother cooking in the kitchen. I tried to call the attention but she did not react at all, like she couldn't see me.
Later, I went to my sister's bedroom. In that time, she was still living there, but in that moment she should have been working in the office. I checked all was normal in the room. She wasn't there, as I expected. Some thing attracted my attention. There was a paper on the table. I approached to it and I could see it was like a note. I had many problems to read it (like usually reading something out of the body). But at the end I was able to understand what It said: "PRESENT FOR _____ (my real name)"
More things happened, but to summarize I went back to my body and made a decision: I would go physically to my parents' house to check all those things. I did it, what it took twenty minutes, and my mother was there, in the kitchen cooking. I say hi and I went into my sister's room, very thrilled. There was a note on the table, exactly like the one I saw being out of the body, which said: "PRESENT FOR _____ (my real name)". Then I imagined she was thinking in my birthday, that would be in two weeks.
I think it is a perfect validation of an out of the body experience....."
To sum up, the person is surprised that their mother is in the kitchen and that their sister has a birthday present for him. He ignores the fact that the kitchen is a very common place for someone to be (my mother is regularly in the kitchen, throughout the day) and that HE KNOWS his birthday is coming up. Is it really that unusual to dream about receiving a present shortly before one's own birthday?
In the next validation the person is surprised to see their father wearing the same clothes he was wearing in a dream. People wear the same clothes all the time, especially men, especially around the house. When I visit my father's house in the evening I could probably guess what he is going to be wearing with 50% accuracy.
Is it really being close-minded to see the flaws in these validations?
Quote from: bluremi on March 01, 2011, 17:38:54
Science doesn't have the antagonistic relationship towards OBE's that you are imagining.
Erm...I think we have already determined this a few posts ago, bluremi! :-D
Quote from: Summerlander on February 20, 2011, 19:09:59
Not true! They are not real scientists and they give science a bad name. what those morons have managed to create was an illusion and nothing like the OOBE.
Science (real science) recognises OOBEs and NDEs to be a real phenomena. Their nature, however, is as enigmatic as consciousness itself.
About your quote above...
QuoteIs it really being close-minded to see the flaws in these validations?
I'm with you there on those validations. But the validations you stated are pretty weak anyway.
How do you explain the hits with people I've visited which I've never met but online? Also how I seemed to have caught a friend of mine doing something which he admits he was doing at the time and which he claims is unusual for him to do so?
You have to weigh both arguments and admit that the assumption of "coincidence" is always there to explain everything away in order for something that seems so far-fetched to be readily dismissed.
I have to say that while I have given many many presents, I have never left a note out saying "PRESENT FOR XXXX". What is being validated here is the presence of a note, not the prediction of a birthday present. If the OBEr saw the exact note (size shape, spelling, handwriting, colour etc) laying in the exact position it was physically, this would be a very good validation. I don't think it is common practice to leave notes out. Maybe that's just my family though.
Quote from: bluremi on March 01, 2011, 21:58:09
Is it really being close-minded to see the flaws in these validations?
i saw the "flaws" as you call them before myself (as an open-minded skeptic), but that is not the point of the list. i still call them "validations" - personal validations, because that's what they are.
that means it applies to subjective views of private persons regarding their own metaphysical experiences that became personally validated by some facts found out or confirmed afterwards
yes, of course, it is not meant to be scientific, objective, 100%-water and bullet proof thing, that it cannot be.
and since these are all "personal" accounts (in anonymous internet forums) - except maybe for the last one by the scientist (C. Tart) you will always only find subjective views about people, locations, events and situations that we can or cannot assess correctly ourselves, moreover there are better and weaker examples.
besides, as a skeptic you can make it even easier for you then: why bother to validate these accounts at all and not use another favourite strategy? which is this:
since these are all personal accounts by anonymous internet forums and also just so-called "anecdotal evidence" you can even go about denying its validity by blaming the posters to be "im"posters, liars as it were.
just suggest that maybe they all made their stories up? we have not scientific evidence since no scientist was present to judge and examine it (with that one exception). furthermore, since we cannot do any reliable repeated experiments on this at all, it is what it is and commonly called: 'anecdotal' evidence. and therefore: not scientific. period. 8-) :wink:
regarding these specific two examples, I would not say they are that weak:
as catmeow also already said: it was about the written note, not about the birthday or the mother or the present, and it was exactly the same note as was read and seen before in the astral projection, fair enough to be called a "personal" validation (without bothering at all what Mr. Blanke, Mr Shermer or Mr Randi have to say about this :wink:)
the clothes example: well, it depends on the father's clothes wearing/changing-habits, if he really ALWAYS wears the same clothes, it surely would not be a strong validation indeed.
however, no statement can be found as to the father's habits of changing his wear, and it is at least said he wore "exactly" the same clothes. can we be the judge on this now?
the general problem is: if you see these "flaws" do you tend to give the close-minded/skeptic view more weight now? does it "dis"-prove anything on the spot?
we can detect flaws in everything, we can debunk everything, that is never a problem ... we should, however, never forget one thing: being also skeptical about skepticism :-P :wink:
debunking nowadays has become a rhetorical exercise performed by firm close-minded skeptics to 'talk down' facts that endanger their belief system - it is not really anymore about weighing alternatives by a fair process to get nearer to some truths - it's only their own chosen truth that counts
(i just noticed the provider's server is down, so the page cannot be viewed currently, as said, they are not just low-budget but even no-budget for me, but that has its downsides as it seems ... :wink:)
I guess I'm just frustrated because I would sincerely love to see a good validation, and instead am always disappointed. It's like someone asking you to try a tasty slice of cake and finding it to be full of sawdust.
Quote from: bluremi on March 04, 2011, 15:01:30
I guess I'm just frustrated because I would sincerely love to see a good validation, and instead am always disappointed. It's like someone asking you to try a tasty slice of cake and finding it to be full of sawdust.
Read Robert Monroe's first book. He's got an entire chapter where he dissects his validations.
Try Mindsight by Kenneth Ring
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mindsight-Near-Death-Out---Body-Experiences/dp/0595434975 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mindsight-Near-Death-Out---Body-Experiences/dp/0595434975)
Some interesting validations by people who were blind from birth reporting detailed visual-like perception during NDE. Intriguing whilst marred by one admitted fabrication*. Never the less very much has the ring of truth to it. I seem to remember there was one case where a blind NDE subject reported "seeing" a slipper in the gutter of the hospital roof, which was later verified. It could have been an elaborate hoax, but why bother?
* the "fabrication" was by an NDEr who gave an innacurate account, not by the author who has great integrity.
And there's so many more in literature (possibly something to find online, too) on great verifications by NDEs and Remote Viewing experiments.
For example, check out the books done by these researchers and physicians:
Kenneth Ring, Melvin Morse, Raymond Moody, Pim van Lommel, Jeffrey Long, Bruce Greyson (and some more!)
You will find statistics and lots of examples for verifications in these books, also because NDErs were involuntarily "skilled" RTZ-projectors.
:-D :evil: :wink:
Quote from: bluremi on March 04, 2011, 15:01:30
I guess I'm just frustrated because I would sincerely love to see a good validation, and instead am always disappointed. It's like someone asking you to try a tasty slice of cake and finding it to be full of sawdust.
The only "good validation" you will see will be your own. The more you experience, test and explore, the more you will find on a personal level. Make observations and build your conclusion unbiased by anything you've heard before.
Open minded scientists make a lot more sense to me than close minded scientists.
Quote from: Highergoals on March 08, 2011, 20:33:50
Open minded scientists make a lot more sense to me than close minded scientists.
A smart man once said that you learn more when you remain open, but skeptical. :)
Quote from: Xanth on March 09, 2011, 09:05:57
A smart man once said that you learn more when you remain open, but skeptical. :)
Yup, the mind is like a parachute, it only works when open.
Its too bad most scientists cant wrap their silly little minds around that concept
this was an enjoyable read with lots of intelligent input.
Having a scientific and analytical mind, I would say OBEs, APs and other metaphysical experiences are caused from the polar opposite, and are products of the "unconfused" opened and awakened mind. A confused mind is a mind that has horse blinders on, and follows the safety of the masses with traditional static thinking. Difficult to expand on one's awareness and the reality of things when they never look outside the box. There is also something called expectation bias, and this applies to skeptics as well. I can't think of anything that will stifle spiritual growth quicker than to have the preconceived notion that the spiritual realm does not exist.
Before I had all my metaphysical experiences, I always wanted to know and have proof of what lies beyond the veil, proof that we are more than our physical bodies, and proof of the existence of the afterlife. The closest thing I got to actual proof in some aspects is a word that was spoken out in a deep meditation that was fully unknown to me in the physical world. Once looked up it had particular meaning. This was so far beyond coincidence even the staunchest skeptic would take note. On another occasion I saw something that I had no idea had been reported to exist. The exquisite detail of the experience was beyond imagination or mere dream. I have also had numerous astral vision events (eyes closed) with associated energy bursts occurring simultaneously that are strong enough to wake me up and continue well after being fully awake. So this is just another example of what convinces me that these metaphysical occurrences are real.
Some of these events are so moving that we don't feel the need to "win over people" once we have witnessed the proof for ourselves. We are convinced of the reality of things, and that is what is the most important. I feel a sense honor that I have been allowed to see what I can see and I just feel the need to share my experiences in a positive light. Dealing with skeptics can be a bit of a downer, not only with this "science" subject, but with just about any subject, hobby or with life in general. Those with open minds will absorb info that resonates with them, while it will be swiftly rejected by the skeptics. It is what it is.
There are other examples and they all add up to convince us of the true realty of things. The more I see, the more I believe, the less I feel the need to prove anything. So even though proof would be nice and may add some extra reassurance, it is not something I am overly concerned with. My focus is on how to improve these experiences and evolve spiritually.
Good points, Frostytraveler!
The unconfused, open and awakened mind...that perspective was somehow clear to me, even at a very early age, but the fact of my youth compared to everyone in my family around me being older, and therefore, arguably more experienced and knowledgeable, led me into doubts which only slowly resolved over many years, even decades. Eventually, I learned to trust my instinct and intuition. I was right from the start.
Age 4 and 5, I had numerous OBEs and then the one ET abduction. The OBEs I kept to myself, only asking limited, probing questions of my parents and older brother...with zero feedback from them, I kept the OBE experiences to myself from then on. The UFO abduction at 5 was so terrifying that upon my being returned, I stood at the top of the stairs in the middle of the night and screamed until the whole family was standing there staring at me. Bad dream, they concluded, went back to bed wondering about my sanity and left me to my predicament. Over the next several years, I began to realize just how different I was from each of my immediate family members- at the newsstand, my dad was checking out Time magazine, the Wall Street Journal, gun magazines and Playboy; my mom was looking at Home Journal and Vogue; my brother was finding the best of Marvel comics...and me...I was looking at magazines featuring UFO and Bigfoot and Loch Ness monster stories...now, I was interested in all those other magazines, but these were my real interest...my family looked at me like I was the odd child out...
'Winning people over'...I tried that for a decade or so, but finally realized that we are all here on Earth learning different lessons and at differing rates of understanding/evolution. Even the people I speak with who have some grasp of these spiritual concepts, I realize that most of us are still on sufficiently different wavelengths that we manage to miscommunicate...I feel that frustration with them and I suspect they feel that frustration with me...it is a strange fact. Honestly, I have no one in my local sphere to talk with about these experiences- it is either online with the Pulse members, or a few I have established telephonic relationships with, or a few Monroe Institute members I stay in touch with. I shouldn't complain...this skeleton-network is now a bit more than ten years old, lol! I am truly thankful for it!
Throughout an individual life like each of us 'experiencers' is having, the accumulation of personal events finally adds up to a 'flashover' point, where our personal understanding of reality breaks with what the society around us is trying to dictate or insist 'must be the truth'...at this point, we have a bit of ego breakdown and re-definement...and we are faced with the choice to either remain in the conscripted world of society or break away and remain open to defining our own reality.
Thanks for the response. We definitely think along the same lines.
I am fortunate enough to have family that is willing and interested in my experiences and have been very helpful in dealing with all that has occurred in the past year. LightBeam and Xanth have also been incredibly helpful. It's important to communicate with those experienced in these matters to help process things as they occur.
Most of my family has always been somewhat interested in the paranormal and metaphysical. My brother and I from a very early age have been drawn to these topics for whatever reasons. Bigfoot, Loch Ness, UFOs, Ghost stories/hunting are all fair game for discussion, along with other more traditional matters (though at this point I can't stomach politics or professional sports chatter. ;) ).
The "flashover" point you mention was the case with me, as there is a very specific life occurrence that opened the door fully. No doubt about that.