A different view on OBE/AP: an article.

[catmeow]

Hi Xetrov

I have quite a lot to say in answer to you, but hey, it's Christmas and not much time...  An answer will follow within the next few days

catmeow

[Tombo]

Xetrov, can you please define Lucid Dream.

[Xetrov]

Hey catmeow,

Take your time there's no rush from my side, ill check your reply after christmas.

And hey Tombo,

I will think of your question and reply in the next few days when I have time. If I wanted to go into detail however I could write a huge book on the phenomenon of lucid dreaming (but ill try to keep it short then and to the point).

Have a nice X-mas everyone

[catmeow]

Hi Xetrov

My reply at last!  Sorry, it's long...

So this shows my point, OBE's from sleep stages are in essence the same phenomenon as lucid dreams, although people interpret them all differently according to their different viewpoints.

Well I agree that many OBE's initiated from sleep stages are in fact "private" LD's.  But it does not therefore follow that all sleep-initiated OBE's are LD's.

on returning to the physical, an OBE is still perceived as "just as real" as physical reality. This is not true of LD's.

To start, the quote I gave from the lucidity institute shows that this is a false premise. It is only based on the distinction a person makes when he/she is having an OBE "it looks so real it cannot be a LD", thus it has to be an OBE, but this is not necessarily true at all. So, I would argue that you should broaden your definition of what a LD is to include such experiences if they do not fit your definition of a LD (and yes this comes from my own experience as well).

Well you misunderstood what I said.  I said that on returning to the physical, an OBE is still perceived as real.  I don't care a jot what the individual thought whilst he was actually having the LD/OBE.  It's what he believes when he returns to physical waking consciousness that counts.  

It has happened to me many times that I returned from an outstandingly vivid LD which seemed pretty convincing at the time, only to realise when I woke up that it was "just a dream".  But for many people, when they return from OBE to PWC (physical waking consciousness) the experience is still just as real as the physical world.  In some cases, PWC actually feels "dreamlike" in comparison with the OBE, and the OBE feels "more real" in comprison. This is NOT addressed by the article, and I think you have mis-understood my point here.

During OBE sometimes 360 deg vision is experienced

Same argument, if vision is 360 deg then it has to be an OBE? It's absolutely not impossible that we can imagine a 360 degree vision in a LD without the need for our spiritual essence or whatever to "float free of the body"

Oh come on now!  How many times have you experienced 360 deg vision during LD?  Can you do this voluntarily during LD, let alone spontaneously, as OBE'rs report!  If you can do this during LD I'll give you my car (it's not a very good one!  )....  The accounts of LD/OBE I have read where 360 deg vision was present had other characteristics, which classified them (to me) as OBE, rather than LD.  These characteristics would be for instance "sense of utter reality" which persisted into PWC, observing the physical world accurately without fantasy constructs, or else the experience occurred spontaneously whilst the individual was physically active.  Show me an account of LD where there is 360 deg vision, and I'll show you an OBE!

During OBE information about the physical world is sometimes obtained which cannot be perceived at the time with the physical senses .

I explained already in detail that this information can be obtained through ESP.

And so have I.  But the article doesn't mention this aspect, because it's a complication which detracts from their theory.  But yes, we can have LD's with ESP.  I agree.

During OBE sometimes the individual is a "point of consciousness"  

I can do this in a LD aswell, no big deal. Its a matter of exploring the possibilities of the mental world you are in while LD-ing, you would be amazed at what you (and your subconscious self) are able to imagine.

Once again point-consciousness is not mentioned in the article, because it detracts from their self-body-image hypothesis.  Point-consciousness is much more common, in experiences that I classify as OBE than it is in LD, and it is (IMHO) a valid "indicator" of the difference between the two experiences.

Some OBE's occur whilst the individual is physically active ie driving a car, playing an organ etc, ie whilst physically awake!  

Ok now I agree this is really interesting information

Yes it is and it cannot just be shrugged off with a simple explanation of "daydreaming".  According to your classification of LD/OBE, the physical body is in some sort of REM sleep.  It is not awake, singing in a choir, giving a sermon, walking, riding a motorbike, playing a piano, or taking a driving test!  I read of one case where a lady (I think it was a lady) was giving a sermon in a church when she found herself literally "beside herself" and observed her physical "self" completing the entire sermon.  Not only that, but one member of the congregation came up to her afterwards and said that she had seen her standing beside herself during the sermon.  I think you're pushing your theory that real OBE's only happen during NDE if you simply dismiss cases like these?  You need to take them into account.  I'll try to find this particular "sermon" case if you are interested?

Now just to elaborate a little more on some points you dismissed:

The Lucidity Institute postulate that OBE is simply an LD. The sensation of floating above the bed occurs because of "the cessation of the sensation of gravity" as our senses shut down. The person however "retains the feeling of having a body" despite his senses shutting down. Okay, let's accept all of that.  But why on earth would a person spontaneously experience 360 deg vision during OBE, when this has no parallel whatsoever in his normal physical life?  Not only has it no parallel, but it's also pretty difficult to visualise.  Now if this 360 deg vision thing was an isolated incident then I'd be willing to let it go.  But it isn't.  It's a common theme reported in OBE's all over the world and there is absolutely no reason for it.  Where is the parallel in physical life?  Why should all manner of different individuals report this? Well the obvious explanation is that these individuals are using sensory mechanisms native to the new realm they find themselves in.  These are not just imaginings...

Now, there is the matter of OBE's which occur while people are physically active.  How does this fit with the REM sleep/LD model?  What is going on?  Let's take the example of the driving test, which I quoted.  So according to your theory, is this individual asleep? Or is he awake? Is he dreaming?  How do you explain it?  There are clearly two copies of consciousness operating - one is performing a driving test and the other is thinking independently from a viewpoint on the roof of the car.  This is easy to explain using RB's "mind split" model.  But how do you explain it?

And finally, the LD/ESP model which you apply to normal OBE's applies equally to NDE-OBE's.  Here's how it works:

A person dies in the operating theatre.  All of his bodily functions shut down, his blood flow has stopped and his EEG is flat.  The surgeons operate quickly and then resuscitate him.  As he begins to come round and in the instant before he opens his eyes he has an LD.  In this LD he imagines himself floating above the operating theatre watching the surgeons operate.  When he later compares notes with the surgeons he finds that everything agrees!  How could this have been? What he describes occurred whilst he was dead, whilst his EEG was flat?  So he must have been experiencing this whilst he was medically "dead".  Not so! In actual fact his experience did NOT occur during the operation, it occurred in the instant before he woke up whilst his blood was flowing and his EEG was normal.  All the information he apparently obtained about the operation was obtained by ESP from the minds and memories of those in the operating room.  Or else it was just obtained clairvoyantly from psychic imprints of the previous events in the "ether".

So you see the LD/ESP model applies as equally to NDE-OBE as it does to normal OBE.  If you argue "LD/ESP" for all the cases I quoted, where people were conducting driving tests and playing church organs, whilst they were OBE, then I will argue "LD/ESP" for all the NDE-OBE cases you mention.  There is no difference.  You can't have it all your own way!

Finally, I don't understand your reluctance to accept OBE as a genuine experience.  Given the fact that you accept human survival of bodily death, why do you refuse to accept the possibility of a person temporarily leaving the body whilst he is still alive?!  

catmeow

[FreeChile]

I posted this just before starting to read this thread in the experiences section of Astral and now I see it more or less belongs here.  Hopefully it can contribute well to this discussion.  I am more inclined to think in terms of the physical body but I am quite open to other possibilities.  This inclination is mostly due to my academic upbringing.

Also, Xetrov, it appears that you and most people on this site make a few other assumptions I would like to express now.

1.  The assumption that there is a mind. Not explored here.
2.  The assumption that there is such a thing as consciousness.  Also not explored here.
3.  Most importantly, that the mind, if it exists, is confined to one location.  In your case, the brain.

If you want to make an argument for a physical body hypothesis, I would start by not limiting yourself to the powers of the brain but extend that perhaps to the powers of the nervous system.  It may be possible that every neuron is highly important and that the ability of the nervous system to adapt is quite immense--simply judging from the number of interconnections between neurons.

My belief is that the nervous system is re-wired or reconnected based on our experiences (more or less like a neural network--to speak in Computerese).  In fact, we are creating such neural nets in Computer Science but the power of these systems is so minimal compared to the capability of the nervous system.

----------------

For example, after I started energy development using NEW, my body reacted very radically and I simply could not understand any of the things that were happening to me.  This caused so much anxiety in me that I preferred not to sleep.  And many times during the night I would reject sleep for fear that I would get possessed or something.  Grant it that I do not believe in such things but I had read about it here on this site.

To shorten it, I think my desire to remain awake and the nervous system's function as a regulator lead to walking hallucinations or visions.  The vision seems to me now to have been all about me, my concerns, my memories, and my experiences.  

I think this was the nervous system at its best, reconnecting to adjust to a radical experience which caused extreme anxiety and distress.
Now I have less anxiety, and with time, I feel the system will make all necessary connections to bring me back to "normal."

----------------
Here's what I had posted earlier on OBE.

When I was young, I remember being glued to the TV while laying on the living room couch or the floor. After a prolonged period of time, I've noticed my pupils dilate and later experience a sensation similar to an OBE. If you are familiar with this and have OBE experiences perhaps you can comment. During this experience, the TV set seems to get smaller and further away from the physical body and some effort to bring it back to actual focus does not help. I have tried blinking in some cases to no avail. Getting up has helped sometimes.

This leads me to the conclusion that an OBE may actually be a form of dream and not the reverse. Grant it that in such cases, I would have probably transitioned into a dream unless the desire to continue watching the show was greater than the inclination to rest.

It is possible that the fact that I was horizontal for a prolonged time signaled my body to sleep plus me not really wanting to due to my focus on the screen, caused the discrepancy, which in turn caused the mild OBE.

You see the nervous system is very intelligent and it tries its best to adapt to a given situation. There was an apparent contradiction, which the nervous system resolved given some time.

Perhaps those of you who OBE frequently could try that as an experiment to see how long it actually takes to OBE that way. Keep in mind that this may take some hours of watching TV in a horizontal position; also, try nothing else, not even a snack in the middle.

Could this be the case also with meditation induced OBEs?

Please note that I have never experienced an OBE otherwise nor have I explored the TV OBE any further. Also, the experience I expressed does not result in any exit or entry vibrations.

[Xetrov]

Catmeow, thanks for your elaborate reply!

Ill try to answer to a few of the points you raised, I must admit some of them are rather intriguing and make me think a lot about these issues. First of all let me briefly reply to what you wrote in the end of your reply; "why do you refuse to accept the possibility of a person temporarily leaving the body whilst he is still alive".

Well this is true and false. Yes I have been making myself rather clear here that I refuse to accept that during a RB type-OBE someone's spirit leaves their body, because sofar I have seen no evidence to definitely prove that this has to be true. However inclined I am to prove my own viewpoint, this does not exclude the possibility that given the right information I would change my ideas according to those of Bruce. However unsettling and incoherent my ideas might sound to the lot of you, I have come to a few points that are just not explained by Bruce and which contradict his ideas.

Why are there people born blind that can see during NDE-OBE, if those OBE's are the same as RB type-OBE?
Why does a RB type-OBE correlate exactly with the activation of the visual cortex, or To put it differently, why can't such an OBE be initiated from beyond deep sleep where the visual cortex is offline?
Nothing proves to me that, as Bruce claims, the astral is a fluid medium which is responsible for our dreams and which is prone to influence by thought. This can just as well be explained by the theory that dreams are only internal events.

So you see my ideas (they are not just my ideas alone, mind you) might have some 'gaps' to some of you (although I really do my best to explain any such gaps as I see them arrive, yet perhaps there will be some which I cannot explain, but that remains to be seen), this does for sure not mean that Bruce's ideas are perfectly sound and coherent. Indeed, to me they are absolutely not.

Also to come back to your claim, I have never said that a person cannot temporarily leave their body while alive, just that it is a lot more difficult then Bruce wants us all to believe because the only way this is possible is to initiate a NDE. Note that I seem to be supported in this notion by someone with a decent reputation and experience like  Clark and also by the knowledge of ancient tradition Yogi's. Ofcourse this doesnt prove anything to you but I thought i'd just mention it to show im not the only one ranting these ideas.

That said I'd also like to make clear what exactly I see as a lucid dream (since people have been asking for it and it would also help to clarify my viewpoint).

First of all we have the usual definition of a LD: Any dream in which the subject who dreams becomes aware of the fact that he or she is dreaming.
Yet this doesnt cover all phenomenon that are related to lucid dreaming. Therefore I also propose to define the phenomenon itself as: Any state of lowered brainwave activity resulting in either sleep or trance during which the subject retains his or her awareness. This awareness can range from 'only' knowing that one is dreaming / in trance to full inclusion of all daily conscious faculties, including but not limited to all memories and full consciousness.

Now this is clear, I want to say a final word about that article I linked. It is indeed totally incomplete and shows only a small picture of OBE related information,  I only wanted to make you read it because it states very clearly that although many OBE's from sleep and trance stages look a lot like someone genuinely leaving their body, this explanation doesnt hold in most cases. Just as in your case Catmeow, if I remember correctly you explained that most of your lucid dreams are initiated in such a way (through exit procedures). So you see I didnt necessarily put that article there to prove anything to you,  just to show that my point of view on this matter is not just something I have come up with overnight. And yes I agree this does absolutely not prove that a 'genuine' OBE is impossible from sleep/trance conditions, I totally agree on that. Yet many people on this forum claim that nearly every exit procedure from sleep/trance they initiate leads to a 'genuine' OBE. Perhaps this doesnt count for the more advanced OBE-ers here, Im not pointing at anyone, but it certainly counts for a lot of people (especially people new to all this).

Then something about all the additional features you would like to see included into the definition of OBE (and which I tried to counter with some arguments): I still believe it is all a matter of convincing yourself about what's what.

It has happened to me many times that I returned from an outstandingly vivid LD which seemed pretty convincing at the time, only to realize when I woke up that it was "just a dream". But for many people, when they return from OBE to PWC (physical waking consciousness) the experience is still just as real as the physical world. In some cases, PWC actually feels "dreamlike" in comparison with the OBE, and the OBE feels "more real" in comprison. This is NOT addressed by the article, and I think you have mis-understood my point here.

First of all I would like to inquire after the amount of daily consciousness you retain in your lucids. Also, what did you mean when you said "only to realize when I woke up that it was "just a dream""? Do you mean to say  that during the LD, you did not (perhaps not fully) realize it was a dream? What do you mean by "an outstandingly vivid LD which seemed pretty convincing at the time"? Of what were you convinced at the time? Do you mean that you only realize after you wake up that you had a lucid dream? Please elaborate as I am now confused about what your LD experiences are.

Well now about the argument. If someone has had a RB style-OBE and he/she wakes up, and still believes it was perfectly real as you say, then it had to be an OBE and not a LD. Well that's just a definition, it doesnt necessarily mean it is true. I mean also, these people are also already convinced it had to be a real OBE. However it could be very well a feature of a dream in which one remains fully conscious. What is your evidence that when such an experience seems real after wards it HAS to be a genuine OBE? Also let's not invoke that article again since I already know very well its limitations.

How many times have you experienced 360 deg vision during LD? Can you do this voluntarily during LD, let alone spontaneously, as OBE'rs report! If you can do this during LD I'll give you my car (it's not a very good one! )

Not yet, but start driving . Ill accept your challenge, and I will report on it as soon as I am able to get a decent LD again (which should be soon I hope). The fact that during an OBE people have reported to have spontaneous 360 degree vision is interesting however, are you sure these people had never read or heard anywhere about this before, so that it was 100% spontaneous? Could you show me where you got this information? Also, I wonder, is 360 degree vision per definition part of a 'genuine' OBE (meaning, without it, it isnt one?). If not, why are there differences in degrees of vision in different OBE accounts? Why does someone have it and someone else not? Should it not be that we all ought to have it, since I assume that you realize that if what you claim is true, and the astral body is set free, then the astral senses take over from the physical / internal ones. Why would the astral senses in such a scenario show 360 degree vision to one person (and perhaps not even always), and not to another person?

The accounts of LD/OBE I have read where 360 deg vision was present had other characteristics, which classified them (to me) as OBE, rather than LD. These characteristics would be for instance "sense of utter reality" which persisted into PWC, observing the physical world accurately without fantasy constructs, or else the experience occurred spontaneously whilst the individual was physically active.

Yes this might be so but we were arguing about 360 degree vision, but anyway your remarks do have relevance for the discussion. Let me however give you an analogy to show you my argument. A child goes to an illusionist with his parents, and he watches the illusionist as he makes objects fly through the building. He is so fascinated that he goes again and again to see the same show. Now the child might believe that what he sees is exactly what happens and that the illusionist really has magical powers to make objects fly through space.... Ok now I agree this is a rude analogy, but I wanted to say that if you have experienced RB type-OBE's a lot, and you had 360 degree vision and point-consciousness each time and also when you woke up, each time you 'knew' it was real, etc, then ofcourse you will define these experiences as 'genuine' OBE's.  To use another one metaphor, to me it's like saying, a house (LD) is a building (Dream) but a castle (RB type-OBE) is clearly not, because it has so many different characteristics.Also please dont think that I compare any of you to a child or that I say that your arguments dont make any sense, because that's not so I was merely trying to make my view more clear.

I think part of the problem might be a definition issue perhaps, since I have claimed that RB type-OBE's are similar to LD's. I didn't mean they are the same (as in, a castle is a house) but that the underlying phenomenon is the same; both are dream experiences, and dreams are caused by visual cortex activity (so a castle and a house are both buildings).

it cannot just be shrugged off with a simple explanation of "daydreaming". According to your classification of LD/OBE, the physical body is in some sort of REM sleep. It is not awake, singing in a choir, giving a sermon, walking, riding a motorbike, playing a piano, or taking a driving test!

Im not shrugging off anything! Im trying to explain certain phenomena from within my viewpoint, and when you can show me for 100% that Im not correct, I'll congratulate you and we all live happily ever after. But no kidding. I have heard of people that are able to visualize any situation during waking life, and at the same moment kind of "dream" that they are there (so at that point, they really are, mentally speaking). So this is not just some mere insane idea I came up with, also its not 'just' simply daydreaming as most of us won't be able to do this (since it involves a photographic memory). Also, uptill now we have indeed been arguing about RB type-OBE's from sleep and trance stages, and for these to happen you don't need to be in "some sort of REM sleep". As I explained (I think), your brainwave-activity has to drop significantly from beta to alpha and theta, which indicates relaxation of physical body and heightened internal activity in visual cortex by release of certain neurotransmitters. It is certainly not impossible that this can even happen for some people during normal daily activity and even when they don't expect it. Furthermore, you can fully immerse yourself in such an experience while continuing to perform very complex daily tasks without being (fully) aware of it! Hence the people that have OBE's during driving tests, or in churches etc. I found a nice example to show you in which direction this can go, an account of an OBE experience by Susan Blackmore, you can find it here:

http://www.issc-taste.org/arc/dbo.cgi?set=expom&id=00075&ss=1

The interesting thing in this account was that she was still able to keep talking during all the time she had the OBE, yet she had no control or feeling of her body. You see I am not dismissing anything and really trying to take any case of OBE into my explanations. It is just that I see so many 'holes' in Bruce's theory that I am inclined to try to explain these phenomena in a different way then most people here do. This does not mean however that Im not open to different explanations as I have said before, however I have seen no reason yet nor any full evidence that Bruce has to be right in his ideas. What I propose, even on these OBE's during waking life, can be true.

But why on earth would a person spontaneously experience 360 deg vision during OBE, when this has no parallel whatsoever in his normal physical life? Not only has it no parallel, but it's also pretty difficult to visualize. Now if this 360 deg vision thing was an isolated incident then I'd be willing to let it go. But it isn't. It's a common theme reported in OBE's all over the world and there is absolutely no reason for it.

Well ok back once more to the 360 discussion. Do you mean to say that everything we experience in a (lucid)dream needs to have parallels in physical waking life? Do you mean that, stuff that is difficult to visualize would be impossible to do in a LD? I can prove the contrary. And sure, it isnt an isolated incident, a common theme even. If you are aware of Susan blackmore's theory on 'memes', you could argue that this is for a large part why people are able to experience 360 degree vision in the 1st place.

these individuals are using sensory mechanisms native to the new realm they find themselves in

I think you meant here that they are using their astral senses, the use of which is native to the astral (new) realm they find themselves in. Well yes, perhaps this is true! But, does that mean they need to have their spirit disconnected from their bodies? I would argue not, because using our astral senses is already possible when we are awake or 'merely' in a LD (remember ESP). Use of astral senses just seems to be limited during physical life, but that doesnt mean its impossible to perceive in 360. So this doesnt prove nor disprove anything. It could very well be that in a RB type-OBE, we are really in an elaborate form of Lding, which allows some of us to visualize in 360, either because we can imagine it, or either because we can use our astral senses to allow such a way of viewing.

the LD/ESP model which you apply to normal OBE's applies equally to NDE-OBE's

Might be true (no way to disprove what you wrote here). But what does that prove? That my theory can be incoherent if you apply a certain way of reasoning about it? Ofcourse it can! There are still so many variables in my and in Bruce's theories too, variables that have to be researched and/or experienced before anyone can with certainty say anything about it. Yet in my viewpoint I can explain these things in a coherent way (you have to admit my view is coherent albeit perhaps not true, but that's another story), but in Bruce's theory there are loopholes which aren't explained yet.

So what I dont understand is all of your reluctance to explore possible different ways of explaining the OBE phenomenon.

Well anyway Catmeow, thanks for your reply and let's see what the future brings in this discussion, I hope we can still continue it for a while (and no need to hurry ofcourse, take your time!).

Greetings,
Xetrov.


PS: I will reply to FreeChile later since my time is also limited

[catmeow]

Hi Xetrov

No time now, but I will reply when I have more time!  But I think my car is safe!  

catmeow

[Tombo]

First of all we have the usual definition of a LD: Any dream in which the subject who dreams becomes aware of the fact that he or she is dreaming.

This is a bad definition cause it avoids to define "Dream"

Yet this doesnt cover all phenomenon that are related to lucid dreaming. Therefore I also propose to define the phenomenon itself as: Any state of lowered brainwave activity resulting in either sleep or trance during which the subject retains his or her awareness. This awareness can range from 'only' knowing that one is dreaming / in trance to full inclusion of all daily conscious faculties, including but not limited to all memories and full consciousness.

If this is your definition of LD, then  OBE=LD is fine with me..........

[Xetrov]

Hello freechille.

I assume we have a mind (and I think most of us do), because I seem to be/have a thinking, conscious self. What alternative would there be, that we have no mind? How would you propose that could be? Also, I assume I am conscious, how else could I think and be aware of myself, of my surroundings, of emotions etc?

Your question in 3 is a good one, and I have argued and I guess most people here would agree as far as I have heard their ideas on this forum, that the mind is not physically located anywhere. Only that the place where it is generated / maintained / sustained (and influenced) is located, a least partly in our nervous system (thanks for pointing that out, its ofcourse not 'just' the brain indeed). I will soon post my new article here in which i delve a little deeper into this issue. The location of the mind in this definition would be equal to whatever it is currently focused on (a dream, a thought etc). I also share your idea on the nervous system as a system that rewires and reconnects depending on our experiences.  

The experience you describe is a good example indeed of how our body, nervous system and conscious mind can interact to create the illusion of an OBE, where our spirit leaves the body. I think there are several possible situations during which this might happen, all of which can result in either a clear OBE situation to merely a feeling of being OBE (or anywhere in between). Examples are plenty and include OBE's induced from sleep (from LD), from trance, and your experience. It would be good to keep an open mind and to explore all brain/nervous system related phenomena before we conclude that such OBE's are really the result of our spiritual matter disconnecting from the body.

Perhaps those of you who OBE frequently could try that as an experiment to see how long it actually takes to OBE that way.

I think some people can do this very quickly, in a matter of seconds, either voluntarily or by accident. When it happens by accident, and if it is accompanied with an exit procedure (which is certainly a possibility we should take into account), it surely looks like a 'genuine' OBE.

Could this be the case also with meditation induced OBEs?

Yes, although  perhaps those are different in that during meditation, you are even more closely trying to reach the perfect situation for an OBE to occur, which is a super relaxed body, an aware mind and low (alpha/theta) brainwaves. In a trance like this, it is easy to visualize in great detail a sort of 'dream' where you float free of your physical body.

[Tombo]

First of all we have the usual definition of a LD: Any dream in which the subject who dreams becomes aware of the fact that he or she is dreaming.

This is a bad definition cause it avoids to define "Dream"

Yet this doesnt cover all phenomenon that are related to lucid dreaming. Therefore I also propose to define the phenomenon itself as: Any state of lowered brainwave activity resulting in either sleep or trance during which the subject retains his or her awareness. This awareness can range from 'only' knowing that one is dreaming / in trance to full inclusion of all daily conscious faculties, including but not limited to all memories and full consciousness.

If this is your definition of LD, then  OBE=LD is fine with me..........

Hmmm... Just a thought: Your definition of LD automatically includes all Conscious Experiences That do NOT happen during waking Life or Brain dead. So basically all OBE's are now per definition labeled LD. Do you really want that?
Assuming it is possible to separate the spirit during Sleep and have a "real" OBE (in your terminology) , this would now still be defined as a LD! Do you see what I mean?

[Xetrov]

Tombo: I know what you mean. But separation of spirit without NDE or really dying isn't possible so yes, I would say that all these experiences share the same fundamental principle as the phenomenon of lucid dreaming, which is that they are "internal" (so not fully placed in the astral), mental events. Note however that the term "lucid dreaming" is just a label for a subset of these experiences.

I have by the way come across a very interesting article to show you some more scientific evidence that my viewpoint is no-nonsense. I would highly suggest for anyone to read the following:

http://www.geocities.com/franzbardon/virtuallimbs.html

It shows to me some interesting facts. First of all they agree with most of us here that we have (ofcourse) a mental model of our physical bodies. A mental model which, according to research, is even hard wired into our nervous system. To quote their findings on this issue:

The important point is, in my opinion, Melzacks assumption that this body scheme represented by the neuromatrix is working on its own but is constantly "updated" by the sensory inputs which come from the diverse parts of our body. Therefore, if we cut the input from the sensory apparatus down in some way then this neural network which processes these signals will take over and will create the impression of a separate body besides the "real, material" body. Therefore we can speak about two systems:
1. Our body and the sensory systems which connect us to the "real (=outside) world", and
2. The artificial body scheme generated in the brain by the neuromatrix = neurosignature. ..

As long as we live an "ordinary" life and nothing special happens, the difference between these two working systems gets by unnoticed. Only if the first system gets separated from the second one by any means, the autonomous working of the second one becomes apparent.

You see here what happens if in any way we lose contact with the physical bodily sensory information flow, the mind will automatically switch purely to this mental image of our bodies. This is what happens when we perform an exit procedure from trance/ sleep (remember i focused on the smooth transition which makes us really believe we go OBE), but if can also happen I think under certain circumstances during waking life (an issue to be explored further). Also this does not mean ofcourse we cannot experience other mental constructs (like as said here, be a flower or a bird), it just shows that as a standard, normally the mind will automatically switch to this internal model of our physical body.

As i have said before here on the forum, what you are doing when you enter an RB type-OBE is what Bardon calls "mental wandering". Ofcourse the argument will go like, "yeah but that's Bardon's words vs Bruce's", and I agree. It's up to us to explore the truths behind each of their claims. It's still interesting though that Bardon's mental wandering can now partly be explained by science. Also I reckon most people will not like the final remark of that article...

What we learn by Bardons method is not to reach the "astral plane" but to control our own body image neuronal network.

... yet I fully agree  

[catmeow]

Hi Xetrov!

Sorry about the long delay, but there really is no urgency I feel in our discussion...?  

I don't understand your reluctance to accept OBE as a genuine experience. Given the fact that you accept human survival of bodily death, why do you refuse to accept the possibility of a person temporarily leaving the body whilst he is still alive?!

I'm still waiting for a comprehensible answer to this?  What I'm trying to say is, given the fact that you accept that "spirit can leave body", I can't understand your inisistance that this can't happen whilst the physical body is alive?  Your argument seems to be:

I have seen no evidence to definitely prove that this has to be true

But this is equally true of NDE-OBE.  There is no evidence to definitely prove that NDE-OBE is "spirit leaving body" either.   Ultimately these things can not be proven, and we can argue in circles over this for months.  Given the fact that we both accept that "spirit can leave body", it seems that you then place an additional and an unnecessary constraint that "body must be dead".   Why? I don't understand?  You talk about "evidence" but the overwhelming "evidence" is that "spirit leaves body", even when the body is alive.

We should apply in each case the simplest theory which fits the observed facts (Occam's Razor).  For the cases I cited, I think that this is that "spirit leaves body" and not that "person has hallucination about leaving body coupled with ESP, coupled with self-body image, coupled with hallucination and ESP of second individual who thinks he saw first individual out of his body" etc etc...!

To put it differently, why can't such an OBE be initiated from beyond deep sleep where the visual cortex is offline?

Who says an OBE can't be initiated whilst the visual cortex is offline?  

I have never said that a person cannot temporarily leave their body while alive, just that it is a lot more difficult then Bruce wants us all to believe because the only way this is possible is to initiate a NDE.

Well this is exactly what I am disputing.  You say a person needs to be NDE to OBE and I say they don't!

Therefore I also propose to define the phenomenon [Lucd Dream] itself as: Any state of lowered brainwave activity resulting in either sleep or trance during which the subject retains his or her awareness. This awareness can range from 'only' knowing that one is dreaming / in trance to full inclusion of all daily conscious faculties, including but not limited to all memories and full consciousness.

Doesn't this definition also include NDE-OBE where brainwave activity is reduced to zero?     I would like to see the EEG of those cases of "waking OBE" I quoted where people were taking driving tests and riding motorbikes.  It would be interesting if these showed a normal EEG, because then they would be excluded from your definition.

The following article discusses EEG, measured for various individuals during OBE:

http://www.psywww.com/asc/obe/faq/obe17.html

From this article:

But perhaps most important is that in no case so far did there seem to be a discrete state in which the OBE took place. There were no sudden changes in either EEG or autonomic functions to mark the beginning or end of the OBE. Any changes were gradual; unlike dreaming, the OBE does not seem to be associated with a discrete physiological state.

And again:

The one other subject who has taken part in a large number of OBE experiments is Keith ('Blue') Harary. ... Here there were no changes in EEG. The amount and frequency of alpha were the same in OBE and 'cool down' periods and there were only slightly fewer eye movements in the OBE phases. These measurements alone show that Harary was awake and that his OBEs did not occur in a sleeping, dreaming or borderline state.

These results disagree with your view of LD/OBE as only occurring during alpha/theta EEG.  For at least one subject (Keith Harary), OBE's take place during normal EEG.  So his OBE's also do not fall within your definition of LD/OBE.

Now to answer some of your questions

It has happened to me many times that I returned from an outstandingly vivid LD which seemed pretty convincing at the time, only to realize when I woke up that it was "just a dream"...

First of all I would like to inquire after the amount of daily consciousness you retain in your lucids. Also, what did you mean when you said "only to realize when I woke up that it was "just a dream""? Do you mean to say that during the LD, you did not (perhaps not fully) realize it was a dream? What do you mean by "an outstandingly vivid LD which seemed pretty convincing at the time"? Of what were you convinced at the time? Do you mean that you only realize after you wake up that you had a lucid dream? Please elaborate as I am now confused about what your LD experiences are.

We need to distinguish (at least) three closely related things during LD/OBE:

1. Level of consciousness
2. Vividness of scenery
3. Sense of "reality"

In my experience these are three different things. During my LD's my level of consciousness can be anything from dream like to very nearly full PWC.  Also, the scenery can be anything from grey and washed out to extremely vivid, and in fact definitely as vivid as PWC.  The sensation of "reality" for me varies from "dreamlike" to "real".

So during an LD my level of consciousness is usually pretty good, though not quite up to PWC.  I am always aware that it is an LD at the time.  I do not have to wake up before I realise it is an LD!  I know for sure at the time.  An "outstandingly vivid" LD is one where the visual scenery is very vivid.  For me this is often the case, the scenery can be marvellously detailed and vivid, every bit as vivid as PWC.  Also at the time, the experience usually "feels real".  It is only when I wake up and compare the "sense of reality" during the LD with the "sense of reality" I am now experiencing during PWC, that I realise the LD was inferior.  On only a very small number of occasions has this not been the case, in other words, it has only happened a few times that when I woke up the LD felt as "real" as PWC.

What is your evidence that when such an experience seems real after wards it HAS to be a genuine OBE?

That isn't what I'm saying.  I believe there is a difference between LD and OBE and for those who experience both LD and OBE, this difference is pretty obvious.  One of the characteristics of OBE is that it still seems "real" when the individual wakes up.

The fact that during an OBE people have reported to have spontaneous 360 degree vision is interesting however, are you sure these people had never read or heard anywhere about this before, so that it was 100% spontaneous? Could you show me where you got this information?

I can't be sure that these people never heard of 360 deg vision.  I'll do some research to see if I can dig up some interesting cases.  360 deg vision is again one of my "OBE pointers".  In fact I would go as far as to say that if you have 360 deg vision then that is strong enough on its own to indicate OBE rather than LD.

If not, why are there differences in degrees of vision in different OBE accounts? Why does someone have it and someone else not? Should it not be that we all ought to have it, since I assume that you realize that if what you claim is true, and the astral body is set free, then the astral senses take over from the physical / internal ones. Why would the astral senses in such a scenario show 360 degree vision to one person (and perhaps not even always), and not to another person?

Don't know.    I assume that it's like "focussing" your physical eyes.  If you concentrate on one spot whilst OBE you get normal vision.  But if you focus on all of your surroundings, your astral senses open up and you get 360 deg vision.  Seems perfectly sensible to me?

As I explained (I think), your brainwave-activity has to drop significantly from beta to alpha and theta, which indicates relaxation of physical body and heightened internal activity in visual cortex by release of certain neurotransmitters. It is certainly not impossible that this can even happen for some people during normal daily activity and even when they don't expect it.

Well of course we need to hook these people up to EEG whilst they are having their "waking OBE's".  I think you might be surprised with the results if we could do that.  As I already showed (in the article I linked to above) EEG measurements have already been taken, which completely contradict your alpha/theta EEG theory.  Can you explain this?

Well ok back once more to the 360 discussion. Do you mean to say that everything we experience in a (lucid)dream needs to have parallels in physical waking life? Do you mean that, stuff that is difficult to visualize would be impossible to do in a LD?

Nope, it's just that the the "parallel" aragument is conveniently trotted out to explain the "self-body-image", but the "parallel" argument is then conveniently dropped and discounted (by yourself) when talking about point-consciousness and 360 deg vision.  It seems that on the one hand it's a "good argument" and on the other hand it's "unnecessary".  So which is it?  

the LD/ESP model which you apply to normal OBE's applies equally to NDE-OBE's  

Might be true (no way to disprove what you wrote here). But what does that prove?

The point I'm trying to make is that the LD/ESP model can be misused to disprove your position, just as well as it can be misused to disprove mine.  What we should be using, in both cases, is the simplest theory  which explains the observed facts (Occam's Razor again).  This means that in NDE-OBE the spirit leaves the body, and also in normal OBE, the spirit leaves the body!  

So what I dont understand is all of your reluctance to explore possible different ways of explaining the OBE phenomenon.

Aha!  trying to turn my own argument against me!     Well I have no reluctance to explain OBE's as LD's.  Some of them, even many of them are LD's.  But a very significant proportion of OBE's are exactly what they appear to be, "spirit leaving body".

btw, how is the "360 deg vison during LD" experiment coming along?  Is my car safe?  

catmeow

[Xetrov]

Hey catmeow, ill reply in length soon, but just one small remark now.

btw, how is the "360 deg vison during LD" experiment coming along?  Is my car safe?   catmeow

I have not yet had a significant high Lucid dream to test it. However I have been asking around to some people I know very closely (and trust at least as much as I trust you!), and they have said that they have 360 degree vision when they reach their highest state of lucidity (so yes, in a LD). I can paste the log or get you in contact with this person if you don't believe me

So eh, does that earn me a car yet?  

[catmeow]

Hi Xetrov!

That's very interesting indeed.  And yes my car is about 4 inches in length and comes in a little cardboard box!  

I'd love to hear from your friends!

Best wishes
catmeow

[Tombo]

have by the way come across a very interesting article to show you some more scientific evidence that my viewpoint is no-nonsense. I would highly suggest for anyone to read the following:

http://www.geocities.com/franzbardon/virtuallimbs.html

I never thought your Ideas are nonsense.But In my view this article does not in any way show evidence that a neuromatrix is more likely then a Astral body existing besides the physical body. All observed Phenomenon are explainable with both Theories.

But this is equally true of NDE-OBE. There is no evidence to definitely prove that NDE-OBE is "spirit leaving body" either.  Ultimately these things can not be proven, and we can argue in circles over this for months. Given the fact that we both accept that "spirit can leave body", it seems that you then place an additional and an unnecessary constraint that "body must be dead". Why? I don't understand? You talk about "evidence" but the overwhelming "evidence" is that "spirit leaves body", even when the body is alive

I agree.. what evidence have we any way, to assume there is a spirit? I think none,  that one could not explain away If one is a little creative with theories one can easily explain all experiences a human being has without a spirit. (  most scientists do exactly that! )
What evidence do we have that spirit leaves the Body, well this question is the wrong way, I think. Let me ask this: What evidence do we have that conscious is not the more appropriate description of what we are then spirit? Conscious can leave Body during sleep, that we know, so if we are not Spirit, but Conscious (a more plausible assumption I think) the discussion would be finished.

I think the Problem is the following:
We do not understand what the mind really is nor do we have any good explanation for conscious itself.  But ultimately we are "mind". If we focus our conscious to remote places and become conscious of things there, we have a fact that modern science can not explain! You can use ESP (unexplained I think!) Neorimatrix etc.. but ultimately we do not understand conscious and therefore this theories are , in my view,  not satisfying cause they fail to explain the most essential part.
It seem s to me that explaining Conscious with science is like explaining a melody with words.....Not possible
So I guess, our dispute is doomed to fail (    @ Frank)





To FreeChile

Also, Xetrov, it appears that you and most people on this site make a few other assumptions I would like to express now.

1. The assumption that there is a mind. Not explored here.
2. The assumption that there is such a thing as consciousness. Also not explored here.

It seems to me like you are saying, It is a assumption to say "We are"    
What do you mean? I don't get it.......

[Xetrov]

Hello everyone,

Catmeow and Tombo, thanks for your replies. I hope we're not getting tired of this discussion yet (I'm not, but I am jobless for the moment, so I got plenty of time to write huge posts ). I'll see if I can make you understand better why some people seem so reluctant to go with some of Bruce's viewpoints.

catmeow wrote:
I don't understand your reluctance to accept OBE as a genuine experience. Given the fact that you accept human survival of bodily death, why do you refuse to accept the possibility of a person temporarily leaving the body whilst he is still alive?!

I'm still waiting for a comprehensible answer to this? What I'm trying to say  is, given the fact that you accept that "spirit can leave body", I can't understand your inisistance that this can't happen whilst the physical body is alive?

First of all I never said its not genuine. But I understand what you mean anyway.The answer lies, to start with, also in this:

Who says an OBE can't be initiated whilst the visual cortex is offline?

To continue, this also has to do with what Tombo wrote:

In my view this article does not in any way show evidence that a neuromatrix is more likely then a Astral body existing besides the physical body. All observed Phenomenon are explainable with both Theories.

Ok so we have 2 viewpoints here now, both of which show some possible inconsistencies. First of all in Bruce's theory. I have claimed that the fact that no OBE can be initiated in deep sleep whilst the visual cortex is offline argues against Bruce. I have asked people here to confirm or reject this statement by trying to do this (experience lucid sleep) themselves, however being lucid in deep sleep is very hard so it would be some time I guess before anyone here can or wants to experiment on this. However I and a few other people I know well have done so on several occasions. From our experience, all of us are able to go  into a RB type-OBE from sleep / trance but not from deep sleep. After some research we found that in this stage the visual cortex is offline, so this supported our conclusion that  RB style-OBE are like dreams and Dependant on certain brain functions  (visual cortex) that produce visual images. How can this be true if Bruce is correct?
To continue we also found some research that shows that people born blind could not see during RB type-OBE, but could during NDE. This could possibly point in the direction that, contrary to RB type-OBE, at NDE-OBE we do leave our body and can "see" with our astral senses. Add to this the several NDE experiences that a friend of my induced from really 0 brainwave activity. I have asked him to elaborate on  these experiences here so perhaps you will find a detailed description of it soon (i hope). These facts are also not explained by Bruce and seem to contradict his ideas.
Now this doesn't mean Bruce is totally insane and has no good ideas whatsoever, only that his notion of astral matter of the body (spirit) disconnecting from it and operating independently from it, thereby fully placed in the astral dimension during RB type-OBE, is not correct.
So now what are the deficiencies in the model of explanation that I have proposed?

We should apply in each case the simplest theory which fits the observed facts (Occam's Razor). For the cases I cited, I think that this is that "spirit leaves body" and not that "person has hallucination about leaving body coupled with ESP, coupled with self-body image, coupled with hallucination and ESP of second individual who thinks he saw first individual out of his body"

Occam absolutely says nothing at all about which viewpoint would be the more simple theory that fits the observed facts, just that you should pick the one that YOU think is more simple, which is purely subjective interpretation, depending on your experiences and knowledge. For you, it's Bruce's ideas. For me, it's not. I could easily sum up or invent some examples where someone doesnt know all the facts so that a certain viewpoint looks the more logical one while this was totally not the case. So, Occam is not going to help us at all here and says nothing about the validity of either of the viewpoints.
I have argued that OBE's are visual happenings induced by the brain, so if you want to call that hallucinations, ok. We have also seen that ESP is absolutely not a weird phenomenon to happen and could very well explain 99.99 or perhaps 100 percent of what happens. So then we are left with some odd examples like "she saw that person beside her body while that person had an OBE". You say, "aha! Occam! So Bruce is right!"... Well that just doesnt do it for me. I have been theorizing a bit on  his forum what can happen and the possibilities of ESP etc, this does not mean I know everything that is possible! Neither do you I assume, so we will always have some lack of information in our discussions (we just dont know everything). So while this example of yours might have happened, I think this is a far smaller discrepancy (and behold yet, for I will certainly try to explain it, just read on... ) then the ones I showed in Bruce's ideas.

You say a person needs to be NDE to OBE and I say they don't!

You know im not the only person who believes this don't you? Look at Bardon's work for example and the ancient tradition of Yogi's. Don't come with the same argument as Frank please that these are invalid and based  upon centuries of dogma and such because that's just not true. These people have been exploring consciousness on levels most of us cannot even imagine, for ages!

Doesn't this definition also include NDE-OBE where brainwave activity is reduced to zero?

No, I dont consider zero to be activity. Perhaps I should have made that more explicit.

From this article:
Quote:
But perhaps most important is that in no case so far did there seem to be a discrete state in which the OBE took place. There were no sudden changes in either EEG or autonomic functions to mark the beginning or end of the OBE. Any changes were gradual; unlike dreaming, the OBE does not seem to be associated with a discrete physiological state.

And again:
Quote:
The one other subject who has taken part in a large number of OBE experiments is Keith ('Blue') Harary. ... Here there were no changes in EEG. The amount and frequency of alpha were the same in OBE and 'cool down' periods and there were only slightly fewer eye movements in the OBE phases. These measurements alone show that Harary was awake and that his OBEs did not occur in a sleeping, dreaming or borderline state.

These results disagree with your view of LD/OBE as only occurring during alpha/theta EEG. For at least one subject (Keith Harary), OBE's take place during normal EEG. So his OBE's also do not fall within your definition of LD/OBE....
....EEG measurements have already been taken, which completely contradict your alpha/theta EEG theory. Can you explain this?

I never meant to say that RB type-OBE is exactly like dreaming, but that the fundamental principles behind  them are the same. These are 1) No spirit leaves the body and 2) Visions are internally created events, added with ESP. So this to me includes RB type-OBE's in any condition as well as LD's. This said, most likely my definitions did not yet cover all related phenomena and all possible aspects (as you try to show). Don't forget Im at times also still learning new facts here, and I try to incorporate them as good as I can into my viewpoint (there might be a limit to this, where there are facts that are so inconsistent with my ideas that I can't incorporate them, but I dont think this is the case just yet!). Also if I get stuck I could ask some other people with far more knowledge and experience than me (but who share my ideas) on their opinion. This is by the way what i'm doing now and then, and I also asked some of them to post their ideas here but alas, noone showed up yet so I'll have to defend the case alone, for now.
Now how could there be "no sudden changes in either EEG or autonomic functions to mark the beginning or end of the OBE"? Have you even considered for example the possibility that differences would show up on the EEG, between OBE's induced from waking life (like WILD) and OBE's started from within a LD, without the absolute necessity for those two kinds of OBE's to be very different? It merely seems to be a sign of sleep when EEG changes fast and a sign of wakefulness when it doesnt. Also about trances, I dont claim to be THE expert on this topic, but I know that meditation starts with alpha, then theta, and in alpha already you can have vivid visions. There is also no need for sudden EEG changes since during the experiment, it could very well be that, when they started to measure, the person was already relaxed and in alpha EEG. So this in itself doesnt say anything . Also remember the cases I called upon of people that could kind of "OBE" at any time of the day by "loosing themselves in their internal visions", for example if they have a photographic memory (but here could be other causes, like people who are extremely good at visualizing). These persons for sure also don't drop into theta trance.
You might say, well a minority of cases dont seem to fit entirely with your previous description of what according to you should be happening at a RB type-OBE. But I am covering  in this discussion some issues on which i definitely dont have all the knowledge (yet), so perhaps it's possible that even RB type-OBE's are in reality dividable in different categories, depending for example on brainwave activity. We could divide them into OBE's induced from sleep paralysis, from LD, from trance, from daily activity, etc. It would be hard now to exactly describe all of these phenomena in one description, but I still believe that they share in common as I have argued, 1) No spirit leaves the body and 2) Visions are internally created events, added with ESP.

Xetrov wrote:
If not, why are there differences in degrees of vision in different OBE accounts? Why does someone have it and someone else not? Should it not be that we all ought to have it, since I assume that you realize that if what you claim is true, and the astral body is set free, then the astral senses take over from the physical / internal ones. Why would the astral senses in such a scenario show 360 degree vision to one person (and perhaps not even always), and not to another person?

Don't know.  I assume that it's like "focussing" your physical eyes. If you concentrate on one spot whilst OBE you get normal vision. But if you focus on all of your surroundings, your astral senses open up and you get 360 deg vision. Seems perfectly sensible to me?

So when you are in the astral, your astral senses still need to open up? This seems weird to me and contradicted by people that experience NDE's. I can tell you though why I think this is true. There are two possibilities. One is that you watch your visions with a kind of fisheye – effect (if you know what I mean). Two is that you can perceive with your astral senses (ESP), but the differences in talent and experience determine to what extent you can do this (360 or less), because we are still connected to and limited by our physical bodies.

Nope, it's just that the the "parallel" argument is conveniently trotted out to explain the "self-body-image", but the "parallel" argument is then conveniently dropped and discounted (by yourself) when talking about point-consciousness and 360 deg vision. It seems that on the one hand it's a "good argument" and on the other hand it's "unnecessary". So which is it?

You dont understand what I mean. The self image model we have is the basic to which we always fall back to during many (mostly ordinary) situations. This doesnt mean we cannot experience different things, which are alien to this model.

The point I'm trying to make is that the LD/ESP model can be misused to disprove your position, just as well as it can be misused to disprove mine. What we should be using, in both cases, is the simplest theory which explains the observed facts (Occam's Razor again). This means that in NDE-OBE the spirit leaves the body, and also in normal OBE, the spirit leaves the body

If I would use Occam here, I would say  that your application of LD/ESP to NDE is extremely far fetched. It would mean that the LD takes place at the exact moment of revival where the brain becomes active again (so there needs to be a huge time compression), and also the knowledge of everything that happened must be obtained through an empathic link with the doctors present, which is extremely unlikely since unless you are godly talented most you can do is sense emotions. This also counts for obtaining the information trough "clairvoyantly from psychic imprints of the previous events in the "ether". ", which is furthermore an idea based upon a premise that you want to prove, so you cant use this argument because it's based upon itself(the ether or astral being prone to influence of thought, and that this is information reachable through  ESP or whatever means is what you need to prove in the 1st place).
So while we both agree that the LD/ESP model is RATHER plausible, we both  (I assume) kind of laugh  (as a joke ofcourse) at your idea to counter my valid use of the LD/ESP model. But who am I to use Occam, ofcourse

Oh and by the way, Im waiting for the postman to deliver your car as soon as I bring the people to post their 360 – LD stuff here!

And as a final note to Tombo: If you dont agree that we have a spirit / astral matter in the first place then how come you believe in Bruce's ideas anyway? And also yes, we are conscious, but if that is all there is, then consciousness  must be created and maintained purely by the brain/nervous system, and we have already argued that if you talk only about consciousness, we really never are "in" the body  in the first place, but "in" the place you are conscious of at a certain time (be it a dream or a thought or whatever). The argument was going about astral matter / spirit disconnecting from the body.

[Tombo]

O.k. I'll give in!
Xetrov I must admit: Your Theories on Astral Travel are at least as plausible as the ones Robert Bruce has, or any other I have heard of.
I'm curious for your new article though. I think you should start a new Thread once you post it, cause I doubt any body else is still following this interesting discussion:

BTW: I hope Catmeow has some good arguments against you, though........

[Xetrov]

Hey Tombo.

Well indeed your conclusion, that these ideas are at least as plausible as Bruce's, is one I have tried to defend here from the start (might have taken a while for me to explain it in a decent way, but hey, that's what a forum is for, im glad i learned to state my ideas so others could understand!). I really hope that more people will be open minded and try to search themselves for possible answers to the questions raised here (including, hopefully, more scientists too in the future). And ofcourse, these answers could still include parts of Bruce's theories, yet I do hope that my ideas have made clear that you should not take it all for granted (as some do but luckily not all).

Anyway I'm also curious for a reply of Catmeow (I hope he will still give one, no hurry though).

Also, I will update my article by the way with any new information I recently obtained (not a lot, but still) and post it here soon.

A nice day to you all!
Xetrov.