I this has probably been asked before, and I know I shouldn't let it bother me, but the fact that science can prove almost anything infuriates me. It's people who make their lack of belief obvious which makes me want to say something, or aggressively push their "Everything is proved with science" statement forward and make a one-sided argument out of it. So how do you prove anything metaphysical or simply beyond science?
Being a member of this forum, out of all paranormal activity, astral projection intrigues me most and I find proof in having experience in this and lucid dreaming (even though that's just knowing your dreaming). I also find proof in seeing a lot of people say the same thing about it, like commenting on the Belief System Territories having lovely architecture, or certain types of entities that turn into puddles once taken care of.
But other than those simple observations, just simply how do you get people to see anything else for themselves, or is it simply impossible?
string theory and M theory, that's other dimensions/reality's etc
they know they are there they just cant go there physically
:NoY:
Hi,
Try as you might, you'll need something repeatable that guarantees a positive result. An objectivity is the scientific way and anything subjective usually fails to get attention.
However, if you look into time forward clairvoyance the subjective experience turns into objective fact. This is the most promising avenue to walk down.
Repeatability is the problem here as you get the required info randomly. Its non conforming as waiting becomes a serious issue. There's no switch. If you can find one let me know. I've researched this and found next to nothing of any value.
Have a read,
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_dreams/just_a_dream-t36961.0.html
Part of it actually occured the smoke one landed at gatwick airport, because of smoke. About 7 days aftet I posted. The other appeared to be the pilots thoughts of what he saw and immediately dropped the aircraft to a lower altitude. These both made national news headlines.
Strange....
"How do you prove anything beyond Science?"
"Change Science."
Quote from: Jdeadevil on July 09, 2012, 12:24:26
But other than those simple observations, just simply how do you get people to see anything else for themselves, or is it simply impossible?
Not impossibe, but in my opinion, very difficult. I was taught to be cynical. I brought a book on spirituality (out of curiousity), did a particular small meditative exercise, and...boom...I had to change my beliefs, because this nice feeling (which was unconditional love) started flowing inside me.
Had it not been for the book, I wouldn't have travelled down this path, discovered meditation, the universe and obe's etc...
Science is great, but experience is usually better (I would like to think, down the line, that the two would eventually, 'meet up', but I could be naive with this)
Sometimes, all it takes is one experience, and that can change everything. But I agree, its very difficult to prove beyond science.
The science we know today is going to have to change drastically in order for the discoveries regarding the non-physical to happen.
Not only that, but the scientists are probably going to have to change even more than the sciences have to. LoL
Quote from: Xanth on July 09, 2012, 18:32:23
Not only that, but the scientists are probably going to have to change even more than the sciences have to. LoL
This ^
What is Science?
I think Science could be summed up by saying it is the study of observable effects.
The observable effects of what? The physical world.
Many areas of Science is demonstrating that this physical world is:
a) Just a holographic illusion; no solid particles. There is no objective reality because every observable effects is tainted by subjectivity of the experimenter/observer (Quantum Physics).
b) Only constitutes ~4% of the Universe, the rest of the Universe is made of dark matter or the invisible Universe. (Astronomy)
c) Biology Of Beliefs (Epigentics) is the foundation of good health and longevity.
d) Primary Plant Consciousness (Everything is connected)
e) Consciousness is independent of the brain and changes phase/states at death (Studies into Near Death Experiences of Cardiac Arrests)
f) Consciousness extends beyond the body into the Earth's magnetic field "The-Schumann 's Resonances"
where the human collective consciousness is located (Michael Persinger)
Who promotes Science? What field of Science?
The Educational System and Corporate Media Interests all promote Newtonian/Darwinian Science of a
materialistic competition type paradigm. These programming prey on young minds and condition the masses
that the Universe is rigid, made up of solid particles, and anyone who thinks differently than the group mentality
should be ridiculed: paranormal claims are nonsense and those making such claims are mentally unstable.
Ultimately depending on your existing belief systems/conditioned belief systems and experiences, you will be drawn to different perspectives, be it science, philosophy or new age ideas.
Obviously the dominant cultural belief systems encouraged by Governments, Educational system and Media
will be greatly favoured due to mass programming. Conversely I have observed more people (on the internet)
investigating other belief systems; many are realising there is more to this reality than meets the eye.
This Forum and many others alike are a testimony to this growing trend.
I think that Science is limited in its premise as defined by "The Scientific Method" and attempts to be objective,
and rational; anything that doesn't fit is either ignored or explained away as an exception etc.
Ultimately if one is convinced by self discovery and direct experiences that the reality perceived through their senses
is a product of their thoughts, desires and beliefs... it does not matter what Science thinks.
Science can attempt to measure consciousness -if that is in their (corporate aligned) interests,
but it is only measuring the effects.
How can consciousness that is formless, dimensionless be accurately described and measured by the forms within it?
I think Philosophy has a better chance of doing what Science is limited in.
I love science and I love spirituality. One is studying in the physical, the other non-physical. Both can exist. Not only that, but as NoY said, there is science that points towards non-physical reality and more scientists are considering that possibility. It's just most people are too ignorant to understand the implications so it's just boring old science.
Being cynical towards science is no different than an materialist being cynical towards us.
Most people all conduct our personal study of this reality and have formed theories and ideas relative to
our experiences and cultural programming.
Can this be called Science or Spirituality or Philosophy?
Spirituality and Philosophy can be recognised as a personal pursuit and way of life eg. Buddhism.
I think most people accept Science as an applied established group investigation with all its peer reviews
including peer censures and published Scientific journals.
Who are those who make a living out of Scientific experimentation, theorising and postulations?
Again, those who belong to similar established groups/societies of all Scientific Fields.
One will find that science is timely, costly and usually involves the use of expensive equipment,
experts in their respective fields of study, and information distribution.
Who is able to finance these area of studies?
Individual can ill afford the costs associated with indepth research.
Confidence level of study and continuation of research in question if results and conclusion goes against sponsor funding.
Most Scientific study is conducted by Government and Private Companies -all corporations, ie in the business of profit making.
(Our govt, civilisation and common law rights have been usurped by corporations > you can investigate this yourself by understanding legal fiction (Strawman), and the difference between Admiralty Law (Commerce and Trade/Law Of The Sea) and Common Law (Sovereign Rights/Law Of The Land).
How about those various Anti-Cancer Society/Foundation?
The facts speak for themselves: An example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGsSEqsGLWM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGsSEqsGLWM)
Companies are in the business of making money including politics.
Until the human element of compassion, love and care is genuinely part of the business model, not just ostensible declared goals,
we will continue to have corporatised science pushing their own agendas.
Subsequently drowning out the voices and research of those minority individual scientists who have genuine goals
to raise the human condition, alleviate human suffering, promote good health and prosperity for all.
Science has indeed given us some insights into the invisible world, the paranormal and elements of consciousness,
but it takes philosphers with the heart and experience of a spiritualist to arrive at a theory/conclusion
that is not limited to just observable effects in a physical reality
eg. Fred Alan Wolf, Bruce Lipton & Thomas Campbell (not part of curriculum in Australia).
The current educational system tells you what to think and what to believe.
It discourages free thinking and self discovery.
It promotes a group mentality, an attitude of disbelief towards most things paranormal,
and also pushes selective science theories as religion with dogmas (unquestionable beliefs).
Following this, any new discoveries which change the foundation of our thinking paradigms should be included as
an "Option" and incorporated into the Educational System, Health Systems, Media etc and
eventually shapes the collective attitude and culture.
Still conscious minds will investigate, question and determine for themselves what is believable or not.
~
It's the system that's the problem, not science itself, and that system goes a lot further than just effecting science.
Science is a subject/activity/knowledge, not an institution. You can't stop science, people are always going to be curious about things and want to figure it out.
I also believe that not all of us are here to experience the same things and that many people are here for physical experience only. I don't push spirituality on anyone, only those genuinely interested. I guess what I'm saying is there is room for everything... there never has to be one or the other and no reason for one to call the other wrong or unnecessary. But yeah, fight the system, I'm all for that.
I listened to Coast to Coast AM last night. Their guest was Seth Shostak from the Seti Institute. He was talking about advances they have to their Satellites, how far they look into space etc. A caller questioned him about the fact that we have been visited in the past. He said there was absolutely no "scientific" proof of this. They spend how much money looking into space for the answer and yet last year during a infra red imaging of the Earth, a female technician through radar imaging, found over 30 more pyramids buried in the deserts of Egypt. We have tablets from ancient Vedic Sanskrit writings showing how to make a Vimana, also known as a flying machine, but that's not good enough proof of anything extra terrestrial for the Science community to believe. Hitler knew better, he had his Scientists go to Persia nad India and learn everything they could about Vimana and the ancient writings. Then they built there missile and rocket programs based on what they learned. We haven't even began to exhaust our search here. Seth says that there is no way any race could travel the light years it takes to get here. I agree that travelling light years be virtually impossible. But they don't seem to want to look at the obvious and that's the fact that this travel is interdimensional. It takes no time at all to travel that way, especially because time as we know it doesn't exist out of our realm. Science won't accept looking "inside" as an answer, because they would have no way to prove their theories. At least we here no better, but again outside of that belief, we have no way to prove it either.
Actually I could be considered to be a scientist, and I think that there are more things that scientists can't prove than things that they can :)....
More scientific research such as what's done at The Monroe Institute needs to be employed to advance the extra-physical research.
Doesn't bother me scientists don't 'believe' the truth; I know what I experience. I believe those scientists in the 'cutting edge' of science see things we see, and eventually it ripples down to the 'mainstream' sciences and it becomes accepted.
Yes, science will have to change and start to look at things that are not hard and physical but wider and bigger than that.