tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post6503772186257091529..comments2024-03-28T15:55:33.435-07:00Comments on The Big Study: Mumbling Down The Forest Path: Of Ghosts, and PSI, and ETI.The Professorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-84735777630740107732013-03-18T05:32:07.403-07:002013-03-18T05:32:07.403-07:00dear prof
do you familiar with robert monroe'...dear prof<br /><br />do you familiar with robert monroe's books of OOBE ? in it he admits he's got help by unknown entities (spirits) that launched his OOBE experience and research. and he also admits his OOBE starts to become better when he purposedly asked for help to his spirit guide (?). The fact that OOBE in itself is hard and impossible for layman (non sensitive) and only special case like NDE will induce OOBE. My point is this (from Christian point of view) , we are by default not a spiritual sensitive by nature, that was cut when adam and eve sinned and lost contact with God. Nowadays the only way to reach our spiritism is via agents , via other spirits and its expressively forbidden by God. <br /><br />My reason of bringing up Robert Monroe is because he admits he use spirit guides to achives stuff in his OOBE.. example : he want to see his dead friend, an entity took him to some place (in spirit) and he met a younger version of his friend, also on his request to meet another dead friend, he can only see a smoke and his friends voice.. as robert admits, the entities can control spirit realm realities so real that he cannot differentiate it.. smell, touch, everything.. BTW what robert monroe did is forbidden and dangerous as Christian. robert monroe practically treated with kid gloves by the spirit entities unlike other people. in fact , all his OOBE friends develop 3rd eye / sensitivity toward psychic things, but only robert dont have it. he asked his guide why he didnt have psychic abilities and was told he dont need it..<br /><br />im rambling again.. sorry language barrier and lack of education in writing make me very bad in making a point<br /><br />regards <br />milomiloAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-77840392805363077732013-02-13T10:45:21.571-08:002013-02-13T10:45:21.571-08:00Hello, Frank.
My thought on your post is that, e...Hello, Frank. <br /><br />My thought on your post is that, even if "Telepathy" turned out to be some undetected signal, it still throws materialism off unless some really elaborate song-and-dance takes place. This is because the "telepathic and clairvoyant phenomena" will take place "at-a-distance" and beyond the normal 1/r-squared forces of the text books. This puts them operating through one of the non-spatial dimensions thereby, and putting some kind of "awareness" detectable only by the brain running through the superstring dimensions sounds "perilously close" to allowing conscious awareness into physics. <br /><br />I know that you are no fan of "consciousness", but I believe that to be at least in part due to your model of the concept, or perhaps lack of a model for it. My own model is pretty simple I think. For me, the soul is not possessed of some characteristic called consciousness, but is only possessed of the ability to become aware of things other than itself. If whatever the necessary relationships are which will allow such awareness do not at present exist, the soul will not be aware/ conscious. "Consciousness" [in the significant sense that I'm defining], requires several things: a Soul having the quality of being able to be aware and make freewill decisions about that awareness, Something NOT the Soul to become aware of, and the conditions which allow that "other" entity to enter the Soul's awareness. What these conditions are is the "research problem" to define, but they do not seem to exist for our Souls while our body sleeps, typically, although some practiced minds can create them then as well. It is probably true that "the Other" is "available" to us all the time, but it is our own untrained, or unrestricted [i.e. overly hard-focussed] mind/soul which cannot communion with the necessary conditions [as could, allegedly, an advanced Buddhist meditator] and therefore rarely has psi or rarely has lucid dreams. The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-31041140735356297082013-02-08T05:41:05.710-08:002013-02-08T05:41:05.710-08:00A funny thing about many materialists: they have ...A funny thing about many materialists: they have faith in "matter," but not very much. I myself would not feel bent out of shape if "telepathy" proved to be (somewhat unsteady) detection of a novel physical signal by the complex human brain, something otherwise not yet detected by any instrumentation (or maybe just not yet recognized in instrumentation). Yet this (except for, perhaps,a very few scientists who have indulged in "psychic research") seems as impermissible as any "nonphysical" hypothesis to reductive materialists--they simply never consider it. Can't. Unless somebody puts it into a box and makes it reproducable on demand. Then they can admit it to the list of matter's abilities. But before such a thing is found....they cannot search for it. <br /><br />Frank John Reid Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-46758559322484566462013-02-02T08:42:02.993-08:002013-02-02T08:42:02.993-08:00This 360 degree view is a grand one Professor, tha...This 360 degree view is a grand one Professor, thanks for laying it all out. A manifesto of sorts for us searchers.. As someone with a scientific background I respect your thoughtful, evidence-based approach. On the opposite side of the close-minded obstinate reductionists are the careless New Age zealots who I find it difficult to have a nuanced discussion of these things with, because they uncritically accept it all, from hidden ascended masters to Oprah's Secret. I and other readers here appreciate your conscientious exploration of these topics.<br />Z. NinchZ.Ninchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-58053498733614795362013-02-02T05:31:46.366-08:002013-02-02T05:31:46.366-08:00Professor, this is a brilliant essay. Very provoca...Professor, this is a brilliant essay. Very provocative and insightful. Well done. <br /><br />Have you read the book Fringeology, which examines the sociology behind our culture's disbelief of the paranormal? Well worth the time, if you haven't seen it already. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com