Jump to content

What is our nature?


Guest

Recommended Posts

Mantagnier isn't a great example, SC. His DNA teleportation work was published only in his own journal, apparently bypassing peer review, and has not been replicated by any other researchers.

 

I can testify that autism is not necessarily systemic, Michen. In my ex-wife's system, one of the adult alters was very autistic while the other was not autistic at all.

 

-Ember

I'm not having fun here anymore, so we've decided to take a bit of a break, starting February 27, 2020. - Ember

 

Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]

Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, World of Darkness, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017

Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Winter Court of Faerie, Dresdenverse, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

 

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mantagnier isn't a great example, SC. His DNA teleportation work was published only in his own journal, apparently bypassing peer review, and has not been replicated by any other researchers.

 

 

-Ember

 

Maybe not. It feels like it's related to Dr. Masaru Emoto theory that states water has a memory, and you can project energy/emotions and change the quality of the water molecules and arrangements.

 

Dean Radin's new book, "Real Magic" does discuss peer reviewed, printed in legitimate scientific journals, psy experiments at 6 sigma, which is overwhelmingly for psy being a thing. (Dean doesn't push the metaphysical view, either.) He has pointed out that the guys that got the Nobel prize for the Higgs Boson were only at 5 sigma. 6 sigma in research is the equivalent of a slam dunk, and no one is rushing to give Dean the Nobel Prize.  Mantagnier may have skipped some of the procedures, such as publishing in his own way, and not pursuing peer review, because the established 'academics' have a history of ignoring this sort of research; they have been quite hostile in fact, which is odd, because science is neutral. If someone makes a claim, you can't just dismiss something because it doesn't fit establish paradigm. Someone actually has to test it.

 

Another example of academic hostility to anything that even hints at paranormal. The Nimitz 'tic tac' encounter is actually an impressive footage of 'something.' not saying aliens. There is an object that is outperforming US military jets. There is radar contact from multiple ships, and the aircraft. There is eyes on the object. It has no obvious heat signature, which mean no propulsion. it actually as a cold layer envelope around it... this 'UAP" (UFO is now UAP- unidentified aerial phenomenon) marks a change in US policy. Navy pilots were able to discuss this on television. The Navy green lighted that, where as in the past, pilots that reported UFOs were grounded. It got more air time in the media than any previous 'UAP' event. Homeland security has been fighting for jurisdiction over who should be investigating this. US admitted that they have been tracking these things since the 70s in a threat identification program, (Which is interesting because the last admitted UFO chasing group was project blue book.) Every scientist and academic brought into the media to discuss the footage dismissed the object, made jokes, and went on record saying "Not aliens."

 

Not one scientist said, "I don't know." Not one scientist offered an explanation for 90 degree turns or going from sea level to 100,000 feet in four seconds flat. Not one scientist said, "I would like to see more of this please? Do you have more footage?"

 

Mainstream scientist are emotionally dead creatures, the curiosity beat out of them by peers that tell them, publish that and you will not have a job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not very nice!

If you hate 'mainstream scientists' so much, maybe you should stop appropriating our culture by using the internet and rely on your magic instead of modern medicine when you're seriously ill.

But that's when they always come crawling - how peculiar...

 

On a more serious note of course you have a point. We are humans

or tulpas

after all and make mistakes. No one is perfect and due to the level of complexity and cost modern science does indeed have a problem with reproducibility. But heh, still a billion times better than any occult pseudoscientific bullshit.

 

The level of science bashing is tiresome. Make something better and more efficient instead of complaining about our hard work. Or well, just do whatever you feel is right. Ido may be a soulless monster but at least I'm not angry. And I have a job together with my host. In science!

 

Regarding UFOs:

Lol, no idea, don't really care. Make your pick.

A) Human reporters telling very human stories about human pilots and human radio operators being human

B) Ayyliens visiting earth to troll humanity by falsifying our ridiculous laws of physics

 

P.S.: Magic isn't real

 

I'm not sorry.

 

Super Girls don't cry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A more politic way to put it would be that, while scientific methodology is sound and the results of scientific endeavors are very useful, scientists are human and not perfectly unbiased or lacking in self-interest. Being associated with results that are too radically out of line with generally understood beliefs can negatively affect one's ability to get grants, get published, get promoted, and keep jobs. The pressure to conform appears to be greatest in those fields of science that have the greatest chance of shaping public policy or affecting public views of science, as people behave differently when they know they are being watched. Human motivations ranging from wanting a roof over one's head to wanting the respect of one's peers should not imply emotional deadness or a lack of curiosity.

 

Scientific advance is a human process, so there will be glitches, setbacks, and delays. But overall, the process is working. Human knowledge is advancing and not slowly.

 

Radin's book sounds interesting. I'll look into it a bit more.

 

-Ember

I'm not having fun here anymore, so we've decided to take a bit of a break, starting February 27, 2020. - Ember

 

Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]

Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, World of Darkness, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017

Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Winter Court of Faerie, Dresdenverse, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

 

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not very nice!....

 

Oh, my dear friend, Ido. You assume not nice. You also assume I am anti-science. I am not. I am suggesting there is more than what science knows. I am suggesting there are legitimate scientist doing legitimate work with impeccable degree of integrity, even published in legitimate scientific journals, and they still get dismissed. The fierceness of your argument reeks of hostility, or dare i say, anger? I could be misreading your emotions. If it is anger, I understand. Science is the only paradigm people have to hold today, and when you have been told all life there is nothing else to hold onto, dismissed, disparaged, or publically ridiculed for holding a thought that appears to be 'anti-science' people get frightened.

 

the book, 'real magic' is not about 'MAGIC' in the traditional sense of the word, and Dean Radin is exploring scientifically something that is there, looking for scientific explanations.

 

I have never not endorsed medical paradigm. Go read my stuff, you will hear me directly say go to a doctor, go a counselor, take meds if prescribed meds. If you got diabetes, you should take insulin. That's just smart. It is not duplicitous, or hypocritical to state there is a greater level of complexity underlying reality, while still coming up against hard artifacts. That said, even hard scientist will tell you they have seen 'inexplicable' things that don't make sense. People given a placebo have gotten better. Not just 'cancer in remission' better, but perfectly healed! Sounds like magic, doesn't it. It's not. But they don't understand it and they can't duplicate it regularly in the lab, because the moment they do, sugar pills supplant the drug pharmaceutical and which will likely result in a an economic collapse. What's bizarre about this, go to a doctor take a pill culture is, we have a whole class of people who go to the doctor to get a pill and they being accused of 'drug seeking behavior.' Talk about hypocrisy!

 

Case in point. They have absolute evidence psychotropic meds, specifically antidepressants work. Regular track for someone to get meds, short of going to a psych hospital, is about 2 months. (This is without insurance and community recourses, not private pay. It is possible if you have money, you can see a psychiatrist within a couple weeks. Also location dependent, as some areas have more psychiatrist than others.) Let assume you get lucky and fall into a cancelation appointment and see a psychiatrist same day: doctor gives you presciption for anti-depressant. He will tell you take your meds as prescribed, as it takes 2 to three weeks to get to therapeutic dose. Getting to therapeutic dose, and coming off meds, is the worst part of the trip, as you may see an increase in symptoms. But assume minimal symptoms, you arrive a therapeutic does, you may or may not see a reduction of overall symptoms. You may feel different. You may need to tweak the drug. You may need to come off the drug and try a different drug... But let's say, it's the best case scenario, and you start your med regimen and three weeks later you arrive at 'better.' Not cured. It's not a happy pill; it will help you have an improved range of emotions. Okay. Your moods are better regulated, but you still have the situational stuff you were responding to, and if the situation sucks, you still feel some negative emotions.

 

You know what else works as well as meds in that particular context? Going to a counselor and talking to someone. Research suggest counseling and meds simultaneously has the best results. Community resource mental health will likely only address the med component, and this is usually due to resource management, not malice. (not anti science, but i assure you, scientific research is not driving community health care plans. Science could save the states money but the state isn't interested in improving healthcare as means to improving state budgets.) You know what else works, per research... Meditation, counseling, and not making life changing decisions for the next two to three weeks allowed people to transition back into a better moods. So, it begs the question, did people get better because of psych meds, or because they just better as they adjusted to reality? I am still advocate for meds! Some people seriously need help. But I have also seen the squeakiest wheel go to the front of the line, get meds that day, and their condition is instantly improved because 'they got their pill.' Not statistically likely. I have also seen people no matter what you give them, they don't seem to get better. It doesn't mean science is broken or i am saying don't use science. I am saying, using everything! Use science. Use counseling, and by god if religion and magic helps, f-n use that too! I don't care if its real magic or the placebo effect, it is real in that context.

 

As for appropriating 'our culture...' You mean your culture? You mean, my culture? So, you're saying, hypothetically, metaphor here, you're a republican and the democrats are idiots and have no voice? If science is neutral, and by definition it should be, shouldn't any scientific inquiry be valid, especially if the statistical numbers bear it out? I love science. I know science. I live in a Trek paradigm, but I can still visit Star Wars paradigm. Both of those have science. Both of those have a mythos. Both of those have mysticism.

 

BTW, I used the UFO thing as an analogy. Your response to it, "I don't really care..." exemplifies my criticism with mainstream science. (Criticism is not evil. It is an absolute civil and more obligation to speak when evidence compels you to do so. An inability to criticize mainstream, politicians, and leaders is by definition a fascist state.) Assume for a moment it is a UFO. If it's alien tech and it is demonstrating a clean energy source, and if we could duplicate this tech and thereby eliminate fossil fuels, something that science agrees is killing our environment, which also means killing us, then every mainstream scientist should be going out of their way to demand more footage and more data, because this is the thing that could save us from our immaturity.

 

I am not sorry if my pointing out that the paternalist, helicopter parenting of state and the dogmatic cult of science has disturbed your inner peace. Notice, I am not hiding that under an invisible wall of contempt. You're right. There is no Santa Clause. There is, however, something greater than flesh and blood. Magic, spirit, consciousness... I don't know what to call it. But that's what this discussion should be about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...