The Strange Tale of "Dr. 58"

[IronGhost]

Hi Everyone:

I also very much enjoyed Antimonys analysis of my transcripts, and I especially like her conclusion that it might be one of my sub-personalities that is actually writing the scripts.

It also makes me feel a tad guilty though -- that such obviously intelligent people are wasting so much of their time analyzing my stupid Ouija transcripts.

But, anyway, I mean, Antimonys case is very good, but also highly linguistic, and as such, has many pitfalls. Ill just give one example:

For example, Antimony thinks I might have gotten the word Trintity from the Matrix. Yes, Ive seen the movie, its one of my favorites of all time, loved it.

But I was also raised a strict Catholic, and one of the central elements of the Catholic faith is the Blessed Trinity. We used to sing a hymn ad nauseum in church and the last two lines were

…God in three persons

Blessed TRI---NI-----TY!!!

I disliked that hymn, but its burned in my head because we sang it alot.

When I was teenager there was a series of really cheesy spaghetti westerns, and one was called They Call Me Trinity. I loved that movie because it was so bad.

Also, as I have said, my childhood hero was Isaac Newton, and I have always thought it strange that Newton was extremely angry about the concept of the Blessed Trinity, and even tried to prove scientifically that such a thing could not exist. Ive always been amazed that Newton could be so concerned with the Trinity.

I mean, so the point is, what did my subconscious grasp:

The Matrix Trinity,

my Catholic upbringing Trinity, or

the They Call Me Trinity Movie

Newtons essay on the Trinity ….

… You get the point. The point is, I have encountered Trinity many times in my life, and perhaps dozens or hundreds of times in a variety of books, media, hymns, etc.

So to say:

1. Ironghost used the term Trinity

2. That reminds me of the Matrix

Therefore:

It's evidence of Ironghosts subconscious or sub-personality at work.

Do you see the danger of this approach?

I just offer this for debate, and not to in any way to be critical of Antimonys thesis because I really think she did a wonderful job here and is obviously a wonderful thinker.

Ans also, I do so apologize for all thre typos in my postings - it's just plane laziness -- I don't proof read much stuff I post here, because I'm just having fun and being informal. (In the real world I have editors and proofers who do all that stuff for me). I really don't think my bad spelling here is any kind of road map into my subconscious mind, unless one believes in things like Freudian slips and that kind of pseudoscience.

Edited May 31, 2010 by IronGhost

[Monk Mongo]

IronGhost,

No waste of my time. Stimulus like this is unlike an other.

Support is offered and given.

Please continue. My synapses beg more.

Thanks!

[Antimony]

Hi IronGhost,

Thanks for the positive reaction to my ramblings. You're a good sport.

As far as "obviously intelligent people" goes...nudge, nudge...wink, wink ??? having a bit of fun, eh? Ok by me.

With regards to the "Trinity" thing. That is most likely the weakest example of the lot. That's why I wrote, it's "of course, likely just coincidence".

And of course, with regards to style & literary similarities, it's very subjective, I did say so too.

But what about other more solid similarities? Plenty of other examples. What do you think about those?

Concerning the spelling; I do think you understand quite well what I'm trying to say. It's not about typos. If you are faithfully repeating what the Ouija entities have spelled out, then it is revealing, as there is consistency in the misspelled words. It depends if you do (spell it out faithfully). Do you?

Actually, thinking about it ...isn't it the session recorder, usually Darcy, who writes down your questions/answers? So how come her spelling mistakes are identical to yours, to the Ouija board entities?

[Monk Mongo]

Antimony,

With you and IronGhost there are two distinct palettes. There is communal ground, at the expense of extreme 'extremes'.

You, seemingly, seek verifications of your arguements at the Minnesota Supreme Court level. At which, argueably, you might succeed.

IronGhost, at his word, seeks only to tell us of the very interesting results of his long time hobby. One which would seem to demand great faculties of mind, heart, and spirit. And stones.

For myself, to misquote Indiana Jones: "I'm willing to go on a little bit of faith here."

Things connect here for me some way.

Thanks, so far.

[IronGhost]

Hi IronGhost,

Thanks for the positive reaction to my ramblings. You're a good sport.

As far as "obviously intelligent people" goes...nudge, nudge...wink, wink ??? having a bit of fun, eh? Ok by me.

With regards to the "Trinity" thing. That is most likely the weakest example of the lot. That's why I wrote, it's "of course, likely just coincidence".

And of course, with regards to style & literary similarities, it's very subjective, I did say so too.

But what about other more solid similarities? Plenty of other examples. What do you think about those?

Concerning the spelling; I do think you understand quite well what I'm trying to say. It's not about typos. If you are faithfully repeating what the Ouija entities have spelled out, then it is revealing, as there is consistency in the misspelled words. It depends if you do (spell it out faithfully). Do you?

Actually, thinking about it ...isn't it the session recorder, usually Darcy, who writes down your questions/answers? So how come her spelling mistakes are identical to yours, to the Ouija board entities?

In general, when one is doing highly controversial work like this, there is an extremely strong temptation on behalf of everyone to turn every small slip up I make (or even seeming slip up) into a kind of "Gotha!" moment, and that's completely understandable.

(I'm not necessarily saying that's you, Antimony, I just speaking in general).

Take the typos, for example. Yes, Darcy does record the vast majority of my sessions, but then it is I who takes her notes and I who type them into this computer. At that point, the typos occur. I retype both my own comments and the Oiuja generated comments -- and so, the axix point of typo error is me at the time of input. So naturally errors of my comments and Ouija comments will be similar. It's as simple as that.

I can go through some of your other good examples as well -- but first let me also add another important point.

As I have said, I am always willing to entertain that my subconscious is at work here -- however, having said that, and as a 29-year-student of Zen meditation, I no longer believe the subconscious mind to exist.

But even if I'm wrong about that -- not only is making a linguistic arguement frought with difficulties, but there is a deeper layer of problem in that it assumes that the "magical" subconscious mind exists at all, and can have so much power to play with our symbolic language.

The theory of the subconscious mind has become today kind of a popularily accepted mythology, with very few people today even considering the fact that it may be a completely bogus theory.

The subconscious mind has become the accepted "go to theory" to explain all kinds of things today -- yet, that the subconscious mind exists at all cannot be considered a fact. There is some circumstantial evidence for the subconscious mind, but that hardly wins the day.

But further -- even if there is a subconscious mind, people are attributing things to it erroneously every day. The problem with subconscious actions is that they have to be "interpreted" by the conscious mind.

For example, I have a very dear friend whom for along time was in an abusive relationship with a real jerk of a guy, yet she choose to stay with him for a long time. One time she said to me:

"The thing about John (not his real name) is that he subconsciously loves me so much, he manifests that by a extreme desire to control me."

You hear this kind of thing everyday. She thinks "subconscious love" is being manifested consciously as "control." That's what she wanted to believe. It's a faulty "interpretation" of "subconscious feeling" in my opinion.

The subconscious mind is one of our modern ages greates myths and magical explanations for just about everything. It's much like the ancient Greeks created personified gods to explain human attributes such as love (Aphrodite) or make war (Ares).

Today our magical myth is the subconscious mind - it's a bogus theory on many levels, just as the human ego is demonstrably a false and dillusional state of mind.

So making a case based on language and linguistics is dicy enough as it is because, as many have pointed out, "All reality for modern humans is suspended in language" to quote Terrence McKenna, just for one. It's a kind of delusion. But then add the magical "go to" scenario of the subconscious mind somehow shaping the highly ghostly and mercurial aspect of human language and the way we use it -- well, there just a lot of problems to be considered.

Edited May 31, 2010 by IronGhost

[Guyver]

Antimony gains 100 credits for unparalleled investigative insight and analysis.

[Nile_Shaman]

*blinks*

IG, if your viewpoint of the subconcious mind not existing is true, then what is it which provides the occasional illuminations of insight which seems to come from ourself, yet is not a part of the concious thought processes or pre-existent knowledge? Is it just a flash of intuitive leap? Or do you understand it to be a sort of higher level of our own conciousness?

I have held for many years now the working hypothesis that everything we have or know or can reach out into the unseen aspects of life is actually within us. We are each as a walking universe. So, the part of myself I can access when I shut down my concious mind as much as possible and be still has been most easily considered my subconcious mind for me.

What do you consider that to be?

thanks,

ns

[Gwynbleidd]

Wow ... all I can say is, some of these posts blow my mind. I am so looking forward to some more of the transcripts please IG. It's getting incredibly exciting!

[Vortmax]

I'm a total skeptic, so I've got my own ideas on where this comes from, but if IG says he's getting it from Ouija sessions, that's fine with me. I don't care -- this is one of the most entertaining things I have ever read (as are most of your older transcripts IG) that I hope you post every last part of it. If not here, please do it on your Lost Ouija Board Files blog! I must have more!

(Yes, I registered just to encourage IG to post more. I am loving it that much.)

[pj bandit]

can i not read this story without it bein analyzed in every way possible! jeez.....

[Antimony]

Of course you can. Just ignore all other posts apart from the story instalments. Simple.

This is a discussion board about paranormal phenomena. Not the Story Telling Corner in your local Day Care Centre. Sorry.

[King Of Agony]

The problem is that regardless if the messages are channeled by veridcal means or if it is perhaps fact based fiction formulated to relate a channeled impression that is difficult to relate by conventional expressionism, it seems that the context of the message is falling by the wayside in favor of arguing the prudence of posting this in the ghosts/ paranormal section of the forum or not.

@Antimony, while I'm sure your threads strictly adhere to forum guidelines and assuredly generate far more interest than Iron Ghost's, I have to encourage a degree of tolerance to concepts that may conflict with your perception of appropriate paranormal topic posting conventions.

And I personally would consider not enrolling my kids in a Day Care Center that would include a transcript from of one of IG's board sessions in "Story Telling Corner" but hey, that's just me

Edited May 31, 2010 by King Of Agony

[IronGhost]

*blinks*

IG, if your viewpoint of the subconcious mind not existing is true, then what is it which provides the occasional illuminations of insight which seems to come from ourself, yet is not a part of the concious thought processes or pre-existent knowledge? Is it just a flash of intuitive leap? Or do you understand it to be a sort of higher level of our own conciousness?

I have held for many years now the working hypothesis that everything we have or know or can reach out into the unseen aspects of life is actually within us. We are each as a walking universe. So, the part of myself I can access when I shut down my concious mind as much as possible and be still has been most easily considered my subconcious mind for me.

What do you consider that to be?

thanks,

ns

Well for me, a person who has been in the "Consciounsess Candy Store" for a long time, there are many ways to look at this.

Most people assume a simple 3-D model of reality, with a slight hint of a fourth dimension that sort of combines time and memory.

But look at it this way: A being living in a two-dimensional flat land would perceive anything "coming to her" as either being from the left or right, or up or down.

Such a being cannot conceive of a third dimension in which cubes or spheres could exist in "up and down." If a cube suddenly comes an intersects with our friend's 2-D world, the 2-D being would be amazed to see a square magically appear out of nowhere.

The 2-D being could not imagine that that square is actually a cube, so she explains it in her common terms.

In similar fashion then, most human beings today are trying to explain things in limited 3-D (and slightly ghostly 4-D) dimension.

If they get a sudden insight or "intuitive impression" they automatically assume it comes from "inside" themselves, and they posit a ghostly subconscious mind somewhere below but intersecting with the conscious mind. But there is a much grater dimension to what is really going on.

Also:

Everyone assumes there is a "you" or an "I" existing in a limited frame of dimensions.

But there isn't necessarily a "you" or an "I" -- everyone just assumes this to be the case, when everyone is both a lot more than this, but ultimately, neither of the above at all.

DeCarte said, "I think; therefore, I am." The fundamental flaw in his statement is that he assumes an "I" to be something mundane, or to be something he thinks it is, when the "I" is something comepletely different.

Rather than come at all this from an occult perspective, there are many great books that can help us all see our own existence in the framework of not just 3 or 4 dimensions, but in multidimensionality, such as physicist David Bohm's book, "Wholeness and the Implicate Order."

To make a long story short: When you consider the many dimensions of reality one sees many more possibilities for novel insights and information as coming from a much wider field of consciounsess.

There is a lot more to all of us than "inside" and "outside" conscious mind and subconscious mind -- and these later two are not what we think they are, although they can be what we make them that simply as a convenient way to model every day reality -- there's nothing wrong with that.

I would invite everyone to think of themselves as multidimensional beings who have far greater access to the universe than just "inside me" "outside me" and "conscious mind" and "subconscious mind." Those aren't the only options, and it's actually very easy to see this with a little practice.

[Nocturnal]

Antimony, in your analysis of the linguistics you mention a number of terms that you find odd to be in use or recognized (eg Holy cow, jeepers, technocrat). The etymology for most of those terms and expressions predate the 1950's - even satellite in reference to a man made object orbiting the planet has it's origins in the 30's. So while they are terms of this century.. they are from the beginning. Also they have a tendency to have roots in older terms .. 'Jeepers' for 'Jesus', 'technocracy' based on commonly used latin roots for example.

Of the terms that 'Dr. 58' didn't recognize.. the simplest explanation (if we assume for a moment that the story is true) is that they simply weren't invented or discovered. The main hole in this would be telemetry which has a latin root similar to technocracy, and which has an origin of the 19th century.

With respect to the typos, since the Ouija session are presumably transcribed from voice recordings (other wise.. what's the point of recording the sessions and not keeping a copy) - any typos IG would commonly make would likely appear in the transcriptions regardless of original quality of grammar.

Anyway, I am of the opinion this is just fiction ( Occam's razor and what not) - but I think your stronger arguments are from the similarity between IG's other Ouija sessions and this one.

[Corp]

You know for trolls and unspeakable monsters they don't seem to be that bad. I mean free instructions to build some special staff in a very polite manner? Quick answers from a supervisor? Now that's service!

[Guyver]

Well for me, a person who has been in the "Consciounsess Candy Store" for a long time, there are many ways to look at this.

DeCarte said, "I think; therefore, I am." The fundamental flaw in his statement is that he assumes an "I" to be something mundane, or to be something he thinks it is, when the "I" is something comepletely different.

Rather than come at all this from an occult perspective, there are many great books that can help us all see our own existence in the framework of not just 3 or 4 dimensions, but in multidimensionality, such as physicist David Bohm's book, "Wholeness and the Implicate Order."

To make a long story short: When you consider the many dimensions of reality one sees many more possibilities for novel insights and information as coming from a much wider field of consciounsess.

First, may I say that was a very intellectually advanced post IG. And, it opens up an opportunity for serious discussion and argument.

I've always been a fan of Descartes, and I also agree with your assessment. The "I think therefore I am" comes from his Evil Demon hypothesis. I feel a ramble here; hope no one minds. It must be considered...the time frame and scientific understanding present during this writing. Descartes writings are not far removed from the Inquisition, Flat Earth, and blood-letting.

So, for him to present the concept in the form of the Evil Demon Hypothesis, was really advanced. In today's world, we can easily consider the possibility of an advanced supercomputer controlling the reality we perceive. Under these conditions, and considering what perception really is....that is our brain processing and analyzing electrical stimuli, the Evil Demon Hypothesis could be morphed into a "Brain attached to a Supercomputer Theory." If we did, we would have to come up with a new refutation that excludes the "Cogito Ergo Sum."

Reason being....a sufficiently advanced supercomputer capable of human brain/machine interface; would indeed be capable of interacting with our minds. This is only one possible explanation for the additional dimensions that you alluded to....another of course being....God.

Still...it makes for a fascinating conversation.

[Nile_Shaman]

If they get a sudden insight or "intuitive impression" they automatically assume it comes from "inside" themselves, and they posit a ghostly subconscious mind somewhere below but intersecting with the conscious mind. But there is a much grater dimension to what is really going on.

I have my own reasons for that, but it is time to get some more data, methinks.

when the "I" is something comepletely different.

Yes. Yes, it is.

Rather than come at all this from an occult perspective, there are many great books that can help us all see our own existence in the framework of not just 3 or 4 dimensions, but in multidimensionality, such as physicist David Bohm's book, "Wholeness and the Implicate Order."

Thanks for the pointer. I just downloaded it to Kindle, along with a couple others which looked interesting.

Appreciate your time and will be going now. Sorry for speaking up in your thread, but you got me to thinking lol. Always a mistake, that.

ns

[IronGhost]

I have my own reasons for that, but it is time to get some more data, methinks.

Yes. Yes, it is.

Thanks for the pointer. I just downloaded it to Kindle, along with a couple others which looked interesting.

Appreciate your time and will be going now. Sorry for speaking up in your thread, but you got me to thinking lol. Always a mistake, that.

ns

I hope I didn't sound like I was lecturing you, or that I know more about anything than you.

But -- ooohh eeee owwwww! downloading David Bohm's book to your Kindle! Cool person alert!!!

[Antimony]

The problem is that regardless if the messages are channeled by veridcal means or if it is perhaps fact based fiction formulated to relate a channeled impression that is difficult to relate by conventional expressionism, it seems that the context of the message is falling by the wayside in favor of arguing the prudence of posting this in the ghosts/ paranormal section of the forum or not.

@Antimony, while I'm sure your threads strictly adhere to forum guidelines and assuredly generate far more interest than Iron Ghost's, I have to encourage a degree of tolerance to concepts that may conflict with your perception of appropriate paranormal topic posting conventions.

And I personally would consider not enrolling my kids in a Day Care Center that would include a transcript from of one of IG's board sessions in "Story Telling Corner" but hey, that's just me

I understand your point, King of Agony ( I really hope you're not hurting too much right now! ). I have nothing whatsoever against browsing UM to be entertained, am doing that myself too, but I don't agree on being criticised by someone who wants to be entertained for trying to investigate a particular phenomenon, and I definitely do not agree that it would be justified to "sell" a mostly fictional story as true by justifying that the subjectively experienced content is difficult to relay & more important than truthfulness. It would be a lie & duping other members, simply put. I am speaking hypothetically here, of course.

Yeah, the "Story Telling Corner" remark came out a bit crankier than I intended. I had a blinding headache all day, so my apologies for that.

[Monk Mongo]

Blessed(?) be Antimony for bolstering the walls of our consciousness present.

Blessed be IronGhost for a resolution to transform them.

You've gotta love this.

[Antimony]

Well for me, a person who has been in the "Consciounsess Candy Store" for a long time, there are many ways to look at this.

Most people assume a simple 3-D model of reality, with a slight hint of a fourth dimension that sort of combines time and memory....................//...............................

.........There is a lot more to all of us than "inside" and "outside" conscious mind and subconscious mind -- and these later two are not what we think they are, although they can be what we make them that simply as a convenient way to model every day reality -- there's nothing wrong with that.

I would invite everyone to think of themselves as multidimensional beings who have far greater access to the universe than just "inside me" "outside me" and "conscious mind" and "subconscious mind." Those aren't the only options, and it's actually very easy to see this with a little practice.

I wouldn't disagree with anything you wrote there, IG.

Referring to your earlier post, I do however think it is quite a bold statement that the subconscious is but a myth and Pseudo-science.

The term subconscious is tricky anyway. It's a popular catch-all with all sorts of meanings. I guess it would be more correct to call it the unconscious, i.e. anything going on in our brains that we do not consciously perceive happening. Even that is a wide field, ranging from automatic responses to "intuition" to processing stimuli,impressions, emotions etc. without being aware of it. We could spend a good few pages just trying to define "the unconscious".

And yes, I do agree that our self, or identity, is multi-dimensional & multi-faceted and stretches further than just "I", conscious or unconscious. However, it is the IG (or Antimony or whoever) personality consciousness (including its unconscious parts) that is dominant in this life, this intersection of "four-dimensional" time & space. And for good reason too, as our energy is still in need of a vessel; otherwise most of us would be sitting in an institution by now.

I am quite partial to Bohm myself ("Science, Order & Creativity" is sitting on my book-shelf) as well as the idea of a holographic universe ( I am venturing a guess that you've read David Talbot as well? He's much too enthusiastic about what he considers scientific proof, but anyway, I digress...)

But, to get to the point, I don't think that we have to take into consideration the multiple dimensions of our self nor debate on the existence of the unconscious to be able to assess the possible origin of your Ouija stories.

We can cut straight through that. IMO there are more than enough similarities in style, "flavour", content, even choice of words in your different stories, lucid dreams & Ouija board sessions to be able to use Occam's razor & simple common sense reasoning.

What is more likely: That there are many different entities communicating to you across time & space, coming from different parallel universes, all using similar style & language; or that the source for all of them is the same, namely yourself?

Even if you argue that these different entities are but aspects of a higher, more complex ueber-entity also containing IG, which are possibly even existing in some sort of dimension, the source would still be you.

But why be so far-fetched & convoluted? Think about what happens when we are dreaming. I am a very intense & vivid dreamer myself and I can assure you that I have dreamed so many story-lines that could have easily been turned into movies. I have dreamed up entire cities, countries, even continents, which I often revisit. I rent several flats in different cities, which I remember across different dreams, I mean, I remember the flats of other dreams in my dreams...I could fill pages & pages about my dreams.

But where do these dreams come from? They originate within me. I am the source, I produce them, in an unconscious state.

So, with yourself having used binaural beats and practised lucid dreaming for many years, why is it so outlandish to accept that you are capable of unconsciously creating such coherent stories?

With that the Antimony-consciousness is going to sign off for now, as she still got a throbbing headache. Incidentally, I also suffered several years from "Alice in Wonderland Syndrome" when I was a kid (scary as hell for a child!) and have an adult lifetime of excruciating, crippling migraines behind me. The levels of pain the human body can produce is mind-blowing! And this sometimes literally.

ETA: Thanks for your blessing, Monk Mongo. But next time around, could I have a blessing without the question mark too?

Edited June 1, 2010 by Antimony

[IronGhost]

I wouldn't disagree with anything you wrote there, IG.

Referring to your earlier post, I do however think it is quite a bold statement that the subconscious is but a myth and Pseudo-science.

Hi Antimony:

Actually, I'm in the vast majority when I say the subconscious mind does not exist. Most psychologists don't accept it, even Freud did not accept the concept of the subconscious mind. This from Wiki:

Although the consensus among psychologists and psychiatrists is that the subconscious mind does not exist, the subconscious is widely believed to exist within the New Age community.

Most psychologists do allow for the "unconscious mind" but its existence is very much in doubt, and in fact, there is no unconscious mind. Here is a good lecture that speaks to that:

http://www.mheap.com/letswave.html

Also, as to linguistic arguments, as I've said, they're tricky and full of pitfalls. One can "prove" just about anything with linguistics. Over the years, I've read about many linguistics attempts to prove that Jesus was the reincarnation of Buddha. Here's something interesting:

http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/countess.html

I want to speak to more of your comments, but simply have to run right now. Deadlines loom!!

You're also a very good sport, Antimony, you're obviously as bright as a shiny new nickle, and thanks for being a fellow traveler.

Kind and warm regards to all ... Iron

EDIT: Oh, and wishing Monk Mongo Golden Dreams!

Edited June 1, 2010 by IronGhost

[Vanchatron]

Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but you're saying that the subconscious mind doesn't exist right? Then what about dreams? I always thought that dreams were your subconscious mind in action during your sleep. I'm not sure where I read that, so I may be wrong though.

[Vanchatron]

I don't know if this has been posted in here or not, but I just noticed the following article on the main page of this site, which reports that over 75 sightings of Big Foot have been reported recently in Minnesota - http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=182867

Trolls relating to what Dr. 58 was talking about perhaps, considering it's a troll looking creature and it's in Minnesota?

I don't know, food for thought perhaps.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Vanchatron

[J4yD0r]

I don't know if this has been posted in here or not, but I just noticed the following article on the main page of this site, which reports that over 75 sightings of Big Foot have been reported recently in Minnesota

I thought about this "story" (I use the word story in only the loosest of terms. Every time I read this thread, which is daily, I am more convinced that there might actually be something to all of this) as soon as I saw the headline too!

I'm definitely never going to see Minnesota in the same light again