Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
SoulChanneler

Soul Channeling Through My Art

171 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Brian Topp

My question was really for him. If he believes in what he's doing he should keep on doing it. Defending yourself to people who think differently than you do is a waste of time. Who cares. Who cares what somebody else thinks. Just care about what you think and proceed with a mind wanting to know more through positivity and not negativity. Dispite the spiritual aspect, if its interesting, its interesting. Let both the artist and the viewer interpret it as they may, that what art is all about but by all means dont argue about it.

You know why

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Theater of Dreams

Do you two believe in anything? Do you believe in yourselves. Your abilities. Or do you only believe in try to knock the other guy down. That's cowardly.

If you want to keep this conversation going I'm more than happy too. You've really got my juices going now. Hell, we've only just begun. Your blood is just as red as mine. You don't want proof. You want a fight, and I'll give you one. Unfortunately, we can only verbally fight on sites like these.

Who made you guys "the last word in what is and isn't? Certainly not me and I'm sure certainly not many others that have had to hear your bull____!!

You guys suck :td:

Demanding proof for an outlandish claim is being realistic, not cowardly. You'd be able to stop having to defend yourself if you could offer some hint as to why you believe that you can channel souls, because-- well, science.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JesseCuster

My question was really for him. If he believes in what he's doing he should keep on doing it.

Did anyone suggest he should stop doing his artwork?
by all means dont argue about it.
Why not? The purpose of forums like this is to argue about things. Arguing in the debating, giving opinion, explaining why you agree or disagree with something, etc. sense, not in the yelling back and forth sense (although that does happen of course from time to time). Compared with some of the cesspits on the Internet (hello YouTube comments) he's getting a pretty fair showing for his artwork - some praise and interest in the artwork itself with some strong disagreement as to the meaning behind it and requests for why we shouldn't take it for what it appears to be - the same kind of facelike blobs and blurs you get in any sort of random or semi-random imagery that humans tend to see patterns that resemble faces in. If he didn't want to hear that he shouldn't have posted here to be blunt about it.

The continual whinge on these forums about how if you don't agree with something you shouldn't voice your disagreement gets quite tiresome.

Edited by JesseCuster
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpiritWriter

Did anyone suggest he should stop doing his artwork?

Why not? The purpose of forums like this is to argue about things. Arguing in the debating, giving opinion, explaining why you agree or disagree with something, etc. sense, not in the yelling back and forth sense (although that does happen of course from time to time). Compared with some of the cesspits on the Internet (hello YouTube comments) he's getting a pretty fair showing for his artwork - some praise and interest in the artwork itself with some strong disagreement as to the meaning behind it and requests for why we shouldn't take it for what it appears to be - the same kind of facelike blobs and blurs you get in any sort of random or semi-random imagery that humans tend to see patterns that resemble faces in. If he didn't want to hear that he shouldn't have posted here to be blunt about it.

The continual whinge on these forums about how if you don't agree with something you shouldn't voice your disagreement gets quite tiresome.

I was asking him why he was entertaining you guys. That was my question...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpiritWriter

Or actually I guess I made a statement. I just re-read what I wrote.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

I would quit entertaining these people. Their opinion on what you do is meaningless. Time would be better spent making more art. I myself would like to see some more.

You can post them in the art section and if they make negative comments there about your pieces they'd only look like humongous jerks. Best of luck.

Whats the matter SpiritWriter? Are you still mad that your contradictions/frauds were exposed by some of us, a few months back ? You should really quit flame baiting normal conversations. Nobody is passing "negative comments", just questioning things and examining them. The OP started this thread claiming certain "abilities". Some people will surely question things instead of blindly accepting them; this must be understood before starting threads of this nature. When the OP himself is willing to carry on with this discussion then what's your problem? Please take your flame baiting somewhere else. The "entertainment" is sought by those who seek attention by making up stories or by stealing them from comic books like the Japanese mangas... not by those who prefer to seriously examine things.

Edited by XingWi
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

I don't understand. According to you, if I'm not one of the 95% that is a fraud, and you're telling me that I don't possess the ability to channel souls, then what catagory do I fall under, according to you?? And if I don't fall in the 95% fraud catagory, how can you state that you can prove objectively that I do not possess the ability to channel?? There's no way for you to prove that these "souls" are merely constructs of my own subconscious and not the real thing. No way. If you say that in your opinion no person can ever channel souls than that 95% fraud number should be 100%, right? Please explain.

The rest 5% rely on all sorts of misinterpretations ranging from those who are in self-deception to those that may even require psychiatric intervention. This claim of mediumship can bring fame and money, so chances of charlatans exploiting the faith of their audience in this field are extremely high, so high that I may have even understated the number when I said 95%.

I do have evidence that these aren't souls that you are seeing. Objective evidence is something we can examine independently without relying on specific beliefs. In your case it's your own statements that everyone can examine to see what your experiences actually are and then the fact that your paintings can be duplicated by anyone following your methods. Let's examine your statements first:

The souls don't move around, but I am planning on shooting a video of them very soon.

Suddenly I heard a voice in my head that sounded like a woman yelling something, but she was talking so fast, I couldn't understand what she was saying, so I said out loud, "Shut up." And the voice stopped.

Have you ever asked yourself, SoulChanneler, why your "souls" do not move around? And why the voice stopped when you asked it to? Do you know why? Because you are controlling these "souls". You are a painter and a painter wants his subjects to remain stationary. And do you know why you can control them? Because you created them. Yes, this is very typical of constructs. Since they are creations of a person's own subconscious, these constructs behave exactly the way his subconscious wants them to behave. The fact that these souls are stationary for you because your subconscious wants them to be that way is the evidence that they are constructs of your own subconscious. This was about examining your statements objectively by everyone. And here is something subjective that you can try for yourself in order to verify if they are really the constructs of your own subconscious. Next time when you encounter them, just think of making them do something else like running, flying, dancing or anything else and then concentrate on this thought while simultaneously projecting it onto them. I assure you they will do exactly what you wanted them to do, and if you are truly honest you will come back here and testify for it.

And wait I'm not done yet. There's another objective evidence. After eliminating the bias produced by ideomotor effect, I can assure you that the result of drip paintings done by anyone will be exactly similar to that of yours if they followed your methods. With the same probability of spotting faces in their results. This can be objectively verified by anyone. The example I gave earlier, Salvador achieved it using turpentine. Anyone can try it on his own and decide if these are really "souls" that are appearing in images. What more evidence is needed to counter your claims that you possess the ability to channel souls?

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that I don't need to pour the paint and move the brush the same way every time I do a drip painting.

I need the paint and brush because that is the medium I choose to use to channel souls. I never claimed that I could throw a bucket of paint onto the canvas to create these souls I channel. That is not the method I use, nor will it ever be the method I use. Painting is still an art, the last time I checked. I have a high level of respect for what I do, unlike some people.

You are going in circles here. When I ask you to rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect you say that the images are totally independent of the brush strokes or on what part of canvas you place the brush and how you use it, implying that the brush plays no role in producing these images. When the brush plays no role, you should be able to produce these images on the canvas despite using no brush at all. When I ask you to show a video recording of you acheiving that, you now say that the brush does play a role. If the brush plays any role then we are back to the same old question: How do you rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect? Circles.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

BTW SoulChanneler, you don't have to double click the quote button when replying to posts. A single click is sufficient.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

I don't understand. According to you, if I'm not one of the 95% that is a fraud

I didn't say you are not a fraud. I said I cannot determine if you are a fraud or not. And please do not take it as a personal attack or a negative comment.

Typical frauds, that post in forums like these, can easily be detected by certain peculiar traits:

1. Their stories show strong inconsistencies. They contradict in places where there shouldn't be any contradictions. (This is the most significant trait of a fraud/liar).

2. They get defensive when questions are asked to scrutinize the authenticity of their claims. To avoid dealing with these questions they may either try to divert the discussion to something else or may simply stop replying to you or may pretend to put you on ignore and may even report your posts in attempt to get your questions deleted.

3. Because most of them are attention seekers, they tend to claim uniqueness and powers that not many possess.

4. To achieve their goals, they may rely on sock-puppetry and/or meat-puppetry. They may use multiple accounts or ask their friends outside the forums to create accounts here to support their position and promote them. This can easily be detected when none of the thousands of members come forward to support the claims of this fraud, in fact even an internet search reveals that there aren't any other "experiences" that may tally with what this fraud is suggesting, and then all of a sudden a recently joined member comes out of nowhere and starts supporting this fraud, claiming that they too have had similar experiences or know people who have had similar experiences.

5. When posting in public does not seem to fulfill their agenda because people started realizing their frauds, they may target individual members one by one through PMs in attempts to convince them of their powers.

But the data in your case is insufficient. All we have is your paintings. So I will be just sitting on the fence until I come across more. I do not prefer to call someone a fraud unless I have strong evidence suggesting that. Otherwise I usually give them the benefit of doubt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

The rest 5% rely on all sorts of misinterpretations ranging from those who are in self-deception to those that may even require psychiatric intervention. This claim of mediumship can bring fame and money, so chances of charlatans exploiting the faith of their audience in this field are extremely high, so high that I may have even understated the number when I said 95%.

I do have evidence that these aren't souls that you are seeing. Objective evidence is something we can examine independently without relying on specific beliefs. In your case it's your own statements that everyone can examine to see what your experiences actually are and then the fact that your paintings can be duplicated by anyone following your methods. Let's examine your statements first: What evidence do you have that the soul I posted a link to in this thread is not a real soul? Also, I never stated that I was going to post a video of the souls moving. I don't know where you found that, but you are either re-arranging my words or misinterpreting what I wrote. Since you do not understand what I am doing, you are trying to disprove what I can do. You have a mediocre mind my friend. It's that simple. Why do I write that you say? Because your mind can't think outside of the little box it's in. You even stoop so low as to implicate that I am in self-deception or that I may even require psychiatric intervention. Do you think before you write these things, or do you just write the 1st thing that comes to your mind? Did you know that the actual image size of the soul I caught in the link is no bigger that the tip of your pinky? And I was able to capture his right eyeball clearly? What are the chances of that happening? If you think that you or anybody else can duplicate what I captured then by all means, DO IT!! Stop talking about it and do it, but of course you can't so you won't.

Have you ever asked yourself, SoulChanneler, why your "souls" do not move around? And why the voice stopped when you asked it to? Do you know why? Because you are controlling these "souls". You are a painter and a painter wants his subjects to remain stationary. And do you know why you can control them? Because you created them. Yes, this is very typical of constructs. Since they are creations of a person's own subconscious, these constructs behave exactly the way his subconscious wants them to behave. The fact that these souls are stationary for you because your subconscious wants them to be that way is the evidence that they are constructs of your own subconscious. This was about examining your statements objectively by everyone. And here is something subjective that you can try for yourself in order to verify if they are really the constructs of your own subconscious. Next time when you encounter them, just think of making them do something else like running, flying, dancing or anything else and then concentrate on this thought while simultaneously projecting it onto them. I assure you they will do exactly what you wanted them to do, and if you are truly honest you will come back here and testify for it.

And wait I'm not done yet. There's another objective evidence. After eliminating the bias produced by ideomotor effect, I can assure you that the result of drip paintings done by anyone will be exactly similar to that of yours if they followed your methods. With the same probability of spotting faces in their results. This can be objectively verified by anyone. The example I gave earlier, Salvador achieved it using turpentine. Anyone can try it on his own and decide if these are really "souls" that are appearing in images. What more evidence is needed to counter your claims that you possess the ability to channel souls?

You are going in circles here. When I ask you to rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect you say that the images are totally independent of the brush strokes or on what part of canvas you place the brush and how you use it, implying that the brush plays no role in producing these images. When the brush plays no role, you should be able to produce these images on the canvas despite using no brush at all. When I ask you to show a video recording of you acheiving that, you now say that the brush does play a role. If the brush plays any role then we are back to the same old question: How do you rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect? Circles.

The rest 5% rely on all sorts of misinterpretations ranging from those who are in self-deception to those that may even require psychiatric intervention. This claim of mediumship can bring fame and money, so chances of charlatans exploiting the faith of their audience in this field are extremely high, so high that I may have even understated the number when I said 95%.

I do have evidence that these aren't souls that you are seeing. Objective evidence is something we can examine independently without relying on specific beliefs. In your case it's your own statements that everyone can examine to see what your experiences actually are and then the fact that your paintings can be duplicated by anyone following your methods. Let's examine your statements first:

Have you ever asked yourself, SoulChanneler, why your "souls" do not move around? And why the voice stopped when you asked it to? Do you know why? Because you are controlling these "souls". You are a painter and a painter wants his subjects to remain stationary. And do you know why you can control them? Because you created them. Yes, this is very typical of constructs. Since they are creations of a person's own subconscious, these constructs behave exactly the way his subconscious wants them to behave. The fact that these souls are stationary for you because your subconscious wants them to be that way is the evidence that they are constructs of your own subconscious. This was about examining your statements objectively by everyone. And here is something subjective that you can try for yourself in order to verify if they are really the constructs of your own subconscious. Next time when you encounter them, just think of making them do something else like running, flying, dancing or anything else and then concentrate on this thought while simultaneously projecting it onto them. I assure you they will do exactly what you wanted them to do, and if you are truly honest you will come back here and testify for it.

And wait I'm not done yet. There's another objective evidence. After eliminating the bias produced by ideomotor effect, I can assure you that the result of drip paintings done by anyone will be exactly similar to that of yours if they followed your methods. With the same probability of spotting faces in their results. This can be objectively verified by anyone. The example I gave earlier, Salvador achieved it using turpentine. Anyone can try it on his own and decide if these are really "souls" that are appearing in images. What more evidence is needed to counter your claims that you possess the ability to channel souls?

You are going in circles here. When I ask you to rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect you say that the images are totally independent of the brush strokes or on what part of canvas you place the brush and how you use it, implying that the brush plays no role in producing these images. When the brush plays no role, you should be able to produce these images on the canvas despite using no brush at all. When I ask you to show a video recording of you acheiving that, you now say that the brush does play a role. If the brush plays any role then we are back to the same old question: How do you rule out the possibility of ideomotor effect? Circles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

The brush is part of the tools I use to channel the souls. It's not me who is talking in circles; it is YOU. Also, I don't tell souls what to do. They show up however they please. The souls are stationary in my paintings because of the medium I am using. That should be self explanatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

By the way, I don't do what I do for the money. I channel souls because I enjoy doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JesseCuster

By the way, I don't do what I do for the money.

So you're honestly telling us that you neither expect or want $5 million for any of your paintings? The $4 million and $5 million tags you attached to your artwork are just joke prices you don't expect to be ever paid for?

Haha. Pull the other one, it's got bells on. You're hilarious.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

I find it interesting that when I make a point, somebody always wants to use something I wrote in my blog against me. I do think my art is worth $5 million. That doesn't mean I'll sell it tomorrow (Wednesday, July 17, 2013) for that much. I'm glad you find me hilarious. I find you hilarious too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

Whats the matter SpiritWriter? Are you still mad that your contradictions/frauds were exposed by some of us, a few months back ? You should really quit flame baiting normal conversations. Nobody is passing "negative comments", just questioning things and examining them. The OP started this thread claiming certain "abilities". Some people will surely question things instead of blindly accepting them; this must be understood before starting threads of this nature. When the OP himself is willing to carry on with this discussion then what's your problem? Please take your flame baiting somewhere else. The "entertainment" is sought by those who seek attention by making up stories or by stealing them from comic books like the Japanese mangas... not by those who prefer to seriously examine things.

Xingwi, I agree with you on some points, but... maybe we could scale things back a bit and take a breath? :)

Only because most of what you said has nothing to do with this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

...I'm glad you find me hilarious. I find you hilarious too.

I'm just glad that we're all having a good laugh then.

N'est-ce pas? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shrooma

I find it interesting that when I make a point, somebody always wants to use something I wrote in my blog against me.

.

it' the nature of things.

the only way of judging what you're like, of ascertaining who you are, is our exposure to you, how you act, how you portray yourself, and the best, only way to do so is by reading your posts, your blogs, because you wrote them.

about yourself.

and if you're not comfortable with people basing their opinions on what they see, that is hardly anyone elses fault.

.

I'm glad you find me hilarious. I find you hilarious too.

.

probably for different reasons though.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

Relax SoulChanneler. Personal attacks and rants won't help much. You have replied with insults and personal attacks and nothing more, not a bit of information in your reply.

What evidence do you have that the soul I posted a link to in this thread is not a real soul?

I have already given you enough evidence that everyone sees as totally valid except you, I even gave you a method to try it for yourself. What more evidence in needed after that?

Moreover, I gave you the examples of people who have achieved similar results with not just water but even turpentine. Anyone can try doing these drip paintings on their own and decide for themselves, yes, but only after eliminating the bias of ideomotor effect and selection+confirmation bias that I seriously suspect is happening in your case, which you are still evading to account for even after being asked several times.

Also, I never stated that I was going to post a video of the souls moving. I don't know where you found that, but you are either re-arranging my words or misinterpreting what I wrote.

Really, you never said you would do a video recording of souls? You are lying now. I wonder if you are lying about capturing "souls" as well. I will quote your post again. (The curly arrow at the top-left corner of the quote box leads you to your actual post, please click on it).

The souls don't move around, but I am planning on shooting a video of them very soon.

I had quoted this exact text before without modifying or re-arranging it a bit. Please be careful when discussing things with me, I have a keen sense of detecting lies.

Since you do not understand what I am doing, you are trying to disprove what I can do.

Disprove what? You haven't been able to provide proof for something that anyone would feel the need to disprove. The burden of proof was on you and is on you. Despite that I gave you proofs to counter your claims, nullifying your claims of exclusivity.

You have a mediocre mind my friend. It's that simple. Why do I write that you say? Because your mind can't think outside of the little box it's in.

"Mediocre mind"?? Hahaha This is hilarious! A few pages back you were arguing with Sakari and Brian about on whom lies the burden of proof. Even when different people tried to explain to you in different ways you still couldn't grasp it. Moreover, when I gave you links to ideomotor effect, you couldn't grasp that concept either. It took me several attempts rephrasing my question over and over again to explain to you what it is. And wait, here is the fun part… you think you can control clouds by staring at them. LOL. Whose mental capacity are we talking about, mine or yours? ROFL

You even stoop so low as to implicate that I am in self-deception or that I may even require psychiatric intervention. Do you think before you write these things, or do you just write the 1st thing that comes to your mind?

I'm speaking the facts here. A little percentage of those who claim this power indeed belongs to a medically defined group. If speaking the facts is "stooping low", then so be it. Are you suggesting that no person claiming these powers can or has ever fallen under the category of mental disorders?

I didn't say you belong to this category though, only that this might be a possibility. The reason I say this is because you are so detached from the physical reality that you have even gone to the extent of convincing yourself that you can move clouds by just staring at them. The following are your own statements not mine:

By the way, have you ever stared at a cloud for 5 minutes? Try it and see what happens to the cloud you're staring at.

And this is what you have written in one of your blog entries:

6/18/13

....

DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU CAN MAKE CLOUDS MOVE WITH YOUR EYES BY JUST STARTING AT THEM? TRY IT. SEE IF I'M FULL OF ****.

Honestly, what would you think of someone stating that they could move clouds by just staring at them, and stating all this with so much confidence that they would even offer others to try it for themselves, and add to that: seeing things and hearing things? Maybe you enjoy slipping into this illusory world you created for yourself where you have all the power to move clouds and control the elements, but it is not short of its repercussions on others around you. Imagine slipping into it while driving your kids to school or something like that. Don't you think things like these should be controlled in the initial stages itself?

Did you know that the actual image size of the soul I caught in the link is no bigger that the tip of your pinky? And I was able to capture his right eyeball clearly? What are the chances of that happening?

What are the chances of finding faces in stained microscopic slides under a microscope then? Zero? By your logic it should be zero. Why do you think size is the factor here? You have yourself admitted of zooming in your images in computer to look for faces. Why don't you try this for yourself: ask someone else to make a drip painting for you, capture the image and zoom it in computer and then look for faces. Then post the results here.

Besides, who knows maybe you manipulated the painting you just mentioned.

If you think that you or anybody else can duplicate what I captured then by all means, DO IT!! Stop talking about it and do it, but of course you can't so you won't.

Almost all the contributors to this topic have already discussed pareidolia in detail. Go back to page 1 of this topic and read all the posts again.

The brush is part of the tools I use to channel the souls. It's not me who is talking in circles; it is YOU.

Again. So the brush is required or not? If yes then how do you rule out the ideomotor effect? The same question again. I will copy and paste what I asked before:

You are consciously 'aware' that your brush strokes are purely random, right? But what if they are not purely random but are to some extent in fixed directions to produce these images with your hand being controled by your mind unconsciously? Also like unconsciously controlling where you pour the paint and where you start your brush stroke and where you end it and where you touch with water to wash off the paint etc. Your mind wants to produce these results on the canvas so it can unconsciously move your hand in a fashion that can produce these images while your conscious mind still believes that your hand is working in a purely random fashion, when it is actually not. How do you rule out this possibility?

And you still haven't answered it despite repeating it several times.

Also, I don't tell souls what to do. They show up however they please. The souls are stationary in my paintings because of the medium I am using. That should be self explanatory.

I wasn't speaking about them being stationary in your paintings but outside them. I copied your own words that these "souls" do not move around. This implies that they are not moving around for you outside the paintings, like the are posing to be captured just like a painter's subject poses for him. I was very clear about what I stated. This gets exhausting, having to explain to you the same thing over and over again.

Also, your conscious mind does not tell them what to do and when and how to appear. It's your subconscious that creates them and controls them. You will not be consciously aware of it all the time. It may apparently look like they "show up however they please" but in reality it isn't so. It takes practice to take control of things like these consciously. It's just like dreams. Do you consciously decide every time what you want to see in your dreams, yet the dream is still the product of your own subconscious mind and is still controlled by it, isn't it? It's just like that.

By the way, I don't do what I do for the money. I channel souls because I enjoy doing it.

JesseCuster has already responded appropriately to this.

Edited by XingWi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JesseCuster

I find it interesting that when I make a point, somebody always wants to use something I wrote in my blog against me.

If you post about a topic on the Internet and link to your blog about the same subject, then of course people are going to look at what you say in your blog about the subject and mention that.
I do think my art is worth $5 million.
Why $5 million? Why not $100,000 or $75 million?

Anyway, it doesn't matter what you think of your art if you want to sell it, it matters what others think. Art doesn't get auctioned for millions of dollars because the artist publicly boasts about how he's better than Picasso and how his art is worth millions. What matters is what art collectors think it is worth and are willing to pay for it.

Art for the sake of art is a noble thing and if people are willing to pay you for it, then more power to you, but saying you don't do it for the money while slapping multimillion dollar prices on it doesn't make much sense to me. If you weren't in it for the money you'd be charging what you thought could make a decent living off, not what would make a multi-millionaire.

I WILL BE PUTTING OUT A PRESS RELEASE NEXT WEEK TO TELL THE WORLD.

I WILL TAKE CONTROL OF THE ART WORLD AT THAT POINT.

You posted that 11 days ago. Any luck so far?
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

Since you do not understand what I am doing, you are trying to disprove what I can do.

BTW these aren't your own words, you are repeating someone else's. This makes me wonder if you are being manipulated and incited in PM by a fraud I know here.

Edited by XingWi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

Wow, XingWi, I have no idea what you are talking about. Am I being manipulated and incited by a fraud you know here? Maybe I'm being manipulated by the souls I am channeling. Maybe my subconscious is playing tricks on me. Maybe this soul is taking over my mind and is now living the life I was supposed to live. Maybe I'm now the soul in the painting and the soul I created with my subconscious is now free (that's not a bad idea for a movie).

I haven't put out the press release yet, JesseCuster. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. Heck, I may make millions of dollars from channeling this one soul. I haven't seen anything like it, and no, XingWi, not even from the photos you referred too. Be careful with saying things look similar to one another because if a side by side comparison is done, the contrast will be more noticeable. Let's do a side by side comparison between my soul and the souls the turpentine created. If I was your doctor, XingWi, I'd recommend that you stare at a cloud for 5 minutes and call me in the morning. Good night to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XingWi

Wow, XingWi, I have no idea what you are talking about. Am I being manipulated and incited by a fraud you know here? Maybe I'm being manipulated by the souls I am channeling. Maybe my subconscious is playing tricks on me. Maybe this soul is taking over my mind and is now living the life I was supposed to live. Maybe I'm now the soul in the painting and the soul I created with my subconscious is now free (that's not a bad idea for a movie).

Don't sell the movie rights for less than a 100 million.

If I was your doctor, XingWi, I'd recommend that you stare at a cloud for 5 minutes and call me in the morning. Good night to all.

I was staring at a cloud but it noticed me. It turned awkward for both the cloud and me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulChanneler

That's a beautiful and interesting little poem, XingWi. Thank you for that :passifier: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shrooma

Be careful with saying things look similar to one another

.

like, oh, for instance, that random splashes of paint look like souls maybe....?

;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.