Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
papageorge1

Metaphysics - Science and the Superphysical

208 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

papageorge1
33 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Like who? How many times must I ask you for something as simple as a name? I'm being as polite as I can, but you're being very rude with all this hand waving. 

Yet it seems impossible for you to name a single one of these contributors.

What detailed knowledge and information are you referring to? This is why I'm asking for a name. You have admitted you don't really know the difference between dimensions, planes and other terms. If you can't explain it I'm asking you for the best place to find someone who can.

If you consider others much well versed in the knowledge of these things then I don't see the issue providing where you are reading the things that swayed you into understanding.

So you claim. I didn't ask for proof of anything. I asked for a name.

Perhaps there is no "realm beyond" the physical senses.

Here is a seer/clairvoyant Charles Leadbetter that addresses the question of 'How these things are known' in the book Man Visible and Invisible (linked in a very short Chapter 1 - just scroll down to Chapter 1 start at the second paragraph on pg 2).

Edited by papageorge1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
7 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

haha....I'm looking at you too psyche101!! And here's what I have to say.

:rolleyes:

Quote

I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the so-called paranormal occurs and advanced/gifted clairvoyant seers can perceive with more than the known physical senses. That is probably our divergent point right there.

You champion stories that you like, let's not get carried away here. You have convinced yourself that paranormal claims have paranormal answers. That's actually pretty common. It's just an illustration of the distance between yourself and supported sciences. 

 

Quote

My other thought is that we have minds conditioned to think only in ways of our normal three-dimensional experiences. Our minds struggle with conceptualizing more dimensions than what we are conditioned to think in. 

That's a your idea to validate the above. What you should be doing is learning the sciences to see if you can find these imaginative bridges before building them. All this really says is that you don't understand science at all.

Quote

My concern is not trying to convince others of the best way to conceptualize all this.

Thats good because if that was your goal, it would be a monumental fail.

If you wish to discuss these topics, you simply must grasp a concept as a point of common ground to even begin discussion.

I strongly suspect that the reason you try and brush off such important factors is so that you can blindly stumble forward with pure nonsense. 

Quote

The important part is that this extra-dimensional and super-physical is a reality and the spiritual teachers I have reasoned to be the most advanced tell us how one ought to live in this grander reality.

You and those who appeal to such ambiguous and imaginative concepts are enemies of reason. There's is no grander reality. WCF gave a reasonable description of dimensions and it well illustrates how you are unable to distinguish between sci fi concepts and reality. The imagination you have been proposing here does not reflect the real world. Scientists deal in such propositions, not con men and story tellers.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
2 hours ago, Wes83 said:

Fair enough- Tesla’s writings on the aether and armchair speculation. 
 

Tesla's aether has been proven nonsense. It holds no value 

2 hours ago, Wes83 said:

I’ll humbly bow out as I’m more into conversing on possibilities openly vs defending a position, which I have none to defend either way. I simply enjoy the conversation of what may be absurd, or could very well be possible-but can usually provide me with another way to consider something I may never have thought of... for instance, I have never considered the possibility of having organs not in my body, let alone this realm. 

Well, it's good information if your writing b grade novels, but not much good for anything else.

If you want to exercise your mind, try to imagine an additional dimension as proposed by QM. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
3 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Vedic (Eastern Hindu, etc.), Western (Theosophy, Rosicrucian, etc.) have developed through the efforts of many gifted individuals. These wisdom traditions are amazingly consistent about the basic constitution of man beyond the reach of physical senses. There are more contributors to these field of study than I can count or know of.

The consistency and detail of knowledge across these traditions and their contributors of things like the chakra system can not be satisfactorily explained-away as only imagination and copy-catting in my serious consideration. The issue of proving to others what is beyond the realm of the physical senses is perhaps not possible.

Right.

 

And the chakra systems you think you understand is the 40 year old westernised version.

Credibility gooooooone........

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Here is a seer/clairvoyant Charles Leadbetter that addresses the question of 'How these things are known' in the book Man Visible and Invisible (linked in a very short Chapter 1 - just scroll down to Chapter 1 start at the second paragraph on pg 2).

A sex criminal, a pedophile who actually taught little boys how to m********e.

Not much of a role model there 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wes83
47 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Tesla's aether has been proven nonsense. It holds no value 

Well, it's good information if your writing b grade novels, but not much good for anything else.

If you want to exercise your mind, try to imagine an additional dimension as proposed by QM. 

I disagree with your conclusions on the aether, one could make the argument atomism is nonsense, and while we’re at it relativity as well.

there is nothing to converse with you about, you already have all the answers it seems.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 hours ago, Wes83 said:

I disagree with your conclusions on the aether,

Why? What did the Michelson–Morley experiment miss?

6 hours ago, Wes83 said:

one could make the argument atomism is nonsense, and while we’re at it relativity as well.

Not successfully. Atomic structure is quite well understood and we see predictions from GR play out every single day. What arguments could you possibly make? Aether has no such support and has actually been proven incorrect by the aforementioned experiment. The evidence for atomic structure and GR is overwhelming.

6 hours ago, Wes83 said:

there is nothing to converse with you about, you already have all the answers it seems.

No I don't. Much smarter people than me have the answers. I do my best to follow their work and understand it. There's plenty to converse about unless you have a predetermined conclusion. I'm taking it from this paragraph that you have more faith in wild guesses than the results of lifetimes of work by the best minds on the planet with the best resources available to them?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
11 hours ago, psyche101 said:

A sex criminal, a pedophile who actually taught little boys how to m********e.

Not much of a role model there 

How is that related to a discussion of the existence and operation of clairvoyant vision?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
11 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Right.

 

And the chakra systems you think you understand is the 40 year old westernised version.

Credibility gooooooone........

It's an ancient concept.....

Credibility raaaised!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem

@papageorge1

Would you consider yourself an adherent of Theosophy?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 hour ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

@papageorge1

Would you consider yourself an adherent of Theosophy?

I have been heavily influenced by  many associated with Theosophy and believe them super-physical insight gifted.

 I hope I didn’t answer your question just to get some slam link in return . I am no newbie to this subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I have been heavily influenced by  many associated with Theosophy and believe them super-physical insight gifted.

Ok. Thanks. 

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I hope I didn’t answer your question just to get some slam link in return .

Boo hoo.

8 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I am no newbie to this subject.

Nor am I. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

How is that related to a discussion of the existence and operation of clairvoyant vision?

 

Because you introduced that scumbag as a person of knowledge, when he has manipulated people and lied, committing heinous crimes for sexually deviant practises. As such, his credibility is on question. Very much so. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

It's an ancient concept.....

Not the version you were promoting.

9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Credibility raaaised!

Nope. Lowered further. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
16 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Because you introduced that scumbag as a person of knowledge, when he has manipulated people and lied, committing heinous crimes for sexually deviant practises. As such, his credibility is on question. Very much so. 

I think he was more complicated than that and was a homosexual a century or more before it became 'acceptable'. I think he did he encourage underage kids to explore their sexuality which is not acceptable today. He was not a heinous person.

I could have selected someone with no sexual controversies but I just chose someone handy for an internet link who gave a readable and intelligent short introduction to the subject of clairvoyant vision.

I could have found someone who claims to see auras and chakras without such controversies too.

But, hoping to return this thread more to the track, what is your theory on why so many different people from so many different cultures seem to be seeing the same things with IMO way too much similarity to be dismissed. In my readings I heard like 1% of the population clairvoyantly sees auras and such to varying degrees. I can't vouch for any percentage numbers but there's still at least millions.   

Edited by papageorge1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

But, hoping to return this thread more to the track, what is your theory on why so many different people from so many different cultures seem to be seeing the same things with IMO way too much similarity to be dismissed. In my readings I heard like 1% of the population clairvoyantly sees auras and such to varying degrees. I can't vouch for any percentage numbers but there's still at least millions.   

Considering people are not that dissimilar and we have a very memetic nature regarding information. It really isn't uncommon for similar ideas to formulate independently. And we've been sharing ideas since we've existed as a species. Plus mental illness can account for many of the dead-end claims. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
15 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Considering people are not that dissimilar and we have a very memetic nature regarding information. It really isn't uncommon for similar ideas to formulate independently. And we've been sharing ideas since we've existed as a species. Plus mental illness can account for many of the dead-end claims. 

I think that explanation is insufficient to explain away the quantity of detail from credible people, cultures and wisdom traditions that I've come across. Reason forces me to think that something real but not directly detectable  by the physical senses is highly likely to be involved. 

Edited by papageorge1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I think that explanation is insufficient to explain away the quantity of detail from credible people, cultures and wisdom traditions that I've come across. Reason forces me to think that something real but not directly detectable  by the physical senses is highly likely too be involved. 

Of course you don't think it's good enough. You can barely see past your own bias. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
Just now, XenoFish said:

Of course you don't think it's good enough. You can barely see past your own bias. 

I see Mr. Unbiased;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast

communicative

On 12/6/2019 at 10:03 AM, John from Lowell said:

More than 3D senses, for many of us we can not get past 3D reasoning restrictions. The human intellect needs to be trained to comprehend multidimensional realities. That can not begin to happen without compassion for self and others.

Aha, and who to train the trainer? Curious ...

Quote

Some of us have our personal proof which can never get validated for those who want to fit multidimensional reality into 3D.

A personal proof of a >4 (3 plus time plus x ) dimensional reality is impossible because the details, if there are any, would be subject to evaluation by a single and subjective mind. Even if <1 individuals would try to evaluate and compare a specific condition based on their very own subjective imagination, related to multi-dims, they would fail to find a common denominator because their communicative interaction could not objective. In addition, and thats the key point, people who claim to know/feel/understand/see/can-jump-into a "multidimensional reality" have lost their connection to reality, and objectivity as well, which took them too far away from any kind of neutral point of view, on principle.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
10 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I think he was more complicated than that and was a homosexual a century or more before it became 'acceptable'. I think he did he encourage underage kids to explore their sexuality which is not acceptable today. He was not a heinous person.

Yes he most certainly was, and you just showed how biased you are. It's unacceptable. The man fiddled with kids and you're saying that he was a persecuted gay man. 

You really need to re-evaluate your ethics. Pedophile behaviour is not acceptable in any time. I'd say your credibility is pretty much gone after promoting that sicko.

Quote

I could have selected someone with no sexual controversies but I just chose someone handy for an internet link who gave a readable and intelligent short introduction to the subject of clairvoyant vision.

Oh rubbish, you took this first thing Google gave you. The man has shown he will manipulate others for sick personal gratification. How can such a disgrace be trusted at all with anything?

You often promote charlatans and tricksters as genuine teachers, this is just your worst example. Congrats PG, I just heard the KERPLUNK of you hitting rock bottom. You have no filter, you do not apply critical thinking. This is your biggest downfall. This is also why so many see you in a dim light. You do not deserve credibility when you are promoting sexual criminals as persecuted minorities. You really ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Quote

I could have found someone who claims to see auras and chakras without such controversies too.

I seriously doubt that you could provide anyone credible, are you talking about the 40 year old westernised tradition that you have already shown to have zero knowledge of as well? Is it not embarrassing for you to have a skeptic teach you about the woo you are peddling?

I think you have already clearly shown that your knowledge on the subject of Chakras is just Google. Colourful spinning wheels, the California version of the Indian tradition. The suggest you drop that one, as you already look silly enough on that subject.

Quote

But, hoping to return this thread more to the track, what is your theory on why so many different people from so many different cultures seem to be seeing the same things with IMO way too much similarity to be dismissed.

That's simple. Look at your zealous approach for a start. A great many other claims no doubt are of the same low standard for evidence. You champion the most ridiculous of claims and in this discussion promoted a sexual criminal as a reference of validity. After that we have misidentification of natural events and then predetermined conclusions brought about by religious based beliefs. Many don't look for real answers, many such as yourself eschew knowledge from the sciences that clear these claims up well. 

People like to think they are smart so they invent answers. Then they become invested and pride makes them foolishly continue to support ridiculous personal musings. Most people are not well studied scientists. That's why the skeptical and the atheists comprise the majority of the best minds in the best institutions and backwater places with little opportunity tend to be more religious and spiritual in nature.

The similarities are clearly driven by cultures and personal bias. 

Removing all that would not leave many, if any cases left over.

If you really were looking for answers, you would attempt to understand the woo being peddled at its base level and attempt to understand the sciences. You don't. You just try to push the paranormal.

Quote

In my readings I heard like 1% of the population clairvoyantly sees auras and such to varying degrees. I can't vouch for any percentage numbers but there's still at least millions.   

Think about it.

If there really was millions of cases, them why is anecdotes all we have?

Quite clearly indoctrination of woo is more prominent amongst the majority of people on the planet, few households introduce physics at the dinner table. What else explains so many claims with zero proof? Statistically, the notion is quite ridiculous. Superstition is no reason widely spread than real world knowledge. 

That's something we should be attempting to remedy, not compound.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
5 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I see Mr. Unbiased;)

Seriously.

You've got to be kidding.

Edited by psyche101
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
6 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I think that explanation is insufficient to explain away the quantity of detail from credible people, cultures and wisdom traditions that I've come across.

Your standard for evidence is exceedingly low. 

As I have noted before. Your level of support seems to be directly proportional to the nonsense content of a claim. The sillier it is, the more you support it.

6 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Reason forces me to think that something real but not directly detectable  by the physical senses is highly likely to be involved. 

Reason most certainly does not force that. You have proven yourself to be an enemy of reason.

Eschewing the sciences for cultural superstition is not a valid approach.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Yes he most certainly was, and you just showed how biased you are. It's unacceptable. The man fiddled with kids and you're saying that he was a persecuted gay man. 

You really need to re-evaluate your ethics. Pedophile behaviour is not acceptable in any time. I'd say your credibility is pretty much gone after promoting that sicko.

Oh rubbish, you took this first thing Google gave you. The man has shown he will manipulate others for sick personal gratification. How can such a disgrace be trusted at all with anything?

You often promote charlatans and tricksters as genuine teachers, this is just your worst example. Congrats PG, I just heard the KERPLUNK of you hitting rock bottom. You have no filter, you do not apply critical thinking. This is your biggest downfall. This is also why so many see you in a dim light. You do not deserve credibility when you are promoting sexual criminals as persecuted minorities. You really ought to be ashamed of yourself.

I seriously doubt that you could provide anyone credible, are you talking about the 40 year old westernised tradition that you have already shown to have zero knowledge of as well? Is it not embarrassing for you to have a skeptic teach you about the woo you are peddling?

I think you have already clearly shown that your knowledge on the subject of Chakras is just Google. Colourful spinning wheels, the California version of the Indian tradition. The suggest you drop that one, as you already look silly enough on that subject.

That's simple. Look at your zealous approach for a start. A great many other claims no doubt are of the same low standard for evidence. You champion the most ridiculous of claims and in this discussion promoted a sexual criminal as a reference of validity. After that we have misidentification of natural events and then predetermined conclusions brought about by religious based beliefs. Many don't look for real answers, many such as yourself eschew knowledge from the sciences that clear these claims up well. 

People like to think they are smart so they invent answers. Then they become invested and pride makes them foolishly continue to support ridiculous personal musings. Most people are not well studied scientists. That's why the skeptical and the atheists comprise the majority of the best minds in the best institutions and backwater places with little opportunity tend to be more religious and spiritual in nature.

The similarities are clearly driven by cultures and personal bias. 

Removing all that would not leave many, if any cases left over.

If you really were looking for answers, you would attempt to understand the woo being peddled at its base level and attempt to understand the sciences. You don't. You just try to push the paranormal.

Think about it.

If there really was millions of cases, them why is anecdotes all we have?

Quite clearly indoctrination of woo is more prominent amongst the majority of people on the planet, few households introduce physics at the dinner table. What else explains so many claims with zero proof? Statistically, the notion is quite ridiculous. Superstition is no reason widely spread than real world knowledge. 

That's something we should be attempting to remedy, not compound.

So my takeaway from your posts is that all these individuals  and wisdom traditions (including those describing the chakra and aura  systems in fantastic detail) are either lying or delusional?

I find that quite unlikely to my sense of rational reasoning.

Edited by papageorge1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

So my takeaway from your posts is that all these individuals  and wisdom traditions (including those describing the chakra and aura  systems in fantastic detail) are either lying or delusional?

Your takeaway is as per all your posts. Short-sighted, credulous and avoiding the massive holes on the nonsense posts you subject others to.

Are you talking about the 40 year old California version of pretty lights easy to sell rehashed soccer mum Chakra or the ancient meditative practise to assist in focus?

Because so far you have only referred to the former. And you have not answered this when asked before.

It must be embarrassing for you to have a skeptic teach you about the very nonsense you are peddling.

As a focus for meditation, Chakra has benefits to assist reaching that state of mind. The new age garbage you have been presenting is the product of lies and delusion.

4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I find that quite unlikely to my sense of rational reasoning.

You have no filters, you have yet to display rational thought, critical evaluation or reasoning.

As noted repeatedly, you are an enemy of reason. If you find something unlikely, then any opposing arguments are more likely to.be correct. It's just how you roll. You champion ridiculous stories blindly, perhaps just to annoy critical thinkers, it's a real possibility as I don't know how your mind works. All I do know a s your posting is misleading, full of bad advice for others and highly credulous.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.