[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
Here is another picture of the spirit changing its mood. I will upload more pics in time.[/quote]
Wow, truly a stunning picture. How do you get them so hi-def?
Its a gift. I wish i could share, but its classified.
More pics will follow, and you will see the spirit’s move from indifferent (first picture) to sullen (second picture) and then malevolent (third picure)
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
Here is another picture of the spirit changing its mood. I will upload more pics in time.
Wow, truly a stunning picture. How do you get them so hi-def?[/quote]
[quote]ukrainian wrote:
I do. Anyways, can you disprove ghosts?[/quote]
Can you disprove Green Geese?
How about the Tyrannical, vengeful God that controls all of your sense perception and to that point gave you the false idea of ghosts? Can you disprove the existence of this God?
[quote]FightingScott wrote:
ukrainian wrote:
I do. Anyways, can you disprove ghosts?
Can you disprove Green Geese?
How about the Tyrannical, vengeful God that controls all of your sense perception and to that point gave you the false idea of ghosts? Can you disprove the existence of this God?
[/quote]
I cant believe so many people dont know you cant disprove something.
Again, this is Bertrand Russels invisible teapot orbiting Mars. You cant prove it isnt there, but that gives you NO reason to believe it is there.
back on topic
we really don’t understand the brain and what it is capable of in terms of our perception and what we experience with our senses
as mentioned previously the thought in your mind that something might happen can be so terrifying and cause so much anxiety that it’s almost like your senses WANT it to happen
as for my story a few years ago i watched the american version of the japanese movie “the ring” in threatres, as far as i’m concerned either you will be scared shitless by this movie forever or you will laugh your ass off at the entire premise of the movie, i have some friends who are the latter
suffice to say i was scared shitless by the time it was halfway through the movie and so was my buddy sitting next to me, the movie used camera filters and sounds/music so well that there was no need for shock horror or gore, the anticipation of something coming up soon in the movie was enough to scare you
for those who have seen the movie the last 10-15 minutes involve a certain scene with a TV and this scene is done even better in the original japanese version “Ringu”, this is by far the scariest scene in the film and the buildup of dread is frightening, i couldn’t keep my eyes on the theater screen the whole time and i didn’t see the very end of it (what happens to the guy’s face)
that night i went home and tried to get to sleep and guess what was a few feet from my bed…a TV
my mind/brain/whatever was so incredibly fucking scared by the ending of this movie that i almost believed something would come out of my TV and kill me, i must have woken up at least 10-20 times that night and i’m normally a very heavy sleeper
even today almost 3 years later i will NOT watch that movie or even listen to the sound/music of that final scene(a high note repeating on a violin or something, extremly fitting for the scene) and the images of that final scene are still vivid in my mind
have you heard of that old school japanese horror genre ? well this is one of the movies that started it and is incredibly famous over there
if you haven’t watched that movie get the original japanese version “Ringu” (isohunt.com should have it), watch it alone at night and see how your perception of a harmless TV set changes
Facts. Well, the scientific method seems very good for investigating material phenomenon, but what about more complex affairs, like psychological or spiritual matters (even if we, or you rather, consider them mere epiphenomenon of matter).
I am not necessarily talking about ghosts or supernatural phenomenon, per se. I am talking about something like, “falling in love”.
Is it a fact that I am in love with Ms. X? It is a fact that I say so, but how can you prove it or disprove it?
I am sure that you will tell me that certain synapses fire in the brain when we are in love, but this begs another question. In order to have mapped this region of the brain as corresponding with love in your first model, you would have had to know he was in love. And, of course, there is the nasty question of defining exactly what love is.
Things get a little messier when we start to deal with things like emotions or a relation to something transcendent, like God. These are hidden, not easily demonstrable to another consciousness who does not share the experience, cannot be replicated in some laboratory in New Jersey in a triple blind study.
If you read the life of Mr. Bertrand Russell (whom you obviously consider a paragon of wisdom), it becomes apparent that he either began as a person with little emotional intelligence or he absorbed his philosophy too much and became an emotional retard.
Oh, he could relate abstractly and intellectually to suffering, I suppose. Thus, the reason he advocated socialism (this is not a criticism of that…I am not one of the T-Nation right-wingers) and went to jail for protesting the war.
However, consider how he treated his son. Sleeping with his own son’s wife, then crowing triumphantly about it. All he could think about was the whole affair in terms of logic.
Why, after all, shouldn’t we be able to have sex with our children’s spouses?
It’s just pure superstitious reliance on UNSCIENTIFIC taboos that prevents us from doing so. Fine. But what about the emotional trauma that such causes? Ah, these illogical emotions. That we be rid of them and repeat Andy Warhol’s refrain, “I’ve always wanted to be a machine.”
So, Mr. Russell was a master at logic, which certainly serves us well in certain circumstances. However, to believe that the world is just made up of stark matter, like Minsky does, is to believe a blind person that the color red does not exist.
Mind you, logic and scientific method have their place…but they also have their limits.
To a certain point, I am willing to follow Mr. Russell (and persons of his ilk) lead. Otherwise, I shall turn to Pascal’s dicutm: “Le coeur a ses raisons dont la raison ne sait rien”. (The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing).
[EDIT: Yes, I know the bit about Russell is an ad hominem argument, but it is, in my opinion, a revealing one]
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
Here is another picture of the spirit changing its mood. I will upload more pics in time.[/quote]
I have honestly started to believe that this is all a big piss-take on your part…
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
Here is another picture of the spirit changing its mood. I will upload more pics in time.
I have honestly started to believe that this is all a big piss-take on your part…[/quote]
I was just telling RSGZ one of two things happened:
1 - He is a true believer, and is now just playing crazy to have fun
2 - He was trying to play the part initially as a joke and wasnt getting his point across that he was kidding, so he cranked it up to 11 to make sure we all knew it was a joke.
Dude, what is there not to believe in? I HAVE communicated with the spirit I showed you a picture of. The only thing that would convince you though, is if you work with people who interact with spirits on a daily basis.
This is almost at the level of a science, though not an exact science. It is experimental at this stage, and the projects are pulled apart due to lack of interest. I have reams upon reams of published research as well as tons of scientific photographs as well as videos that show beyond doubt that spirits exist.
We the living are particles embedded in a continuum of spirits. The existence of this continuum is immaterial to you, so you can ask for proof and not receiving proof satisfactory for you, can call BS. I on the other hand have partied with spirits (in a sense) and know fully well how to feel them out.
More pics will be added.
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
duffyj2 wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
Here is another picture of the spirit changing its mood. I will upload more pics in time.
I have honestly started to believe that this is all a big piss-take on your part…
I was just telling RSGZ one of two things happened:
1 - He is a true believer, and is now just playing crazy to have fun
2 - He was trying to play the part initially as a joke and wasnt getting his point across that he was kidding, so he cranked it up to 11 to make sure we all knew it was a joke.
[/quote]
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Facts. Well, the scientific method seems very good for investigating material phenomenon, but what about more complex affairs, like psychological or spiritual matters (even if we, or you rather, consider them mere epiphenomenon of matter).
I am not necessarily talking about ghosts or supernatural phenomenon, per se. I am talking about something like, “falling in love”.
I am sure that you will tell me that certain synapses fire in the brain when we are in love, but this begs another question. In order to have mapped this region of the brain as corresponding with love in your first model, you would have had to know he was in love. And, of course, there is the nasty question of defining exactly what love is.
[/quote]
I never said that the scientific method can be applied to everything, and “concepts”(thing like “Love” “Justice” or even “5”) fall outside of its realm. However, if you are going to make a claim like “God created the universe, the earth, and humans exactly as they appear today, and he did so 6000 years ago” well, now we have something we CAN test.
[quote]
If you read the life of Mr. Bertrand Russell (whom you obviously consider a paragon of wisdom), it becomes apparent that he either began as a person with little emotional intelligence or he absorbed his philosophy too much and became an emotional retard.[/quote]
I used one sentence of Bertrand Russells work and I “obviously consider him a paragon of wisdom” ?? In actuality, the only reason I used him name is to cover myself from getting called a plagiarizer. I wanted to give credit to the man who thought of the idea, that is all.
What exactly were you trying to reveal by attacking Russells private life? That his logic was not sound? If that was the point, then argue the logic, not the man. I really saw no point in the whole of the posting.
To engage in a bit of my own Ad Hominem, although I think it is slightly more telling of the mans overall thought process:
Pascal elucidated one of the most childish arguments known to man, known as Pascals Wager, in which he said he would rather believe in God because(if he exists) of all the cool shit you get to do if you are right, and if you are wrong you go to hell (supposedly). If you are an Atheist and you are right… Well, nothing happens anyway.
Clearly a man interested only in the truth…
Bring on some more ghost stories:)
[quote]BLinGsTaR wrote:
Bring on some more ghost stories:)[/quote]
Or the photos…
[quote]ktennies wrote:
So far as I can tell, the only ones “hoping” are the believers.
[/quote]
Bingo.