What Can We Actually Attribute to Spirit?

[Dulloldfart]

So if "I" is not in the physical universe it must be outside or occupying the whole universe! That is a Static, not a single point but the whole damn thing!

You are making a big assumption here. What if there is a discrete "thing" intimately associated with a human body that is not unambiguously detectable by present-day scientific instruments, but which seems to fit with (relatively) well-known descriptions of "spirit" etc? I'm excluding Hubbard's silly ideas here.

Let,s say i am really evil and a Dog pics it up barking. Some would say the Dog was reading my body language where others would claim that it could smell it! You could certainly have a "bad feeling" about someone or a situation or you could smell a bad feeling. fragrant could be a close encounter with an unseen natural world. Right in front of our nose

Request for comments

Again, you are excluding other possibilities. What if the dog has a better perception of a spirit world (including a person's extended anatomy [aura etc] displaying energy phenomena) than most post-pubertal humans? Many practising auditors talk about being able to see a person's "pictures": why shouldn't a dog be able to perceive same? You must be familiar with dogs clearly reacting to things that "aren't there," or more precisely, dogs apparently reacting to things that humans can't perceive.

Paul

 

[JustSheila]

You are making a big assumption here. What if there is a discrete "thing" intimately associated with a human body that is not unambiguously detectable by present-day scientific instruments, but which seems to fit with (relatively) well-known descriptions of "spirit" etc? I'm excluding Hubbard's silly ideas here.

Again, you are excluding other possibilities. What if the dog has a better perception of a spirit world (including a person's extended anatomy [aura etc] displaying energy phenomena) than most post-pubertal humans? Many practising auditors talk about being able to see a person's "pictures": why shouldn't a dog be able to perceive same? You must be familiar with dogs clearly reacting to things that "aren't there," or more precisely, dogs apparently reacting to things that humans can't perceive.

Paul

Quite a few dogs and cats have been known to show radical behavior changes for hours, days, even weeks before earthquakes - running frantically in circles, hiding under beds, etc.

That's not the standard five senses we know. But there is also a sense of pressure, and there is a sense of balance beyond physical hearing range. How we or animals sense these things from a long range isn't fully understood. An energy sense is certainly a realistic possibility, and if that sort of energy perception is considered, spiritual energy perception isn't much of a jump from there.

I don't personally think energy perception is the least bit supernatural. To me, it seems as natural as the concept of gravity. As life forms, we are each an animating force and quite aware of other life forms. I wonder if there have ever been tests done to find if simple life forms that do not have five senses can perceive other life forms anyway? I'd bet they can, but I'll bet scientists can't explain it, either.

 

[Dulloldfart]

I wonder if there have ever been tests done to find if simple life forms that do not have five senses can perceive other life forms anyway? I'd bet they can, but I'll bet scientists can't explain it, either.

Cleve Backster did a lot of research in this area over many years. Easy enough to Google. Here's one quick link:
https://weilerpsiblog.wordpress.com...ular-level-the-experiments-of-cleve-backster/

Paul

 

[JustSheila]

Fascinating! Thanks for the link, Paul.

These parts particularly stood out for me:

This is a confirmation of the groundbreaking staring experiment (Wiseman and Schlitz, 1977) where it was shown that in psi experiments, when all other variables were accounted for, skeptics were far less likely to get results beyond mere chance than non-skeptics .

and:

A process that worked once to elicit a response from organisms or cells would not necessarily work again and these organisms also had the ability to distinguish between real intent and just faking it.

Funny story. Parrots tend to like to make people laugh. Well, I had one that never spoke, but did all sorts of whistles and sounds. One of his favourite tricks was to do the high pitched whistle going lower in key, lower and lower and ending in a big "Boom!" sound whenever anyone dropped something accidentally. He was hilarious!

But he would never, ever make the noise if someone dropped something on purpose. He knew the difference.

 

[EP - Ethics Particle]

A kiss!

Here's a kiss for you from Olga...worth watching!
https://youtu.be/N1XzPruGqkw

 

[degraded being]

Fascinating! Thanks for the link, Paul.

These parts particularly stood out for me:



and:



Funny story. Parrots tend to like to make people laugh. Well, I had one that never spoke, but did all sorts of whistles and sounds. One of his favourite tricks was to do the high pitched whistle going lower in key, lower and lower and ending in a big "Boom!" sound whenever anyone dropped something accidentally. He was hilarious!

But he would never, ever make the noise if someone dropped something on purpose. He knew the difference.

Fascinating!

Yes, fascinating how nuts someone can be!

 

[oneonewasaracecar]

You are making a big assumption here. What if there is a discrete "thing" intimately associated with a human body that is not unambiguously detectable by present-day scientific instruments, but which seems to fit with (relatively) well-known descriptions of "spirit" etc? I'm excluding Hubbard's silly ideas here...

The interesting thing about this is that is that it is not really a supernatural claim. It is really speculation about a scientific possibility.

What I mean by that is if you say we can't detect it yet, it implies we can detect it in the future, which means it is within the purview of science.

I am always dubious about scientific speculation for which there is not solid evidence and for which the scientific community is not generally supportive.

The plausibility of scientific speculation is dependent upon how well it aligns with our growing understanding of the universe and this helps to mark out the division between science fiction and science fantasy.

Unless there's evidence and theory that explains the evidence, it's science fantasy, like Scientology, and not science fiction.

 

[Helena Handbasket]

WHY THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OT

Being OT means doing impossible things. If, for some reason, you can start doing one or more of those things, they are not impossible any more. Therefore, you can't be OT because you can't do anything impossible.

Helena, P-1

 

[Panda Termint]

“Seeing, contrary to popular wisdom, isn't believing. It's where belief stops, because it isn't needed any more.”
~ Sir Terry Pratchett

 

[oneonewasaracecar]

“Seeing, contrary to popular wisdom, isn't believing. It's where belief stops, because it isn't needed any more.”
~ Sir Terry Pratchett

I see.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Cleve Backster did a lot of research in this area over many years. Easy enough to Google. Here's one quick link:
https://weilerpsiblog.wordpress.com...ular-level-the-experiments-of-cleve-backster/

Paul

I have been seeing snippets of cellular experiments popping up in the news here and there. They don't advertise all that much about new projects on tv. But, one lady in a lab coat was very briefly sharing here discovery about the aggregate cell groupings culminating in a sort of skin-type expansion 'bubble' in her dish. These amalgams were alongside others generating another bubble with a type of unique skin enclosing nature.. To me it seemed like she was pointing to the genesis of simpler 'minds' and consciousness. Bruce Lipton has done incredible research proving the maleability of what a cell 'feels' it is and what it feels its function is. It 'becomes' according to environmental triggers. It takes on any form in response to the environmental stresses it becomes aware of.

It got really interesting around 24 minutes. One of his vids described how one set can absorb and encorporate another within its skin. They meld and a new skin is formed, pristine, for the fresh conglomrrate. CHANGE is easy it seems.

https://youtu.be/7GAduIk94_0k

https://youtu.be/VYYXq1Ox4sk

 

[Hatshepsut]

https://youtu.be/lm6O5CHBN7Y

I like this one. Greg Braden (The Isaiah Effect) did a sit down interview with Bruce Lipton ( The Biology of Belief) that was a mind blower. I am trying to find it.

https://youtu.be/1I4M2pHloM4

 

[Leon-2]

WHY THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OT

Being OT means doing impossible things. If, for some reason, you can start doing one or more of those things, they are not impossible any more. Therefore, you can't be OT because you can't do anything impossible.

Helena, P-1

HH - This must rank as the dumbest post you have yet made and you are NOT known for making dumb posts. It really is not worthy of you.

 

[Hatshepsut]

WHY THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OT

Being OT means doing impossible things. If, for some reason, you can start doing one or more of those things, they are not impossible any more. Therefore, you can't be OT because you can't do anything impossible.

Helena, P-1

My neighbor is an Avatar trainer. She coaches students on The Wizards Course. It is a product of Harry Palmer, an ex mission holder. I read through her magazine when I brought her mail in. It seems the 'secrets' that upper echelon Scientologists made hard to get to....are being turned into common food. I took some photos of her mag before giving it back. The files are large so I will just add links to the photos. I think it's a working man's OT VIII....if that still interests anybody.

IDENTITY and ENTITIES and their conversion back into the original building material of consciousness....which you are not. Consciousness is a creation according to these trainers.

I go get files from google drive....one sec please.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6c25Kc202Z3M0UUU/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6Rjk2Yy10TzhrdTg/view?usp=docslist_api

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6NV9WXzBzb1g1Q1U/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6RkpRMExsX0lJRFk/view?usp=docslist_api

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6eXZWN0JJNldsalU/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6b1I3WUdJaGRWOFE/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6UzBJVk13eWNUSTg/view?usp=docslist_api

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6Vm5qSlYwMnd2VTQ/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6N1hyN2QwTEpKZ28/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6RjRRbmtJbzFQbG8/view?usp=docslist_api

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4...SQGtw3s6c25Kc202Z3M0UUU/view?usp=docslist_api
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6Rjk2Yy10TzhrdTg/view?usp=docslist_api

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B43TSQGtw3s6NV9WXzBzb1g1Q1U/view?usp=docslist_api
You can view and enlarge or expand the image to read.

 

[Dulloldfart]

The interesting thing about this is that is that it is not really a supernatural claim. It is really speculation about a scientific possibility.

What I mean by that is if you say we can't detect it yet, it implies we can detect it in the future, which means it is within the purview of science.

I am always dubious about scientific speculation for which there is not solid evidence and for which the scientific community is not generally supportive.

The plausibility of scientific speculation is dependent upon how well it aligns with our growing understanding of the universe and this helps to mark out the division between science fiction and science fantasy.

Unless there's evidence and theory that explains the evidence, it's science fantasy, like Scientology, and not science fiction.

See, for example, a post I just made on another thread: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...Should-We-Do&p=1060182&viewfull=1#post1060182

It points to common evidence (experiences shared by many on this board), and well-written theory. By well-written I mean the original author calling on her own experiences and documenting them in a best-selling book. It's not so much theory from her viewpoint, but it is from mine to the extent that I have not had similar experiences in my life. Now, just because the theory might be rejected by many, that does not make it incorrect (or correct either!).

Paul

 

[JustSheila]

Hi there, not trying to derail this thread i will try to add something here.

One of my primary acceptance of LRH theory about spirit's and such, was his use of the word 'Static' - This is, IMO where Science and Philosophy meet. The effing Static!

The Scientist is having a hard time to define a Static and using The big bang theory as a common point in the universe. A point! Now LRH and others (he stole it from) also talks about a point of origin, as in Thetan. Over time LRH tried to tell us that a Thetan wasn't even in the physical universe. So that make sense, as in the Matrix or, as in God as a whole or everything.

So if "I" is not in the physical universe it must be outside or occupying the whole universe! That is a Static, not a single point but the whole damn thing! Now before your jumping at me, here me out!

Everything in the physical universe has Entropy and can be predicted forward or backwards in time using a calculator. That is also why the mathematician having a hell of a time finding anything that is truly random. It does not exist! But, something is acting up on lifeforms as it has a determinism or will of choice. It just moves around! This is not logical in the physical universe.

The physical universe does not even support life as we know it.

It all boils down to this effing Static

This has nothing to do with my believes or what i know, but my observation of others that is trying to explain what the hell is going on!

I like to hear your comments on this if you please.

<snip>

Request for comments

Use less exclamation points.

 

[Anonycat]

Use less exclamation points.

This thread is now about New Age woo woo, delusionary OT shit, make-believe space cooties and exclamation points.

 

[JustSheila]

The interesting thing about this is that is that it is not really a supernatural claim. It is really speculation about a scientific possibility.

What I mean by that is if you say we can't detect it yet, it implies we can detect it in the future, which means it is within the purview of science.

I am always dubious about scientific speculation for which there is not solid evidence and for which the scientific community is not generally supportive.

The plausibility of scientific speculation is dependent upon how well it aligns with our growing understanding of the universe and this helps to mark out the division between science fiction and science fantasy.

Unless there's evidence and theory that explains the evidence, it's science fantasy, like Scientology, and not science fiction.

Ah, Racecar, I think it's far less ridiculous than the notion some scientists have that at some point man can actually create life as an animating force. To me, that's science fiction or fantasy. You say potatoes, I say patahtoes?

Just to say that there is some sort of thing that all life forms share between us that we can sense is a far cry from reading futures, ethereal physical bodies and levitation. I don't think it's the least bit related to the others, which I don't believe at all. It doesn't mean it sets some sort of basis to justify the rest, either.

 

[JustSheila]

Hi there, not trying to derail this thread i will try to add something here.

One of my primary acceptance of LRH theory about spirit's and such, was his use of the word 'Static' - This is, IMO where Science and Philosophy meet. The effing Static!

The Scientist is having a hard time to define a Static and using The big bang theory as a common point in the universe. A point! Now LRH and others (he stole it from) also talks about a point of origin, as in Thetan. Over time LRH tried to tell us that a Thetan wasn't even in the physical universe. So that make sense, as in the Matrix or, as in God as a whole or everything.

So if "I" is not in the physical universe it must be outside or occupying the whole universe! That is a Static, not a single point but the whole damn thing! Now before your jumping at me, here me out!

Everything in the physical universe has Entropy and can be predicted forward or backwards in time using a calculator. That is also why the mathematician having a hell of a time finding anything that is truly random. It does not exist! But, something is acting up on lifeforms as it has a determinism or will of choice. It just moves around! This is not logical in the physical universe.

The physical universe does not even support life as we know it.

It all boils down to this effing Static

This has nothing to do with my believes or what i know, but my observation of others that is trying to explain what the hell is going on!

I like to hear your comments on this if you please.

Another thing i like to mention is fragrant; some animals 'might' use there nose to visualize the world in 3D as it is blind or it is dark. If we humans do the same but nobody told us this - yet! It could explain a long chain of 'paranormal' phenomenons. Like mind reading, predicting the future, ghost etc. Let,s say i am really evil and a Dog pics it up barking. Some would say the Dog was reading my body language where others would claim that it could smell it! You could certainly have a "bad feeling" about someone or a situation or you could smell a bad feeling. fragrant could be a close encounter with an unseen natural world. Right in front of our nose

Request for comments

Okay, I'll comment.

This is a huge, giant jump in suppositions. Fun to imagine, maybe even a belief system, but there is no meeting of current science with the concept. None at all.

One simple concept, semi-proven, of a life form perceiving another life form doesn't mean it's a springboard that proves every "What if". A perception is simply that. It can't be just flipped around to become a "causative" form when a perception is just a receipt of signals of some sort. It doesn't mean humans can perceive the same way dogs perceive just by deciding to do so and has nothing to do with that. That's imagination.

Everything in the physical universe has Entropy and can be predicted forward or backwards in time using a calculator, .

Prediction, by definition, is the telling of future events. Therefore, there is no such thing as predicting anything backwards. There is also no evidence that anyone can predict the future, they can only use probability statistics of possible future outcomes. If life is a static, as you believe, this is also a contradiction. Static means at rest by definition, so does not move forward or backward. Something that is just there does not move or move other things. That is a physical, physics-related phenomenon.

I could go on, but let's just say that the theory is not scientific in any way and if it's spiritual, there are much better, more cohesive spiritual concepts around. I wouldn't call any of them scientific, though.

 

[oneonewasaracecar]

See, for example, a post I just made on another thread: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...Should-We-Do&p=1060182&viewfull=1#post1060182

It points to common evidence (experiences shared by many on this board), and well-written theory. By well-written I mean the original author calling on her own experiences and documenting them in a best-selling book. It's not so much theory from her viewpoint, but it is from mine to the extent that I have not had similar experiences in my life. Now, just because the theory might be rejected by many, that does not make it incorrect (or correct either!).

Paul

Well, I'm not sure I can agree. We skeptics have a saying the plural of anecdote is not evidence.

How many success stories have we all read?

If one person can repeatably read a playing card on top of a shelf by remote viewing, that's evidence of OOBE.

If a thousand people give a testimony of OOBE, it's not.

Or if it is, I am going to be really careful eating grilled cheese sandwiches in the mid-west.

I mean, I'd hate to hurt baby Jesus.