Jump to content

Luna Bliss

Resident
  • Posts

    7,869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Luna Bliss

  1. Scientific debate should be about the material, yes. The problem occurs when science definitively claims they know there is no 'as-yet-unmeasured' component of the Universe, and tells anybody who believes there is that they're wrong and silly. There's simply no proof one way or the other, and when science purports to know the truth that has not been proven....that is not science...it is scientism. The most science should be saying is that they have not discovered enough evidence to make such a final determination as many unfortunately do.
  2. I really liked this video...it made me think about my understanding of fear a bit more.
  3. https://nomegallery.com/chapter/fossil-legends-of-the-first-americans-by-adrienne-mayor/ I like the little I know of Native American (Buddhist, Pagan, etc) thinking on the interconnectedness of nature. Ultimately, however, their understanding of the fossils was also quite limited, and some of them cling as stubbornly to their creation stories as Christians do to theirs. https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/22/science/indian-tribes-creationists-thwart-archeologists.html That's a paywalled article and you might not have access to it. In it, the author describes the difficulties archaeologists have excavating on Native People's lands. Here's a quote from it: ''We never asked science to make a determination as to our origins,'' said Sebastian LeBeau, repatriation officer for the Cheyenne River Sioux, a Lakota tribe based in Eagle Butte, S.D. ''We know where we came from. We are the descendants of the Buffalo people. They came from inside the earth after supernatural spirits prepared this world for humankind to live here. If non-Indians choose to believe they evolved from an ape, so be it. I have yet to come across five Lakotas who believe in science and in evolution.'' I doubt that represents the thinking of the majority of Lakota, just as the "sports of nature" idea did not represent the mainstream of European fossil thought, but it does illustrate that willful human ignorance is an equal opportunity employer. I'm certainly not well versed on the fossil lore of America's indigenous peoples, but I suspect the significant variance from European thinking of the same period is rooted in the comparative availability and nature of fossils throughout each culture's history. The Rocky Mountain range, particularly in Canada (home of the Burgess Shale), is the world's richest exposition of dinosaur fossils. It's hard to wander around a place like Alberta's Dinosaur Provincial Park without understanding that, thousands of years ago, the indigenous people of the area were literally tripping over dinosaur fossils. When you get a 10,000 year head start on your mythology, it's hard not to look wiser for a while. China has similarly easily accessible dinosaur fossil sites and I have wondered whether their mythology reveals their long historical exposure to dinosaur fossils. There be dragons? Ultimately, I suspect you can find archeologists and paleontologists hailing from most of the world's belief systems that are converging on a common understanding. That's a pretty impressive achievement for the most powerful tool we've ever created, science. I will probably get back to you on this. I'm in the process of a deep dive into Native traditions. I'm just wary of being ethnocentric....the Native experience is difficult to understand and has frequently been mischaracterized and overlooked by Western science.
  4. It does indeed sound like, from what you've described, your girlfriend had a psychic experience. If it happened to me personally I would always keep the other frame of reference in my mind too....like...was there some physical clue like a siren barely audible...or whatnot. I guess though I am a great believer in psychic experiences (they happen a lot in Yoga communes/circles) I usually leave the door open to consider there might be something in the physical realm unaccounted for. Not saying you should do that with your experience....just relating how I process it all.
  5. great links, btw...didn't know this about more Eastern traditions, but have come across it in Native ones..
  6. Wrong is wrong, yes? Well yes, every organization in the world is wrong to a degree, including science, because patriarchy is or has been a part of it. I just tend not to invalidate anything wholly because it has some faults. I don't know if Coffee was indeed doing this...but due to other postings I have a high degree of suspicion about it. Hence, I do get Chroma's defense.
  7. Yes, but science is entirely responsible for everything that makes this conversation possible. Dozens and dozens of complex scientific disciplines stacked one atop the other, It's science all the way down. Some people navigate more by their experience and don't impose a test on everything they do and discount its validity unless they see a chart posted online. So it could have been a thread about people simply sharing their psychic experiences. Also, much of my disturbance is because we've only included Western science, and only at it's most limited levels. Vedic science is another science that should be included, as well as others, but Western science typically doesn't see anything but their worldview as valid.
  8. Again, no....nobody has to play by your rules. They might choose to explore with you but you should not demand. And any real scientist would not denigrate a variable from the beginning by stating it is "magical". Rolig, you seem to pretend you are open but I don't believe you are. If you were you would have investigated and responded to some of the material I've provided. Instead, you only parrot your own material over and over.
  9. That's one thing that is definitely wrong, though. If you are trying to prove to me that telepathy exists, you must use the rules of science, simply because you are trying to convince me. If I try to convince you that telepathy exists, I have to use your rules. We're at an impasse because neither of us will accept a "proof" created by the other's rules. Faith is not there to be proven by scientific methods, and scientific discoveries are not revealed by faith. Chroma's initial post indicates to me that she wanted examples of telepathy -- I see nothing in it that indicates she wanted to know if telepathy was real or not or that she was trying to convince anyone of its truth. So for you (and other proponents of Scientism), to demand proof...is totally off-topic and disrespectful to the intent of the poster. You assume that your belief has precedence, and that we must defend our beliefs to YOU. And now you're insisting we must be sensitive to the rules of Science you impose, as if it is the default way to view reality? I don't mind taking the initial intent further and discussing science as we have really ....I'm just pointing out there should be no decree that we must. BTW, I have provided scientific examples of telepathy to explore. Did anyone explore them? No. This says to me all you really want to do is believe in a totally materialistic world that could not include telepathic experience. Did anyone explore what Scientism means? Or explore what Deloria said beyond some Wiki entry where white man once again tried to discredit the Natives? No, your minds are made up.
  10. “Looking for consciousness in the brain is like looking in the radio for the announcer.” – Nasseim Haramein, director of research for the Resonance Project “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulating consciousness.” –Max Planck, theoretical physicist who originated quantum theory, which won him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918 “It was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.” -Eugene Wigner, theoretical physicist and mathematician. He received a share of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963 “A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction. Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote: “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” –R.C. Henry, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University
  11. I don't think it's simply a matter of faith...belief in an 'as yet unseen' aspect to reality. Scientists have been discovering there is more than just the material world for quite a few decades now. Heisenberg, Bohr and Schrödinger to name a few. “Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” ~ R.C. Henry, Professor of physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University
  12. Science is not the only way to understand the world though, but you assume it is, as if your position is the default and only true one. It's fine if you want to believe this, but it's not fair to expect others to meet your demands. Nobody needs to prove anything to you.
  13. Scientism is also a hell of a drug...
  14. I don't see anything psychic going on with this incident, but it's possible. Imagine someone staring at you while wanting to destroy you -- their eyes and demeanor are pretty creepy and easily detectable by anyone viewing them.
  15. I believe it's possible something psychic occurred here. As many pointed out, it's true our minds have patterned ways of responding to the world, and they can fool us in so many ways, but this will never prove your particular experience was not psychic in nature. Psychology is basically a study of the patterns in our mind. They should be used as possibilities when approaching experiences, and never as proof of our preconceived notions. We'd have to know much more about your girlfriends previous experiences to even approach applying our theories to her.
  16. Your a priori assumption about the nature of reality which excludes the possibility of non-material/physical means of connection would not allow any other conclusion would it? This is not scientific.
  17. Yes, if our attention is focused intently elsewhere we might not notice the small shift in light that another person makes in the room as they move, or the sounds that are barely audible.
  18. Have you ever sensed that someone was staring at you from behind? I know they've done experiments with this but don't remember the results..
  19. I think Tucker Carlson has the mind of an ape, but then I don't mean to insult the apes...
  20. lol well I did wonder far in the back of my mind. It's just that I have heard remote viewing actually works in some cases, but never did check out credible sources to confirm.
  21. The military found that subjects were more accurate while using Google Earth to focus their information-gathering powers. Really? I had not heard that. It makes sense though...to have some sort of physical perception from the senses to help focus.
  22. btw...last night I heard strange sounds coming from my garden. I rose from my bed, clasping my beloved phone, and was able to capture on video what I discovered:
  23. There are some links to explore in this article: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-03633-1_14 Too lazy myself atm, but if you scroll down to the bottom section of this article, named '14.4.2 Psi: Measuring the Transcendental' I see lots of experiments I've never checked out that the author claims have statistical significance.
  24. The nature of reality...could it include psychic experiences or extraordinary forms of consciousness inherent in the Natives of long ago? Many Western models say 'no', that the experiences of Natives long ago was simply "magical thinking". To actually know the answer we would have to go back and relate to the world with the type of connected consciousness they thrived in though -- it was so very different. I'm not sure it can be comprehended intellectually, and it was actually the experience of it during an intensive vision quest which makes me know there are better, more inclusive and expansive, forms of consciousness. In the following article a MA student thesis attempts to describe Natives relationship to the land and greater interconnectedness as described by Deloria, as well as Deloria's critique of Western science: https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/19344/Southall_oregon_0171N_11370.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Deloria claims, in his book "The World We Used to Live In: Remembering the Powers of the Medicine Men", that in many instances what we today call "magical thinking" was not a delusion and very accessible when Natives were far more connected to each other and the land than most people are today. In order to test this scientifically though it just won't work to grab random people off the street -- we need people who embody a more connected type of consciousness (Natives who embody it, dedicated Yoga practitioners & meditators who have more likely minimized the ego consciousness that causes separation, or anybody else that works to minimize patterned ways of thinking/attachments to concepts so prevalent in the Western world). Psi phenomena would simply not typically happen to the average person on the street -- we need people with more fluid boundaries for these tests.
  25. At the 25-minute mark of the following video you can see Deloria describe some sort of creature with hard skin the Natives couldn't kill with an arrow as they could the buffalo... reported to him via source material from the 1800's. He never used the word 'dinosaur' there, but at least I can see how he might have gotten the impression there were creatures similar to dinosaurs before the conquering of the west in the U.S. I'd like to find that source material and estimate its credibility. Or see where he actually claimed, in his own words, and seriously, that dinosaurs and humans occupied the earth at the same time. Anyway, as the author of 'Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee', Dee Brown, claimed, I think Deloria was being a Trickster and poking the pig, the powers that be who continued to treat Natives unfairly via distorting their experience. The author of Bury My Heart, Brown, stated that Deloria did not believe it. This article is good to see examples of his "scathing and sardonic humor": https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/nov/24/guardianobituaries.usa He was certainly a beloved figure to many Natives. Here's a tribute to him: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1331&context=jepson-faculty-publications In the video he encourages students to find missing information using the computers he seems enthralled with (it's early 2000's). I think it's a worthy goal, as History has been written by the victors from their perspective. Of course we need scientific research to get a clearer picture (for example, were other animals like the one described in his source material found in the records). Here's where he talks about the hard-skinned creature at the 25-minute mark:
×
×
  • Create New...