Luna Bliss

A heads up. If you have animal pets be sure and see if your vet is still around. I had a sick kitty and had a helluva time getting care for her as so many offices had closed and others had no space for new clients due to the chaos of Covid (still not sure of all the reasons why so many vets had to close offices and others became filled to capacity, or if this is only specific to my town. However a clinic said Covid was one of the factors). Finally got her in to an emergency care hospital and called around to find a new vet for follow up visits.

Just you. My best friend is an atheist and a materialist yet I've had no problems with her, and so disagreeing with another isn't the issue. She doesn't insist that I read books on how I must be fooling myself with a defective mind should I discuss experiences which appear to transcend known physical laws though. She doesn't insist she knows everything. She allows others to have differing viewpoints on the matter without diagnosing them as delusional. Big difference, compared to what you do. I genuinely believe that since this issue disturbs you so much that counseling would be of benefit. Since you consistently diagnose others as having malfunctioning minds isn't it only fair that I do a little diagnosing of you?

I had this once in a supermarket...this man had his back to me, just looking at the shelves, looked normal, etc, but I got a really bad vibe as soon as I saw him and just thought "That person's trouble"... then he came up really close to me in another aisle, absolutely furious, and started swearing at me, I think he was disturbed...I hid at the back hoping he'd left, but he was arguing with the staff at the checkout until security came over. I don't know why I got that vibe when I couldn't even see his face and he wasn't even doing anything 'strange' when I first saw him... Do you have any theories as to how you were able to detect this in him while only seeing his back? Barring any physical clues (even something like a strange smell we might not pick up consciously), the first thing that occurs to me is what is known as the 'energy field' which extends quite a ways from people -- in this way we are 'touched' by others and can pick up information. (prana, chi -- many other names for this field that I can't remember atm). Certain disciplines train people to sense this 'energy' if one doesn't already have the ability.

Just because the distortions in thinking you mentioned CAN happen does not prove ALL synchronicity is a product of faulty thinking. Of course we should certainly be aware of how bias can creep in, and how we as humans easily assign meaning and connections to events that are most likely random. But again, just because our minds often see connections that aren't there does not prove ALL untypical connections are imagined. Since your world view is one of scientific materialism I think it more likely that synchronicity could never be an option for you because your beliefs don't allow it -- such is the sadness of dogmatic beliefs Of course there must have been plenty of violence I 'missed' getting vibes from in my city, but just because synchronicity would work some of the time doesn't mean it has to work ALL of the time. Our minds never operate the same way even when undergoing typical daily experiences -- there is much variance according to time of day, nutrition, emotional state -- so why would this be any different when evaluating an accurate perception inherent in non-typical states of awareness (like synchronicity). Really, all or nothing thinking from YOU -- something I never imagined would happen Well we've kind of been here before haven't we -- I think it was in discussing Yogananda and his mystical experiences some years ago. Anyway, Madelaine, you seem unusually threatened regarding world views that counter your religion -- the scientific materialism religion you espouse and/or anything that appears to defy logic. Thanks for the book recommendation, however I have no books for you off the top of my head -- perhaps therapy could allay your fears and obsession with the curse of the reductionist, dissecting mind. Sometimes time and experience can heal as well. Good luck

Oh I am a great believer in gut instinct. I don't think it's psychic power but there is definitely something we have that alerts to us to danger. Yes sometimes the 'gut' can be a good guide. I really wish we could get away from such names as 'psychic powers' and 'supernatural' to describe experiences which transcend the typical physical ways we communicate, because these strange names make intuition sound spooky or like total fantasy. Taking an in-person example of intuition, it can often be difficult to ascertain if what we sense is truly beyond the physical or if the intuition has physical correlations. For example, if we meet a person and get a creepy feeling did we subconsciously pick up on shifty eyes or subtly dishonest responses, perhaps a manner of speaking that seemed manipulative, etc. -- or did we get this intuition based on no physical evidence whatsoever.

I quite agree there's no need to minimize. So why did you just do it? I'm reminded of this... Because 'dissecting mind' is so arrogant -- 'man' thinks they know far more than they actually do and can't comprehend they are to the larger Universe as a single cell is to a human. As much as I love Science, the 'clever ape' has gotten us into one heap of a mess as it divorced from nature and thought it could conquer the world through clever manipulations. Get ready for mass die-off and suffering as the temperature climbs. The connection has nothing to do with aesthetics. The connection I'm speaking of would have enabled us to cooperate with the world around us instead of imagining we could conquer it. 'Dissecting mind' feels no connection other than how it can manipulate physical elements of the world and create a model of the Universe, confusing the map with the territory.

In order to believe in synchronicities one has to believe that information can travel in extraordinary ways beyond the usual physical ways we're familiar with (in person, phone, pc, others). I do believe, like you, that information can travel in ways we can't measure. Perhaps it will be measurable in the future. In any case, I believe we can transcend the physical and 'tune-in' to information, sometimes with conscious attention but more commonly the information is transmitted spontaneously. I don't like to use the words 'God' or 'another dimension' or 'spiritual dimension' to describe these typically unknown levels of existence, as these are such loaded terms with too many interpretation, and, I don't see any agency (any deliberate action from some unknown force/being communicating these 'messages') -- I see it more as another level of reality that our human body and brain usually shuts us off from but that we can sometimes access. An example for me came from my intuitive sense that something was very wrong with a small part of the city I was living in at the time. I actually feared this area and did not know why, and I never wanted to go near it though I had to as it was on the way to several places I needed to visit. I had not feared any area in a city before, and was perplexed as to why this part of town frightened me, as there was nothing bad-looking or unusual about it. The area just totally gave me the creeps. As it ended up, a serial killer actually lived there, one who had eluded capture and terrorized the city for decades. I believe I tuned into the 'bad vibes' on the street where he lived, although I would never say I'm 100% convinced I detected something. I have no other explanation really.

I'm gonna try this, one last time. The guy in the video used this as an example.. Someone dreams about a relative, then wakes up and finds out that that relative passed away that day.. Now this person thinks some phenomenon has happened to them.. When in reality in a world of 7 billion people, with like I don't know, 160,000 that die each day in the world.. It probably happens more than we think, since our relatives or people we know end up in our dreams, and it's a good chance that more than one person has someone in their dream die the next day.. In other words, what may seem like a phenomenon to someone might not be such a phenomenon in the bigger picture.. All he said was, yea sure, I'd like to believe that kind of phenomenon stuff, but I also like the idea that I am part of a much bigger machine.. In other words, yea, It'd be kinda cool if that phenomenon stuff were really happening, But I like the idea that I'm a part of something much larger than that. I didn't watch the video. I'm simply referring to the experience we have, as has been discussed on the forum before, especially by Maddy, where we have a sense we are part of the Universe or something much larger than ourselves.

We are part of the Universe -- how could we not be? It is only the thinking, dissecting mind that imagines we are separate from the whole. Sometimes, we let go of 'dissecting mind' and know this, albeit briefly, and the letting go of control lends a sense of euphoria to the experience. No need to minimize the importance of the experience by labeling it as simply a pleasant feeling and not worthy of what our 'dissecting mind' determines as actual reality according to its logic. No need, either, to minimize the experience by supposing it's only an evolutionary advantageous sensation, labeled as such because our 'dissecting mind' finds no purpose or logic in it. It is a great and glorious "plan", but outside the purview of human logic, and so I prefer the word "experience" to describe it. The human mind can't conceive of infinity.

Does Consciousness Pervade The Universe? Philosopher Philip Goff answers questions about Pansychism One of science’s most challenging problems is a question that can be stated easily: Where does consciousness come from? In his new book Galileo’s Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness, philosopher Philip Goff considers a radical perspective: What if consciousness is not something special that the brain does but is instead a quality inherent to all matter? It is a theory known as “panpsychism,” and Goff guides readers through the history of the idea, answers common objections (such as “That’s just crazy!”) and explains why he believes panpsychism represents the best path forward. Can you explain, in simple terms, what you mean by panpsychism? In our standard view of things, consciousness exists only in the brains of highly evolved organisms, and hence consciousness exists only in a tiny part of the universe and only in very recent history. According to panpsychism, in contrast, consciousness pervades the universe and is a fundamental feature of it. This doesn’t mean that literally everything is conscious. The basic commitment is that the fundamental constituents of reality—perhaps electrons and quarks—have incredibly simple forms of experience. And the very complex experience of the human or animal brain is somehow derived from the experience of the brain’s most basic parts. It might be important to clarify what I mean by “consciousness,” as that word is actually quite ambiguous. Some people use it to mean something quite sophisticated, such as self-awareness or the capacity to reflect on one’s own existence. This is something we might be reluctant to ascribe to many nonhuman animals, never mind fundamental particles. But when I use the word consciousness, I simply mean experience: pleasure, pain, visual or auditory experience, et cetera. Human beings have a very rich and complex experience; horses less so; mice less so again. As we move to simpler and simpler forms of life, we find simpler and simpler forms of experience. Perhaps, at some point, the light switches off, and consciousness disappears. But it’s at least coherent to suppose that this continuum of consciousness fading while never quite turning off carries on into inorganic matter, with fundamental particles having almost unimaginably simple forms of experience to reflect their incredibly simple nature. That’s what panpsychists believe. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-consciousness-pervade-the-universe/

What if the spiritual aspect of the Universe is imbedded in the material world, as a kind of usually unseen part of reality. In this conceptualization, the material world we see manifested is the outer layer while Spirit is the inner. They are the same, really, but since we can only see the outer some think that's all there is to the Universe, and it is the human mind that actually creates the split between inner and outer layers. And so God, the inner part of reality, is infinite and only sometimes manifests the physical, material world, and evolution is the way in which the material aspects of the Universe manifest. This is a theory known to those who study consciousness, currently gaining greater acceptance in the Sciences, named Panpsychism.

Oh that's easy. Mah Hint! \o/ hehehe

Tried it. Getting an Oculus Quest 2 today. My views on Second Life and VR remain unchanged. Ahh, so let me get this right...you like VR but just not for Second Life? Indeed, you can't create in it, but the touring around is fun. How did you feel about the Facebook requirement for logging in? I didn't like it at first, but discovered it's really no biggie. If they start with advertisements though I'm out of there and seeking another brand of headset if I can afford it. The $299 price point of Oculus 2 was just too good to pass up however.

Yes, loads of people love VR...I talk to them all the time in VR venues. People on this forum, not so much -- understandable, as this is a forum for those who became accustomed to a world without VR and it's great for them. What I find strange is that most of the people dissing VR never even tried it once!! lol

As @Rolig Loonsaid....Meh. Well as @Jae Villasaid.......YAY!

lol "spawn from hell". I hate it when this happens. I was almost convinced something supernatural was indeed happening as I tried to track the culprit a couple years ago..

Pffft....I come back to this thread and nobody has discovered how life began! Disappoint 😉

I beg to differ, Miss Amore! Everything in VR is sooooo much more beautiful. Have you seen Reid Parkin's flowers in VR? Truly amazing...

A Light exists in Spring by Emily Dickinson A Light exists in Spring Not present on the Year At any other period — When March is scarcely here A Color stands abroad On Solitary Fields That Science cannot overtake But Human Nature feels. It waits upon the Lawn, It shows the furthest Tree Upon the furthest Slope you know It almost speaks to you. Then as Horizons step Or Noons report away Without the Formula of sound It passes and we stay — A quality of loss Affecting our Content As Trade had suddenly encroached Upon a Sacrament.

Excellent! I accept.

Extinction was part of Darwin's theory and I published that quote in this thread but it's a long thread so I am reading through it to find that quote which to me looked emphatically like a conclusion by Darwin. What I remember now about that particular quote from Darwin was it had something to do with natural selection aka survival of the fittest. One survived, the other did not (extinct). However, just attempting to read Darwin's theory of natural selection, it seems the Wiki is saying Darwin was not sure it was complete, his theory of natural selection which Darwin later adapted to survival of the fittest. It appears the NeoDarwinian's put more emphasis on speciation as opposed to extinction in the evolutionary process. I'm not quite sure which article to post on speciation as I don't really have a grasp on it.

We didn't actually evolve from rabbits nor Apes, it is more like we splintered from the chimpanzee and share a common ancestor. However, I thought this common ancestor has been described as "a missing link". In other words, the link is not there as to why humans splintered from Apes. If we truly evolved from apes, they would have to be extinct altogether and the same with rabbits. Maybe someone can clarify what this missing link is. Here's an interesting article: There Is No 'Missing Link' in Evolution -- Evolution Is A Scientific Fact: No. There is No "Missing Link" in Human Evolution. (futurism.com) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And then an article about the so-called missing link that was found (from 2 years ago...don't know what the status is now): https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/19/health/australopithecus-sediba-human-history-scli-intl/index.html

I agree with you, Rose. How many publications whether right/left, conservative, liberal could have agendas? How are we possibly to know, out of all the publications in the world, who has agendas and who does not? We cannot. So, while I remain a skeptic about the press in general I cannot say I distrust all the publications in the world. In evaluating the merits of Mother Teresa I think we need to go beyond determining whether this source or that source is biased, as most of the pros or cons regarding her case are simply IDEAS that we can choose to agree or disagree with when considering that idea on our own. For example, one of the cons Hitchens puts forth is that it's wrong for colonizers of a country to attempt to help others in a country they conquered (India in the case of Mother Teresa). This is an idea anybody can research and draw their own conclusion from. Personally, I don't take a 'black and white approach' and do believe we can help but we must be careful not to impose to the point of being more destructive than actually helping. Case in point, the way we "helped" Native Americans in this country is shameful -- forcing the children away from their families and making them adopt White standards. Yet there are SOME programs today that Whites can participate in that do help Natives. Another con Hitchens levels against Mother Teresa is in blaming her for the poverty she claims to want to alleviate. I have to agree that much of the poverty (especially in less-developed countries, and especially Catholic ones) is caused by mothers having too many children due to the view that contraceptives and abortions are bad. I fault the stance of the Catholic church on this one, and while her religious beliefs on contraceptives may have increased poverty to a degree she also dedicated her life to helping the poor and those in their last stages of life. So I cannot label her 100% wrong and totally trash her as Hitchens does. The Catholic church is very patriarchal, elevating men above women on many levels. Should I think less of Mother Teresa for participating in such a system? Not really -- my general stance is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when evaluating most anything, and I admire the Catholics fighting for equal rights within their chosen religion. The most annoying attitude I see in Hitchens' dislike of Mother Teresa is his insistence that all people involved in religions are simply trying to selfishly increase their own power, a kind of "do-gooder" mentality, converting others to their religion only for selfish reasons. He seems to believe all people in general attempting to do good are actually, deep down inside, selfish slobs trying to push their views on others. While the above dynamic (wanting others to be just like us for our own perceived safety in numbers as opposed to wanting the other to know 'love') is indeed something to be cautious of in all religions, I don't see it with Mother Teresa. I really think she believed in love, in helping others and in spreading love, despite some of the trappings inherent in the religion she belonged to. Do I believe she worked miracles, like something supernatural? Probably not, but then someone who dedicated her life to helping others is actually a kind of miracle in itself.