Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
They take AA batteries right? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would never Ever touch one  "Ah go on... live a little -it's not like they're gomma give you an std or sumfing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks" Confirmation bias can apply to stuff like this as well. Let's say you get a bunch of predictions after using a ouija board a bunch of times and then when something happens, you would immediately remember the one prediction that sort of fits to what happened and forget the other predictions that didn't come true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes I've experience yes something interesting happend no I want talk about it except for get that fucking thing away from you and I couldn't be more serious..." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks" Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on. "Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would never Ever touch one
Ah go on... live a little -it's not like they're gomma give you an std or sumfing"I'd never want to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate? "I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake."What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best"Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they. "Following its commercial introduction by businessman Elijah Bond on July 1, 1890,[1] the ouija board was regarded as a parlor game unrelated to the occult until American spiritualist Pearl Curran popularized its use as a divining tool during World War I. There you go | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks
"Obviously the human subconscious is a dark strange place , it's no wonder some blame landed upon so called malevolent dead | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Following its commercial introduction by businessman Elijah Bond on July 1, 1890,[1] the ouija board was regarded as a parlor game unrelated to the occult until American spiritualist Pearl Curran popularized its use as a divining tool during World War I.
There you go"Good stuff, very informative | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lets get my board out for the truth I T S . A L L . B O L L O C K S . Well thats what the board says " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Following its commercial introduction by businessman Elijah Bond on July 1, 1890,[1] the ouija board was regarded as a parlor game unrelated to the occult until American spiritualist Pearl Curran popularized its use as a divining tool during World War I.
There you go
Good stuff, very informative "Amazing how revealing the facts can be Elijah bond you say ? To a dyslexic brain Elijah looks nothing like ouija does it xxx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mumbo jumbo bollocks. " i'll check but i dont think mine are mumbo jumbo | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks" So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mumbo jumbo bollocks. i'll check but i dont think mine are mumbo jumbo "It'll say on the label. Just above the cool iron only symbol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. " They can think whatever happened to them is real, the brain is a powerful and magnificent thing, it can make you see whatever it wants. They are free to believe what they want, I'll stick with science and facts. What human inventions act as gateways may I ask? And gateways to what exactly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tried it once. Opened a portal to hell through which a school girl who'd clawed her eyes out crawled and proceeded to birth Satan's child in my living room whilst a tornado ripped a hole in my roof and sucked her and my next door neighbours off into an alternate dimension of endless suffering and pain. Didn't really bother with it again after that" Perhaps for the best | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aw I've played lots and indeed convinced many gullible people that it's possessed The psychology is complex and one will never convince a believer but the fact remains all actions of the pointer come from the dark and complex minds of those holding it It is far far greater insight into the human brain than anything supernatural The sadness of this reality is the insight is vastly more fascinating than the misplaced idea that the dead communicate x yet so many still believe the nonsense rather than the complex insight to humanity and it's subliminal brain manifested influences. Xxx " Very well put. Nita | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've used one a few times. I saw weird shit that I am at a loss to even come close to explaining. If they tap in to our own sunconscious then we have a lot of untapped power. " I think the reality is that the unconscious doesn't exist. It was just a quaint 19th century invention to describe the entity which puppets us. That entity is actually the universal mind. This explains why, when we tap into that deeper mind, we can often get access to information that should, in all reasonableness, be beyond our ability to know. Indeed, it's exactly that same process which has powered the progress of science. All imo of course  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. They can think whatever happened to them is real, the brain is a powerful and magnificent thing, it can make you see whatever it wants. They are free to believe what they want, I'll stick with science and facts. What human inventions act as gateways may I ask? And gateways to what exactly" For example, a drug habit could be a gateway to schizophrenia. The problem with your logic that I see is that it's like you're saying that it a person has a drug habit and develops schizophrenia, then you dismiss schizophrenia because we can prove where the drugs came from and how they were made. You science and facts about the board (drugs in my example), you don't have it about all the things it could be a gateway to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. They can think whatever happened to them is real, the brain is a powerful and magnificent thing, it can make you see whatever it wants. They are free to believe what they want, I'll stick with science and facts. What human inventions act as gateways may I ask? And gateways to what exactly For example, a drug habit could be a gateway to schizophrenia. The problem with your logic that I see is that it's like you're saying that it a person has a drug habit and develops schizophrenia, then you dismiss schizophrenia because we can prove where the drugs came from and how they were made. You science and facts about the board (drugs in my example), you don't have it about all the things it could be a gateway to. " Well, not really. You can't use an example of medical and mental problems that can be researched and proved to back up any arguement that has to do with mysticism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tried it once. Opened a portal to hell through which a school girl who'd clawed her eyes out crawled and proceeded to birth Satan's child in my living room whilst a tornado ripped a hole in my roof and sucked her and my next door neighbours off into an alternate dimension of endless suffering and pain. Didn't really bother with it again after that" There’s just no pleasing some people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. They can think whatever happened to them is real, the brain is a powerful and magnificent thing, it can make you see whatever it wants. They are free to believe what they want, I'll stick with science and facts. What human inventions act as gateways may I ask? And gateways to what exactly For example, a drug habit could be a gateway to schizophrenia. The problem with your logic that I see is that it's like you're saying that it a person has a drug habit and develops schizophrenia, then you dismiss schizophrenia because we can prove where the drugs came from and how they were made. You science and facts about the board (drugs in my example), you don't have it about all the things it could be a gateway to. Well, not really. You can't use an example of medical and mental problems that can be researched and proved to back up any arguement that has to do with mysticism. " Minimal difference in my opinion. Just take an objective look at the list of mental health conditions and symptoms in the DSM and it's like a dictionary of catch-all terms. They can't even make clever sounding names anymore (anti-social personality disorder). Mental health is about as well understood in 2018 as physical health was in Roman times when they were drinking lead flavoured water. In my opinion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Had too many strange experiences that couldn't be explained away when using them as a teenager that I wouldn't touch them now." Ghost gangbangs dont count | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've used one a few times. I saw weird shit that I am at a loss to even come close to explaining. If they tap in to our own sunconscious then we have a lot of untapped power. I think the reality is that the unconscious doesn't exist. It was just a quaint 19th century invention to describe the entity which puppets us. That entity is actually the universal mind. This explains why, when we tap into that deeper mind, we can often get access to information that should, in all reasonableness, be beyond our ability to know. Indeed, it's exactly that same process which has powered the progress of science. All imo of course "Apart from When the human brain dissected slice by slice , whilst alive the suggestion that the brain is only a receiver for reasoning and thoughts from a collective consciousness , is also dissected! Thoughts are manifest from the brain and its senses As one removes bits , it's function diminishes If it were a receiver of thought not a maker then what we sadly observe would not manifest x Thus zero data to collaborate central consciousness theory and lots and lots and lots to support brain as reality creator thought processor , self generator , simulator of perceived reality x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've used one a few times. I saw weird shit that I am at a loss to even come close to explaining. If they tap in to our own sunconscious then we have a lot of untapped power. I think the reality is that the unconscious doesn't exist. It was just a quaint 19th century invention to describe the entity which puppets us. That entity is actually the universal mind. This explains why, when we tap into that deeper mind, we can often get access to information that should, in all reasonableness, be beyond our ability to know. Indeed, it's exactly that same process which has powered the progress of science. All imo of course
Apart from
When the human brain dissected slice by slice , whilst alive the suggestion that the brain is only a receiver for reasoning and thoughts from a collective consciousness , is also dissected! Thoughts are manifest from the brain and its senses
As one removes bits , it's function diminishes
If it were a receiver of thought not a maker then what we sadly observe would not manifest x
Thus zero data to collaborate central consciousness theory and lots and lots and lots to support brain as reality creator thought processor , self generator , simulator of perceived reality x"Apart from Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body You can't even frame a logical argument for how it would work if the brain manufactured the mind yet Maybe the brain receives the mind and each section of the brain is focused on acting as a conduit to receive different facets of consciousness. Hence why, when those sections are damaged, there is a loss of reception of those aspects. There's a reason why the best neuroscientists talk about there only being a correlation between brain activity and thought. It's not yet known which drives which. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've used one a few times. I saw weird shit that I am at a loss to even come close to explaining. If they tap in to our own sunconscious then we have a lot of untapped power. I think the reality is that the unconscious doesn't exist. It was just a quaint 19th century invention to describe the entity which puppets us. That entity is actually the universal mind. This explains why, when we tap into that deeper mind, we can often get access to information that should, in all reasonableness, be beyond our ability to know. Indeed, it's exactly that same process which has powered the progress of science. All imo of course
Apart from
When the human brain dissected slice by slice , whilst alive the suggestion that the brain is only a receiver for reasoning and thoughts from a collective consciousness , is also dissected! Thoughts are manifest from the brain and its senses
As one removes bits , it's function diminishes
If it were a receiver of thought not a maker then what we sadly observe would not manifest x
Thus zero data to collaborate central consciousness theory and lots and lots and lots to support brain as reality creator thought processor , self generator , simulator of perceived reality x
Apart from
Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body"I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind." So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate? "I know someone who regularly contacts the dead. Then again I suppose being an undertaker...... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I know someone who regularly contacts the dead. Then again I suppose being an undertaker...... "You know the undertaker? Impressive | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes I had and I managed to get my cock sucked by few lesbian ghosts " I had a gay one he really put the willies up me  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well i think my bedroom is haunted had a few things happen , last night i felt as if someone was kneeling behind me on the bed (i sleep alone ) few weeks before that i felt something move up the bed like trying to lay next to me , "Guilty as charged sorry | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks So fire blade and bike monkey are just talking bollucks then? I fully understand what you are saying about the origins of the game, but that's irrelevant. Many human inventions can act as a gateway to things that weren't part of the original invention. They can think whatever happened to them is real, the brain is a powerful and magnificent thing, it can make you see whatever it wants. They are free to believe what they want, I'll stick with science and facts. What human inventions act as gateways may I ask? And gateways to what exactly" I'm not sure what you think that I said I believe? As an atheist who is more than a little cynical I have no idea to explain what I saw, I don't believe it was definitive sign of life after death but I also can't explain it by way of science. To clarify this wasn;t d*unken kids it was sober adults and I saw shit that made no sense and cannot be explained on more than one occassion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm? "No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought. "So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic. Mind - commands Brain - commands Body Is the only model that currently makes sense Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
very interesting perspectives!
People cannot diminish another's experiences just because you don't believe in something, though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well i think my bedroom is haunted had a few things happen , last night i felt as if someone was kneeling behind me on the bed (i sleep alone ) few weeks before that i felt something move up the bed like trying to lay next to me , "Wow that's spooky hope it's not scaring you too much before sleeping! X | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work "More of this debate please | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Has anyone had any experience with them/has anything interesting happen or something that made them regret dabbling?? " Yes, many years ago and yes I regret it, no word of a lie, weird shit happened. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Single blokes probably have more chance of a response from a ouija board than sending a message on here. Even if it's a 'no thanks "lol true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As a paranormal investigator (not ghost hunter) it’s not the first thing I use on investigations. Have used them before but prefer other things/ways to try and make contact. Ps I never try and make contact using anything in the place I am living " Certainly can't blame you for that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please "That's the point. End of. Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning. It can't It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As a paranormal investigator (not ghost hunter) it’s not the first thing I use on investigations. Have used them before but prefer other things/ways to try and make contact. Ps I never try and make contact using anything in the place I am living " I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't use the term ghost hunter. To hunt implies to kill or capture in my view! We aren't there to do that were there to investigate! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed "Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective? So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step So far my understanding of your concept is The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain Do I understand this correctly ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought?"Apologies, you're right. It was something I read 10+ years ago. It was referring to when we feel an itch. The message from the effected area is sent to the brain and the arm reacts just before the thought is formed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought?
Apologies, you're right. It was something I read 10+ years ago.
It was referring to when we feel an itch. The message from the effected area is sent to the brain and the arm reacts just before the thought is formed. "No need to apologise This stuff is fascinating isn't it. Yeah there's no doubt that the brain can't be a mere receiver, even if one holds to that idea. It must relay stuff back.
There's so much we don't yet know and can't even make sense of yet. It would seem even the idea that the brain is the sole repository of consciousness is a fallacy as more and more evidence points to our nervous system playing a role. I tend to think consciousness resides in the entire body. But clearly the brain plays a key role in it all. You can't deny the evidence of how brain damage impairs key aspects of who we are | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought?
Apologies, you're right. It was something I read 10+ years ago.
It was referring to when we feel an itch. The message from the effected area is sent to the brain and the arm reacts just before the thought is formed.
No need to apologise This stuff is fascinating isn't it. Yeah there's no doubt that the brain can't be a mere receiver, even if one holds to that idea. It must relay stuff back.
There's so much we don't yet know and can't even make sense of yet. It would seem even the idea that the brain is the sole repository of consciousness is a fallacy as more and more evidence points to our nervous system playing a role. I tend to think consciousness resides in the entire body. But clearly the brain plays a key role in it all. You can't deny the evidence of how brain damage impairs key aspects of who we are "That's not what you said earlier you said Maybe the brain receives the mind and each section of the brain is focused on acting as a conduit to receive different facets of consciousness. Hence why, when those sections are damaged, there is a loss of reception of those aspects. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed
Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective?
So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand
Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step
So far my understanding of your concept is
The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain
Do I understand this correctly ?"Hi Sensual I don't hold to any fixed idea of how it all works. But I'm generally convinced that mind exists as some kind of force which works through living cells and ultimately brains rather than it being the other way around and living cells being dumb robots that merely appear to be intelligent and brains manufacturing mind.
I'm quite happy for science to falsify my view if that's possible or for it to reveal a complex third way that we haven't yet comprehended. For sure, for example, our sex drives seem to come very much from our bodies rather than any kind of soul. I'm happy for the truth to be hyper complex. But it needs to be able to win me over by a strongly reasoned argument that resonates with what we observe in nature | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed
Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective?
So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand
Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step
So far my understanding of your concept is
The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain
Do I understand this correctly ?
Hi Sensual I don't hold to any fixed idea of how it all works. But I'm generally convinced that mind exists as some kind of force which works through living cells and ultimately brains rather than it being the other way around and living cells being dumb robots that merely appear to be intelligent and brains manufacturing mind.
I'm quite happy for science to falsify my view if that's possible or for it to reveal a complex third way that we haven't yet comprehended. For sure, for example, our sex drives seem to come very much from our bodies rather than any kind of soul. I'm happy for the truth to be hyper complex. But it needs to be able to win me over by a strongly reasoned argument that resonates with what we observe in nature "Ok does in your view memory exist as a consequence of electrical and chemical interaction and physical state of brain , body cells or stored out of body The same question goes for reasoning And what is the data to collaborate or suggest your conclusions ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed
Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective?
So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand
Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step
So far my understanding of your concept is
The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain
Do I understand this correctly ?
Hi Sensual I don't hold to any fixed idea of how it all works. But I'm generally convinced that mind exists as some kind of force which works through living cells and ultimately brains rather than it being the other way around and living cells being dumb robots that merely appear to be intelligent and brains manufacturing mind.
I'm quite happy for science to falsify my view if that's possible or for it to reveal a complex third way that we haven't yet comprehended. For sure, for example, our sex drives seem to come very much from our bodies rather than any kind of soul. I'm happy for the truth to be hyper complex. But it needs to be able to win me over by a strongly reasoned argument that resonates with what we observe in nature
Ok does in your view memory exist as a consequence of electrical and chemical interaction and physical state of brain , body cells or stored out of body
The same question goes for reasoning
And what is the data to collaborate or suggest your conclusions ?"I have no idea what the word "memory" even refers to. I'm fascinated by it. Having suffered short term memory loss at one point, I have an intimate grasp of how much of my reality is orchestrated by my "memory", whatever that is. I'm open minded to read more about it if you've got any good sources of info | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed
Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective?
So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand
Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step
So far my understanding of your concept is
The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain
Do I understand this correctly ?
Hi Sensual I don't hold to any fixed idea of how it all works. But I'm generally convinced that mind exists as some kind of force which works through living cells and ultimately brains rather than it being the other way around and living cells being dumb robots that merely appear to be intelligent and brains manufacturing mind.
I'm quite happy for science to falsify my view if that's possible or for it to reveal a complex third way that we haven't yet comprehended. For sure, for example, our sex drives seem to come very much from our bodies rather than any kind of soul. I'm happy for the truth to be hyper complex. But it needs to be able to win me over by a strongly reasoned argument that resonates with what we observe in nature
Ok does in your view memory exist as a consequence of electrical and chemical interaction and physical state of brain , body cells or stored out of body
The same question goes for reasoning
And what is the data to collaborate or suggest your conclusions ?
I have no idea what the word "memory" even refers to. I'm fascinated by it. Having suffered short term memory loss at one point, I have an intimate grasp of how much of my reality is orchestrated by my "memory", whatever that is. I'm open minded to read more about it if you've got any good sources of info "If you. ""Have no idea what memory refers to " how do you know you suffered short term memory loss ? I'd suggest you do understand the exact concept of memory And a little bit of fascinating reading would be Henry Gustav Molaison | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Think "I'll raise my arm" then raise it and the chain is clear: mind to brain to body I read before that in the example you gave, there would be a slight physical action of the arm just before the thought presents itself. So in that case the chain would be brain, then mind. So the arm tells the brain to create the thought to move the arm?
No, the brain tells the arm to move, before the thought.
So what tells the brain to move the arm before telling it to think the thought? What you're trying to say is that the brain moves the arm for absolutely no reason because it isn't a rational process at all, it's just some physical impulse, and then it quickly generates the thought "I'll move my arm" to try and bluff the fact that it was a conscious endeavour when it wasn't. You're trying to argue that intelligent instructions to motivate actions are merely extra byproducts of that action and not motivating factors whatsoever. Indeed, they come after the fact. This robs us of any ability to think and reason. As such it robs us of the very ability to frame the argument for it. That's why the brain manufacturing mind is currently an impossible claim to frame logically as it demands that there is no such thing as logic.
Mind - commands Brain - commands Body
Is the only model that currently makes sense
Brain - commands Body and feigns Mind as an after thought
Leaves the body driverless and driven by physical impulses alone. Agreeably that sounds like some guys on here But it doesn't work as a model of how we work
More of this debate please
That's the point.
End of.
Everyone waxes on about the brain manufacturing mind, assuming such a phenomenon can be legitimately argued using sound reasoning.
It can't
It's not for no reason that I used to be an atheist and now I'm a theist. Core claims that atheists assume carry water simply don't hold up on closer inspection. It's not that they fail to be convincing. In certain cases, as with this, they can't even be framed
Ok let's try to understand your reasoned perspective?
So let's suggest that your concept is true but obviously intricate complex and hard to understand
Thus it is not unreasonable for me to try and understand it step by step
So far my understanding of your concept is
The physical brain and its constituent parts are a receiver of some sort of signal ? And that consciousness , reasoning , self and memory are held somewhere , anywhere beyond brain
Do I understand this correctly ?
Hi Sensual I don't hold to any fixed idea of how it all works. But I'm generally convinced that mind exists as some kind of force which works through living cells and ultimately brains rather than it being the other way around and living cells being dumb robots that merely appear to be intelligent and brains manufacturing mind.
I'm quite happy for science to falsify my view if that's possible or for it to reveal a complex third way that we haven't yet comprehended. For sure, for example, our sex drives seem to come very much from our bodies rather than any kind of soul. I'm happy for the truth to be hyper complex. But it needs to be able to win me over by a strongly reasoned argument that resonates with what we observe in nature
Ok does in your view memory exist as a consequence of electrical and chemical interaction and physical state of brain , body cells or stored out of body
The same question goes for reasoning
And what is the data to collaborate or suggest your conclusions ?
I have no idea what the word "memory" even refers to. I'm fascinated by it. Having suffered short term memory loss at one point, I have an intimate grasp of how much of my reality is orchestrated by my "memory", whatever that is. I'm open minded to read more about it if you've got any good sources of info "Oh and indeed I think reality and self are very much framed by memory But where does it reside and what purpose would any living force intelligent or not be in memory ? Especially within context of our above tragic subject | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And a little bit of fascinating reading would be Henry Gustav Molaison" Thanks for this Very interesting. But so steeped in folk concepts it's difficult to see it clearly. The phrase "unable to form new memories" carries so much baggage that it's difficult to know what's left when you get rid of it all. But I shall enjoy pondering it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they. "Hes right though, its all a load of bollocks. And to back it up, no one, anywhere has ever been proven to contact the dead. Including the ouiji board. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Hes right though, its all a load of bollocks. And to back it up, no one, anywhere has ever been proven to contact the dead. Including the ouiji board. "Nobody has ever been proven to contact aliens either. But many scientists think alien lifeforms are likely. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Hes right though, its all a load of bollocks. And to back it up, no one, anywhere has ever been proven to contact the dead. Including the ouiji board.
Nobody has ever been proven to contact aliens either. But many scientists think alien lifeforms are likely. "its reasonable to suggest aliens exist given the vastness of the universe. Its more likely than not likely. It is unreasonable to suggest that ghosts exist due to what science has taught us about 'matter' etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Hes right though, its all a load of bollocks. And to back it up, no one, anywhere has ever been proven to contact the dead. Including the ouiji board.
Nobody has ever been proven to contact aliens either. But many scientists think alien lifeforms are likely. its reasonable to suggest aliens exist given the vastness of the universe. Its more likely than not likely. It is unreasonable to suggest that ghosts exist due to what science has taught us about 'matter' etc. "Hillarious display of not knowing your own biases! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lets get my board out for the truth I T S . A L L . B O L L O C K S . Well thats what the board says " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yeah and it was interesting. But then I'm a bit weird  "Did you ask it whether of not to sell salah? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yeah and it was interesting. But then I'm a bit weird
Did you ask it whether of not to sell salah? "Genius | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lets get my board out for the truth I T S . A L L . B O L L O C K S . Well thats what the board says "Excellent | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nothing happens, it was made as a parlour game to contact your own subconscious. It was then adopted by 'psychics' and other nonsense peddlers to 'contact the dead'. It's all bollocks Brilliant. An expert on the subject. I can’t wait to hear the evidence you base your facts on.
Google it, it's not that hard to find out. It's funnier that you think what I said seems preposterous, but using some wood with letters on it to contact the dead is legitimate?
I didn’t say it was preposterous or that they were legitimate. The fact that you know for sure that they are nonsense led me to assume you were an expert on the subject or at least had some evidence to offer. Obviously not. My mistake.
What do you want, for me to post in whole slabs of text from historical documents. Just look it up, it's not exactly difficult to find. You're attempt to try to make me look stupid is poor at best
Why would I try to make you look stupid? I don’t know you from Adam. I’d just expect somebody to be able to back up their claim of nonsense with some facts that’s all. If people just googled stuff then 90% of threads would be redundant wouldn’t they.
Hes right though, its all a load of bollocks. And to back it up, no one, anywhere has ever been proven to contact the dead. Including the ouiji board.
Nobody has ever been proven to contact aliens either. But many scientists think alien lifeforms are likely. its reasonable to suggest aliens exist given the vastness of the universe. Its more likely than not likely. It is unreasonable to suggest that ghosts exist due to what science has taught us about 'matter' etc.
Hillarious display of not knowing your own biases!"Oh behave | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yeah and it was interesting. But then I'm a bit weird
Did you ask it whether of not to sell salah?
Genius "No | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yeah and it was interesting. But then I'm a bit weird
Did you ask it whether of not to sell salah?
Genius
No "The results of what you found interesting , how more interesting would it be if the causation was the minds of the people in the room and not anything we might term supernatural ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ok does in your view memory exist as a consequence of electrical and chemical interaction and physical state of brain , body cells or stored out of body The same question goes for reasoning And what is the data to collaborate or suggest your conclusions ? I have no idea what the word "memory" even refers to. I'm fascinated by it. Having suffered short term memory loss at one point, I have an intimate grasp of how much of my reality is orchestrated by my "memory", whatever that is. I'm open minded to read more about it if you've got any good sources of info If you. ""Have no idea what memory refers to " how do you know you suffered short term memory loss ? I'd suggest you do understand the exact concept of memory " In relation to this discussion about memory, I just spotted New Scientist is running an article on it in which they claim "The truth about memory is far more elaborate than we previously thought. Memories aren't just stored in the brain, but are instead created anew each time you try to recall one". Perhaps that helps explain why I'm so cautious about claiming I, or anyone, understand what memory is | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Don't. That's all." Do that's all xxx I think it is very significant to note it never ever works with one ! Two is very very rare One thing is absolutey certain, the pointer has never been moved by what humans define as spirit or evil or any other force other than a construct of the brains involved xxx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
