Baddogma's Meta Cafe- Polite Discussions About Scientific Mysticism and General Weirdness

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Don't you agree there is obviously a connection? Between the parasites, aliens, god and all the woo things? Do you really believe bacteria like parasites could do that?

Well the thing is that they are hooked into our nervous systems.. they use the advanced nervous system of our stomach and various bodily systems, and in at least some people tap into the unconscious mind.

All the critters which interact with us have their own base lifecycles.. but our own unconscious (and to a lesser degree conscious) minds "corrupt" these lifeforms, creating all of the gods, mythology, etc.

I HAVE explained this in great detail a bunch of times.

Now as I have stated, there are several external sources too..

but most of human misery is augmented by our own fevered brains, which feedback into the
mostly innocent little critters, making our nightmares come true.

Of course there are the "space imps".. but they don't tend to bother people unless someone
opens themselves up to them.. like with attempting channeling or demonology or the like.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

But they're researching like crazy, looking for reasons for psychosis and depression, burn-out and so on. If it is a bacteria they would have found it.
That's why I think, there is a chatroom for "beings" and your soul, what answers, didn't leave you, it just hung up on you, or you overloaded your line. If you have brain activity you have electric charges in your brain, I bet something happens than on a quantum level also and your own bubble of energy reaches out a bit, like in chemistry, you're thinking about something or something has a presence in your mind, your minus attracts a plus, and then you have a second or so access to the new information these particles have stored.
Like the force, think about a marshal arts master. Just an instant information, half a thought, maybe less, mostly just an emotion.
And I don't promote a simulated universe, holographic universe, or extra dimensional beings. Just us and the intelligent beings home to earth. Maybe plants also. The elders, big trees. And we constantly feed the energy into the feedback field.

a reply to: Peeple

Oh those Eels, that's ok then.
It's stuck in my head now, but in a good way.

PS: Brandon Lee and yeah, he kinda was.

originally posted by: Peeple
Do you think it is possible that there is something at the receiving end of our prayers, inner dialogue and focused thoughts?

I tried to be really mindful of your questions while I was "praying" in church today. I am usually mindful of what praying means to other people, but I seldom give any thought to my own expectations. I found that I don't have any but I am more than happy to add my voice to collective prayers, on the off-chance, that they are reaching the intended recipient. If I'm honest though, I don't think that that's enough, and I suspect commitment has to be a factor. I have prayed for others because I know that they have committed, and it makes sense to me that my praying for them has meaning for them.

That said, I do ask questions out loud on rare occasions, and that has on occasion led to a reply, of sorts. For me though, it is more about raising my awareness and announcing my intentions. And, by out loud I mean taking it outside my "head", so my ears can hear, my eyes see it, or my fingers touch it etc.

originally posted by: Peeple
Or what would you say, is the biggest problem with this assumption?

What works for one person does not necessarily work for another? I honestly don't have a firm opinion on it. I was reading something in the pew sheet that said that only pagans make wishes. I am more partial to wishes, but I don't have a good track record in the fulfillment department (but hey ho, could be worse), but I see no reason to hitch my horse to another wagon because what works for me, still works for me. That way I also avoid the hazards of heresy, always a plus.



I think it goes back to suspension of disbelief, and or belief, whichever applies at the given. And, I think a lot depends on what you're expecting in response and your commitment.

It's possible. Can't say otherwise.

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
I watch you incorrectly psychoanalyze person after person as part of many of your replies.
It's your right to do that, but it's also my right not participate when you do.
Just an FYI.

I have no recollection of having any interest in doing any such thing. Are you sure it is me you're thinking of?

Hmmm? What would constitute "psychoanalysis"? I'm kind of curious now.



FYI In future, it would be far less confusing if you just called me out at the time when I post something you want to make comment on rather than raising it at random, out of context, in this way.

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
I watch you incorrectly psychoanalyze person after person as part of many of your replies.
It's your right to do that, but it's also my right not participate when you do.
Just an FYI.

I have no recollection of having any interest in doing any such thing. Are you sure it is me you're thinking of?

Hmmm? What would constitute "psychoanalysis"? I'm kind of curious now.

FYI In future, it would be far less confusing if you just called me out at the time when I post something you want to make comment on rather than raising it at random, out of context, in this way.

You are doing it again... you can't stop yourself.

Though you do alternate somewhat between psychoanalysis and just pure personal
attacks.

The reason I called you out as you put it, when I did, is that you assigned "homo erotic"
impulses to me. That inappropriate and silly assertion was the perfect time to bring
up the pattern of behavior.

Contrary to what you might think, I'm not being unfriendly or confrontational from
my perspective.. surely you can see that you pound on people with poorly
formulated psychology in an attempt to win arguments?

No?

I'm pretty dense when it comes to human interactions.. and it's as obvious as
the nose on my face to me.

Kev

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

But they're researching like crazy, looking for reasons for psychosis and depression, burn-out and so on. If it is a bacteria they would have found it.
That's why I think, there is a chatroom for "beings" and your soul, what answers, didn't leave you, it just hung up on you, or you overloaded your line. If you have brain activity you have electric charges in your brain, I bet something happens than on a quantum level also and your own bubble of energy reaches out a bit, like in chemistry, you're thinking about something or something has a presence in your mind, your minus attracts a plus, and then you have a second or so access to the new information these particles have stored.
Like the force, think about a marshal arts master. Just an instant information, half a thought, maybe less, mostly just an emotion.
And I don't promote a simulated universe, holographic universe, or extra dimensional beings. Just us and the intelligent beings home to earth. Maybe plants also. The elders, big trees. And we constantly feed the energy into the feedback field.

We aren't in disagreement.

I don't go on about "extra dimensional beings".. now.. there seem to be a much different class
of beings in "Oververse", where the laws of physics never splintered after a big bang..

But other than that region.. yep.. it's just the VERY RARE "sentient" organic beings in this
Universe.. just a handful... and the myriad "energy beings".

I was talking to Rosemary Guiley the other day, she's a pretty famous researcher of
the occult and especially about "Djinns". She says that Djinn circulate in the blood
stream of humans sometimes, and I totally agree.

However I say that the "young" are always in every human, all of the time, and in
fact we couldn't function without them.

In my view, humans ARE tied to all manner of critters, to what I call "zone critters"
(call them chakras if you wish), and to the Cyrpto life we share this planet with..

and a few people bond with "Space Imps" (they are fools if they do so), and perhaps
even that species 5 galaxies over.. the only somewhat organic species of which
I'm aware in the entire Universe.. doesn't mean that there aren't more.. but they
seem to be very rare. As it seems the purpose of this Universe is to service
the "plasma beings", not any sort of 'star wars' or 'star trek' Universe that so
many humans long for.

If this Universe is to have such a thing, it would be us-- humans who build
star wars/star trek. Insofar as I know, except for "species 5", all the others
have been killed off, subverted, or a few have 'ascended' into the oververse.

It's a lonely Universe.

Kev

a reply to: Peeple

One more comment I've been meaning to make for some time.

As you say, "the other" constantly looks for chinks in the psychological armor
of humans.

I'd totally agree.

Humans use a great deal of their brain capacity to maintain a sense of self.

But "critters" can't get much of a CONSCIOUS foothold in a person, unless
that person has a damaged sense of self, OR, thinks that they are some
sort of magician and freely gives a part of their brain over to such a
critter.

Now.. I'd say that a shaman is a somewhat different case, in that they are
open to communicating with the symbiotic lifeforms within their own
bodies, and the bodies of others, and the bodies of innocent lifeforms,

but they leave alone the space imps. Historically shamans and space imps
mix like oil and water. If I come across a space imp, I have zero compunction
about encouraging it, not nicely at all, to vamoose.

Nothing breaks up the party for magicians who make deals with 'space imps'
faster, than for a shaman to walk in. This includes new age channeling
groups and the like.

I suppose this is why I never get invited to occult groups, spiritual groups,
or religions.. as most of those groups are rife with "space imps".

Kev

a reply to: Anaana

One more comment for you before I get responsible today too.

I'd be more than happy to be cordial with you..

but your style, mixes like oil and water with me when you
confusedly place all these incorrect motives on me, and on
friends of mine.

I don't like it.

Now--- am I misinterpreting something? I suppose that's
possible.

But in any case, I'm just alerting you to my perception..
I don't mean to be unfriendly.. rest assured, if I was
feeling unfriendly towards you, I wouldn't be bending
over backwards to be nice, despite the slight
discomfort about openly discussing this. This is a
sign I want to like you.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

How do you know that?
Isn't that maybe just a possibility? I mean the first assumption would be already big, for people which never think about things like that, or never experienced anything weird, or which don't believe in a soul.
We are not alone and sometimes some of us, make contact with a very different intelligence.
That's big, for an average earthling, maybe normal for an ats member, but the majority isn't.
I like the idea of a weird quantum telepathy chatroom.
Because I would assume an omniscient being, would be smarter.

But how would I prove that?

a reply to: Anaana

to make a good wish, seems to be an art form.
If you would have just one, which would it be?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

How do you know that?
Isn't that maybe just a possibility? I mean the first assumption would be already big, for people which never think about things like that, or never experienced anything weird, or which don't believe in a soul.
We are not alone and sometimes some of us, make contact with a very different intelligence.
That's big, for an average earthling, maybe normal for an ats member, but the majority isn't.
I like the idea of a weird quantum telepathy chatroom.
Because I would assume an omniscient being, would be smarter.

But how would I prove that?

I"m merely suggesting that you and all of us be very careful before we
'make a long distance call'.

I'd say that there are probably 10 'space imps' for every human, and they
actively try to 'intercept calls'.

The other critters/lifeforms/civilizations are much more live and let live
and for the most part, just want to be left alone.

Of course if you lavish them with love and attention, then our resident
"zone beings" and our indigenous "plasma beings" will certainly interact
with humans.. but their world and ours have little in common.. other
than that humans are their computer system...

really.. WE are the "ghosts in their machine" from their point of view.
(human brains and bodies are 'their machine")

Proof?

That's a funny word when used in any of these sort of conversations!

We'd have to be able to build something like the Large Hadron Collider
and put it in a microchip and fill a unit full of them, to start being
able to build a technological 'communicator/viewer' that could see
the little assholes (the 'space imps') and all the neutral critters.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I like the machine picture. "Be kind to your robots". I imagine something similar, all my cars had names. You get what you project.
So let's focus on a breakthrough in microscope technology so we can see what's going on?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I like the machine picture. "Be kind to your robots". I imagine something similar, all my cars had names. You get what you project.
So let's focus on a breakthrough in microscope technology so we can see what's going on?

On some level, even 'electrons' seem to have a basic sentience is my view,
so we are talking about on the quantum level or below..

Now electrons that we generate by spinning magnetic fields past coiled wires
(power generation) or via EMF (radio broadcasts) would kill and strip out the
potential 'sentience' of the 'electron'.

Only natural electrons and ions (like in isolated nature.. for example next to a
mountain stream) seem to have interesting properties.

Also, I'm not quite sure exactly what these "symbiotes" are composed of
(dangling participle).

One could say "room temperature cold plasma", but I think that's just one
of the layers of their 'body".

One can 'hide behind' so-called "dark matter / dark energy / dark plasma"
and I think ultimately that's true.. but it's like "quantum mysticism" - it
might be true.. but from the standpoint of science, it's like the
"invisible pink flying unicorn in the garage" theory that Atheists
use..

I DO NOT LIKE that I'm co-inventing an entire new mythos on this planet..
Jay Alfred started it all.. but I don't agree with 90% of what he says..
I think that he's probably infested with 'space imps' / Theosophy.
(In my opinion 'space imps' are the creators of Theosophy).

Besides the "sentience" of "natural uncontaminated" "electrons, ions, magnetic fields,
and plasmas"..

I'm highly suspicious that ultimately there are something like primordial black holes
lurking near, at or below the Plank Length:

A Planck length is 1.6 x 10^-35 meters (the number 16 preceded by 34 zeroes and a decimal point) — an incomprehensibly small scale that is implicated in various aspects of physics. The Planck length is far and away too small for any instrument to measure, but beyond that, it is thought to represent the theoretical limit of the shortest measureable length. According to the uncertainty principle, no instrument should ever be able to measure anything smaller, because at that range, the universe is probabilistic and indeterminate.

So we may NEVER 'catch the critters' on their ultimate home turf.. but we may be able to prove their
existence with the side effects of their behavior.

But then again.. since time may be completely irrelevant at the quantum level, the 'critters' may
have all of eternity to 'see us coming and stay hidden' if that is indeed their wish.

Or this is all my own craziness with no merit whatsoever.. and/or some combination therein.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

What if it is just a barrier? What if information is faster than the speed of light, on a quantum level. But we hear a speech, so it excites the echos on a quantum level and the waves maxima get transported through a faster than light, quantum field. Like these ghost voice boxes.
But I have no clue if any of that is even possible. Would faster than light imply negative time?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

What if it is just a barrier? What if information is faster than the speed of light, on a quantum level. But we hear a speech, so it excites the echos on a quantum level and the waves maxima get transported through a faster than light, quantum field. Like these ghost voice boxes.
But I have no clue if any of that is even possible. Would faster than light imply negative time?

Well I don't properly understand Einstein's special relativity.

But time slows as you approach the speed of light, and presumably
stops at the speed of light.

It would seem that "timelessness" is baked into certain layers of the Universe.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Planck Length... sigh.

To me, that there is a unit of length that seems the smallest limit of measure and where it all breaks down to "quantum weirdness" thereafter indicates a limit... related, again,to computers and the whole "rendering of reality" a la computer graphics.

I would think that if our environment wasn't "a simulation" (and that's a loaded term ripe for misunderstanding, but could encompass many meanings) then we wouldn't find the limits of this universe being rendered for the observer, again using a computer graphics analogy. I'd think we would break through the Planck and just keep going smaller and smaller, through universe after universe, if we were in a "real" universe.

It doesn't mean that God has an old graphics card, necessarily, but that this universe we are in does seem to be a construct (or pocket universe) in some manner... and that the "real" universe ours in couched within, would not have limits in the micro or macro.

But then, I'm not smart enough on most days to really grasp such concepts.

And going back to god's maybe lack of freewill, which I'd like to explore to really try to understand... it occurs to me that such a concept could indicate just another set (in the math sense) misidentified as the ultimate "god" behind the curtain ... a seeming all encompassing set, but it might just be, yet again, a smaller subset misidentified as an ultimate...

if that was understandable.

a reply to: beansidhe

Eels.. .I keep meaning to post something from them on my music thread.. .truly an eclectic band that tends to appeal to quirky braniacs.

And another bee just blundered in, hovered over me a tic and then bee-lined (heh) to my window and is smashing against it, wildly stinging the glass in a bee-frenzy (as they are all "Africanized" here... which is an unfortunate, colonial tainted term for aggressive bees... too bad the ornery bees that escaped in Brazil didn't come from Sweden, thus avoiding stereotypes).

I captured the bee and let her go... but couldn't help noting, again, the sting Melissa can bring with her honey.

Why is everything so darned 'dualistic' around these parts?

a reply to: Baddogma

Yah, that made sense.

But really.

There is no difference that matters, between "real" and "simulation".

We say "simulation" when there is another layer underneath..

But given that there is at least a boundary between classical and
quantum functioning.. that right there seems to be a layer between
different 'layers of inception".

Or layers of reality.

I just don't see all the fuss about 'simulated' nor 'not simulated'.

People go on about a 'simulation' when they want to talk about god
or talk about some evil force or super aliens "trapping us in a computer
simulation".

But the Universe is a functioning quantum computer and we live within
it's rules. They are called the laws of physics.

I 100% do not see a meaningful difference.

Kev

a reply to: Baddogma

Somebody's got to cut wood and carry water.

Or else the Universe would have an itch it wan't scratching.. and it would
go wiggy.

Again.. as with simulations.. I can't understand about the fuss over dvaita (two)
and advaita (not two).

It's all silliness.

Unless you possess all possible information, there will always be the appearance
of one being two, and two being one.

That's just simple logical really... if you are missing information, you make bad
assumptions.

We will always be missing information.

Kev