The greatest horror - transdimensional alien ecology.

You can not teach a blind person what colors are like. They can only sense with the perceptions that they are aware of and this becomes their world to them. Any stimulus beyond what be processed by their known perceptions is illusion to them. Arguing with a blind person over what the color red looks like compared to blue is pointless.
I thought the OP was interesting and offered some unique information. I would like to ask if you had any info on astral spiders. From what I understand, they feed off of light energy.

reply to post by starshift


Actually, you're soon to be wrong.
Pre-Bionic Eye

Technology: w00t!

I'm still waiting for someone to drag one of those fishes flopping and gasping into daylight.

Cut the new age drivel. Give us some hard empirical data. Quaint little fairy tales, while fun and fascinating, are entirely worthless without corroborating empirical data that we can test and verify.

Then again, do you have any information on the astral platypus?
There's unconfirmed reports they swim in rivers of rainbow, and make their burrows out of magic crystals.
Further, we'd really like to know what astral chicken tastes like. Does it taste like ... chicken?

reply to post by sirbadazz


I want to correct you on something you said that surprised me. You show great knowledge on the subject of life that we cannot see. But you used the word 'never' and that struck a chord with me. You should know that no matter what happens with anything in life, 'never' is not possible. Life can overcome anything and everything. As 'hard' as the matured and anchored in octopus may be, how can you say one can 'never' recover from it? I wholeheartedly disagree with you brother.

Life flows just as water does. And just as water sculpts and shapes solid stone... hope/love/positivity can overcome anything. I hope you respond to this, as using the word 'never' just screams contradiction. Please explain to me in your sincerest way, why you believe something living can achieve something permanent over another living thing.

reply to post by Druscilla

That was a somewhat interesting article. They are trying to poke at the retina to create a stimulation. Might as well hook up a light bright while they are at it.

Try this out for yourself. When in the presence of another person, ask them to describe some details about a certain part of their house. They will look in a specific area with their eyes where they store this memory. Ask them about another subject unrelated and they will look to another area. Why do you think this would be? The memory is stored within their auric field, not the brain.

We are more than our physical bodies. We also have two hemispheres to our brain, try using both.

reply to post by starshift


Would you like to provide some documentation and citations to support your statement or is it just so because you say so?

I'd like to counter with:
Experience-Dependent Eye Movements Reflect Hippocampus-Dependent (Aware) Memory.

There are a number of other related papers supporting observations regarding eye movement in relation to memory, but the majority of the are on PubMed where you'd need purchase access.
You can, however, find other papers floating about if you'd like to look by searching "eye movement memory".
If abstracts and simple magazine article plugs work for you, there's plenty those as well.

Auric field though? Where do you get this nonsense? How gullible are you?
Sorry, I don't think so. All evidence indicates eye movement association with access to specific cognitive areas of the brain. Such can easily be demonstrated by watching what areas of the brain light up under MRI while a subject is performing specific memory recalls. Additionally a camera can track their eye movements during such an exercise.

You have all heard enough from the self labelled "educated" responses.

This thread ticked me off so much, I had to login ATS and take some time out of my work.

A lot of these posts by well-known skeptics on this site highlight instances of fraud whether intentional or unintentional, and they are all valid arguments, this happens.

However it doesn't give you the right to even give the impression that you are correct, or that the OP is wrong, or that this is all bull# by lunatics, because you don't know. All you are working with is theory, and so is he. I keep on highlighting this to all you people on both sides of the argument, but you all argue like a bunch of children regardless of how professional you make your posts look. Calling people nuts is offensive, even if they are.

Everything presented by skeptics in this thread is theory, and explanations of how some psychoanalytical experiments are carried out, all designed to give you the impression that "well if he sounds smart, he's probably right"

If people were really fair skeptics, they would claim "This is theory, I can't say im 100% right about their not being octopus entities" but that was never said. It's fairly clear that often skeptics have their own psychological issues or obsessions with proving people a certain fact for whatever reasons they may have. I dont know if thats the case here, i dont know if im 100% right. There may be indications of these things, but that doesn't mean im right. The same goes for you skeptics.

It's seriously borderline troll, when people come to this site and want to discuss what may be some undiscovered unknown phenomenon, and skeptics interject by adding nothing of value in the way that i have mentioned.

I will say it time and time again, individuals within humanity are quite foolish to be so confident that their science and technology is at a peak, as if they know everything. The pinnacle of ignorance is often the skeptic ironically. Dont be so reliant on the petty developments of humanity up to this point, in psychology, physics, the sciences and all technology. fools, thats all I can say for most skeptics.

Let me say it again, - you dont know if what the OP claims is true, or false. The technology and evolution of humanity has yet to be able to prove or refute such claims. the claims of the OP are hinting at a higher level of physics, something which humanity hasn't fully understood yet. This is why I feel so adament in this post, people are acting like they know everything about the physics and nature of our reality even on the scientific level BUT YOU DONT.

Until we come to higher technological/scientific/evolutionary achievements, this is all just theory to be noted (the octopus). You dont have any rights in refuting anything said in the OP. You can call the op a dingbat nut and waste your time trying to "appear" educated refering to cherrypicked academic arguements, but the ignorance in ego is apparent as I have mentioned.

I especially don't care to "win" any arguements here because I side with no one except the reader of these threads. They shouldn't have to drudge through all these childish arguement, largely by skeptics who give a false impression that since their arguement is academic or "educated" that they are right. Often what is an educated response is a theory, and these skeptics rely on what OTHER educated people have had to say about these topics, so at the end of the day these skeptics aren't educated at all, theyre just reiterating what other people have had to say about things, that isnt educated at all.

IT BOGGLES THE DAMN MIND, how can you be a skeptic of things like this, yet not a skeptic with acadamia? its not like the academic world is always correct! Theories evolve over time, this happens often! There indeed may be a day when we have identified the concepts that the OP mentions, and all you skeptics are going to go silent and act like you knew it all along.

I wish i could go on and on, rant some more, but i have work to do and im sure you dont like lengthy posts.

TL;DR - Be a skeptic, we need those, but dont act like you know it all, and dont act like you know for sure that the other person is wrong (when it comes to these ghost/entity/ET topics )

reply to post by Druscilla


The response was fairly clear I thought with an exercise for you to try for yourself rather than me just saying so. If you can find someone to engage in an actual, in person conversation, observe their reaction for yourself, the focus within their field if you will. Go back after a couple of questions to the first question and verify that they look in the same area when they recalled the memory associated with the question.

Did you try this for yourself or did you focus your thoughts on discrediting me while searching for a link to support your next post? Habits can be difficult to stray from.

Listen, I was once like you, I thought that science was the ultimate answer, that without absolute proof it was not real. It's a very linear process well supported within the everyday structures of our society that try to shape our reality and give reason to it's interpretation but that focus is very limited to a small spectrum of the actual world. It's quite crippling to our consciousness in fact to be confined to thinking in one specific way, limiting our comprehension of reality to what we have been trained to value. I chose to go beyond the programming I received in school so that I could deal with some of the more difficult questions that they were not even aware of asking.

Look into some of the quotes from Albert Einstein who chose to go beyond traditional thinking and into the quantum world. Quotes Another example that may stretch your mind, while supported with documentation would be a book called the "Secret Teachings of Plants."

There is no road map I can show you to convince you of the world beyond your skin when you are so closed to anything that can not be proven to your satisfaction. Are you open enough to experience the world for yourself, not simply measure it and think you understand everything about it through a filter you have created to keep yourself comfortable, but to really surrender to it's expression at a core level in order to know it without judgement?

Also, sorry for the DP, but i wanted to mention something concerning the OP's topic that was unrelated to skeptics.

I dont think the octopus entity controlling your consciousness would be effective, I mean people (at least me) observe their consciousness and their actions...what are you trying to say the octopus does?

does it like, make people do bad stuff? what level of control does it have, and what are the objectives that the octopus has ?

reply to post by DivineEvolution


I really enjoyed your previous post. Well thought out.

Octopus are really amazing creatures and they do have shape-shifting abilities that we can see for ourselves.


Mimic Octopus Thread

reply to post by DivineEvolution


You're more than welcome to throw an uppity fit, but ...
Your misconception regarding science and the term "theory" needs ammendment:

The word theory in the theory of evolution does not imply mainstream scientific doubt regarding its validity; the concepts of theory and hypothesis have specific meanings in a scientific context. While theory in colloquial usage may denote a hunch or conjecture, a scientific theory is a set of principles that explains observable phenomena in natural terms. "Scientific fact and theory are not categorically separable," and evolution is a theory in the same sense as germ theory or the theory of gravitation.

source

In other words, "Theory" is essentially proven observable FACT.
Should you doubt the Theory of gravitation, I invite you to stand under something quite heavy and hazardous while it's suspended above you on a fraying unsafe length of rope.

If you doubt the Theory aspect of the Elementary Theory of Electricity and Magnetism, hey, it's JUST a Theory, so, you should be safe gouging some scissors into the nearest live wall socket. Right?

They're just theories, eh?

Sorry, but, your understanding of the terminology is fundamentally wrong.
You're more than welcome to get your panties in a knot over getting corrected, but, your misunderstanding in regard to what the term Theory as it applies to science is an overt and public act of Ignorance.
Saying so is not intended as an insult, but a description of your state of not-knowing.
You are in error and in the spirit of Denying Ignorance, your error begs amendment.

Short answer, as far as you are concerned; Theory = Fact (supported by observation, replication, peer review, and repeated attempts at crash-testing the "theory" such that it's essentially unbreakable).

Thus, you really should take notice when a scientific "theory" is presented.

Additionally, because this line of topical discussion is so predictable, before someone else mentions it, you may want to take note of the Humans only use 10% of their brain MYTH.
All too often the 10% myth argument gets thrown in as some skewed validation for the awe inspiring goshing and gushing potential of the mind to transcend dimensional vibration or some such crack pottery.
Once again, the 10% argument is WRONG.
We essentially use all our brain all the time.

If you think we only use a small portion of our brains, please feel free to demonstrate which substantial percentage of your brain you don't use by elective excise of said unused sections. If you're leery about cutting even small sections of your brain out, then, by all means, feel free to conduct this experiment on a rat, a bunny, or some other typical lab animal. Cut out a small section of its brain and see just what happens.
It dies?
Oh, yeah, there's that.
Even dumb animals use all their brains all the time.

reply to post by starshift


You've really offered nothing to dispute eye movement as it relates to memory access.

You're more than welcome to believe the nonsense you're believing. You are, however, in error.

lol.. i still havent had time to read anymore comments and respond, but i will tomorrow night hopefully. no doubt there is a loud trumpeting of ignorant brainwashed types, as my intuion tells. thankfully, there is an ecology of consciousness among others here who are not trolls. imagine how funny, a short 200 years ago, all the scientists screaming like howler monkeys that radio waves did not exist, that untraviolet frequencies did not exist. where is the proof they said. HAHAHAHAHAHA. this information comes from a disciplina as old as humanity from a wellspring as ancient as consciousness itself. remote viewing is a shodow copy, at best. shriek forth howler monkeys, tell me all the things that dont exist because you havent discovered them yet. at one time the new world didnt even exist in scientists minds. hilarious in your simplicity. religious zealots in your fear/denile of the unknowns [yet-to-be-discovereds]. yes, radio frequencies dont exist. there is no xray spectrum either. hahahaha. if you havent seen it yet empirically, it doesnt exist. we have seen it, empiracally and otherwise. and it turns out radio frequencies did exist and dinosaurs were not grey. lol.

the saddest part about science being a religion of zealots with false creation myths, is that it is the only religion in the world that claims life has no meaning, the universe itself is happenstance. HHAHAHAH. trust the shamans my friends, life is rife with meaning, spirit and consciousness if you will, down to the smallest iota. the shrieking of closeminded zealots cannot and never will change that. ecologies outside normative perception do exist. and its a no brainer to hypothesize such even without shamanic sight. only a fool denies the unknown in favor of boxthinking, when so much remains to be enlightened.

thank you for the intuitive lol, and i will respond to the more curious minds soon. all the bestest.

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by CallYourBluff
I'm interested to know why you turn up on these threads. You clearly have no interest in these subjects, but you sure do enjoy calling people ignorant and uneducated. Is it your ego?

1. Look at the ATS motto: Deny Ignorance.
Ignorance (not used as a derogatory) defines as "Lack of Knowing".
Often enough, we get some pie in the sky claim with zero corroborating verifiable Empirical Data. On the other side of that, there's a wealth of "Knowing" in studies that have interrogated these very phenomenon.
In the spirit of Denying Ignorance, ie; lack of knowing, it's obligatory well studied contrary evidence come to presentation.

You may also profit from reading This Post by another member. Who's calling who Ignorant? Hmm? Door swings both ways, and when/if I use the word, I'm using it properly with contextual validity.

2. ATS is an open, public, free forum where anyone can express their opinion for any or no reason at all regardless the relevance and/or familiarity with the topical discussion. You and I, and anyone else for that matter are more than welcome to articulate our knowledge, lack of it, and even feelings as they can be applied to any topical discussion so long as they adhere to board T&C.

3. How old do you think I am?
I was in Full-Time University (16 hours of classes and labs enrollment) at 16.
I won't say what my academic accreditation entails, but, I went to school for well over a decade plus some.
From there, I've embarked on a successful independent career where I essentially make my own hours, attending to a variety of projects and interests with liberties extending to taking two or three vacations a year at most any leisure I desire.
Care to reconsider my age?

4. You're inferring enjoyment. While there's a certain degree of entertainment in the demographic of socio-psychological stew to observe on these boards, I'd much rather have topical discussion on a level where I actually have to think about it. Please, feel free to raise the bar above the typical purely anecdotal subjective and poorly speculative sloppy demonstrations of atrocious facility for logic.

5. If you have a problem, alert a Moderator. Crying about your distaste for any personality in public is worthless. Your friends don't want to hear it and your enemies definitely don't care, and, if anything, might derive enjoyment out of your consternation and discomfit.

Edit: Re: #3: I misread your statement regarding EGO as "age". I'm not infallible.
Regarding Ego; I've no shame in having a high self worth. If you've low self worth, that's not my problem. If you bring up arrogance, it's not arrogance when you're right. Prove me wrong. Slap me down. I'm actually more than happy to get knocked down and proven wrong. Please, provide a concise, relevant argument to counter any I put forward anywhere. I look forward your retort and any data sets you offer.

edit on 27-11-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

To paraphrase....."yup. It's because of Ego".


I tell you, these octopus are not to be trusted. Look at what the less advanced, non transdimensional species can do.





My Question to the OP would be...how would we as a species be able to Kill it? Seriously. We can kill everything else. I vote that we all brainstorm out side the box here and devise ways to kill this predator.

A) Physically
B) Psychically
C) Astral

I don't just mean to scare this thing away, but to verifiably kill it. I await the replies enthusiastically.

reply to post by sirbadazz


Actually, I'll be absolutely ecstatic if you prove your claims.
Do it.

The thing you obviously do not understand about science, something you're utterly confused and outright wrong about is that science BEGS to be amended.
Thus, please, o pretty pretty please I'm begging you to prove to us poor poor mixed up and confused adherents to empirical data that we are wrong.

Come on. Do it. Prove it.
Show us your astral platypus, and tell us if astral chicken does indeed taste like ... chicken.
Do the astral doggies eat astral bacon?

Come on now. Show us something.

reply to post by starshift


Sorry Starshift. You beat me to the punch. I just saw your mimic octopus link, Albeit a different vid.

While its a nice story you have there it is still an assertion of knowledge the rest of us
lack, to prove this knowledge you need to offer some true evidence or tests that are
scientifically verifiable and testable, otherwise its just a cool fiction story. nothing wrong
with a cool fiction story just don't let it rule the decisions you make in life until you know
its true.

Now that all that's out of the way, have you ever read Reality Dysfunction by Peter F.
Hamilton? I get a feeling you would totally love this book, the beginning of the books
starts out with beings very similar to the ones you describe and the story goes on
to unfold in a fascinating way that these beings cause a cataclysm that was unintended
in our own species! read it! its an awesome scifi book, or one of my favorites at least

meh... missing info, like case studies.

You cant actually see what any beings are doing to people in the long run, so you are fear mongering.

This talk of permanent damage.... it's easy to see what you are doing.

You also have no way to show or illustrate this so you can't say how frequent it is. You have no way of seeing it.

You're also very unclear on many important things like "Why bother?" I mean why would they go to the trouble of living through another entity.... because this dimension is so great they cannot resist? I find that hard to believe with their freedoms and capabilities if they are able to do these things. It seems our world would be a tad dull.

for all this ancient shaman wisdom you have you sure do use terms like "octopus thing" a lot. that certainly doesn't sound like a traditional way to describe this lore. hmmm...

ok, let's say I'm communicating with an ET... Now what part of my thoughts are not my own? The way I see it, I become more and more pleased with my own realizations and less pleased with the world around me and I shudder to think about my previous standards... not standards of living but standards of thinking.

Time has also had a chance to work on me and all of lifes annoyances as well... like sexist men, or other woman who slight me because I'm smaller and look younger than them... so now that I'm all disgusted with so many people in the world for various reason including very personal ones and the list is growing.... I'd say I'm feeling more and more like myself each day. As a matter of fact, I'm feeling so rutted in I'm getting bored with it because it's unimpressive.

What part of this is not my own realization? What part of this is not my own mind?

Oh, I guess in reality if I didn't have an interdimensional space octopus attached to my head, I'd just love stuff like being objectified and living the American lie despite all it tramples under foot.

Yeah, real bummer.... because I always wanted to be haggered with 5 kids and told wrestling was entertainment and wear a red white and blue halter on bike week... as opposed to being exactly what I am.

Um, no thanks... I'm fine. I'm quite happy with myself, it's my location that seems to be a problem.... it's the world around me and the bullcrap in it. I don't appreciate being told I have some kind of personality defect because of this. Some type of consciousness illegitimacy. No, I don't think that's cool at and despite what YOU can excuse yourself of due to your opinions, it's actually ME your talking about has some kind of problem.

No, it's not an octopus, it's not an alien.... it's me you're talking about.

Do you really think you're going to influence my thoughts on my own et parasites and consciousnesses,,, however many they have?

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by starshift

 

Actually, you're soon to be wrong.
Pre-Bionic Eye

Technology: w00t!

I'm still waiting for someone to drag one of those fishes flopping and gasping into daylight.

Cut the new age drivel. Give us some hard empirical data. Quaint little fairy tales, while fun and fascinating, are entirely worthless without corroborating empirical data that we can test and verify.

Then again, do you have any information on the astral platypus?
There's unconfirmed reports they swim in rivers of rainbow, and make their burrows out of magic crystals.
Further, we'd really like to know what astral chicken tastes like. Does it taste like ... chicken?

edit on 27-11-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

What if these beings are aware, to an exacting level, of your thresholds of acceptable empirical "satiation" and can literally distort the information at any point (whether the electromagnetism traveling between you and the source) or (the compression waves between you and the source). Including the ability to interfere with/alter any other part of your perception (firings in the various cortices of the brain, mid brain, nervous system, limbic system, you name it) while simultaneously capable of erasing anything that DID get through that would satiate said "Empirical" observation standards via electromagnetic pulse upon specific, nano meter sized areas of the brain.




Science


Alas, this is, but a course of drivel to you, is it not?

Originally posted by NotAnAspie

No, it's not an octopus, it's not an alien.... it's me you're talking about. Do you really think you're going to influence my thoughts on my own et parasites and consciousnesses,,, however many they have?

edit on 28-11-2012 by NotAnAspie because: (no reason given)

So, are you "me" or are you "they" (you being "they", or "they" being the ET parasite you referred to in your slightly difficult to understand and skewed-context question?)

See, look what the Octopussies are doing to you! Everyone hide and chew on a pillow!!




Oh I see, it's the ET's multiple concsiousnesses you're talking about. Well # now we're really #ed if they've got MULTIPLE conciousnesses

As I alluded in an earlier post, shamanism has nothing to do with theory - it is about direct experience. Providing empirical data is possible, but it simply won't provide a predominately left-brained individual with a full, objective explanation.

Now, I am a physicist/astronomer by formal training, so I am no stranger to the sort of skepticism that some are providing. But, it really doesn't apply here. Shamanism is inherently the art of exploring consciousness itself - expecting "proof" is a display of ignorance of the phenomenal and subjective nature of reality and consciouness.

I'd better remind you that talking about psychedelics is against the T&Cs and won't be accepted on ATS

and if certain chemicals are crucial to understanding an important subject...?

T&C be damned. They directly inhibit the discussion of important subjects. Shame on moderators who kowtow to such ridiculous restrictions just because "well, the rules say so..." deny ignorance, eh? But only when no sponsors are monetarily threatened of course. ATS is a joke sometimes, thanks to such ridiculous moderator behavior.

I can't think of a better way to embrace ignorance, than to directly prohibit discussion of such inherently relevant material. What was that ATS motto, again?