View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Greetings all! My virgin post...

Introduce yourself here!

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 13 Sep 2010, 07:44

Thank you for the link, but it didn't seem to help my curiosity.
Bringing this point back full circle, David Icke has claimed that world leaders are a bunch of paedophiles and Satanic worshipers. I would still like to know to whom he is referring and what evidence he has of this. If he has none, then he is voicing a personal opinion based on some kind of prejudice. And if he is doing that, then his comments hold zero credibility for me.


Short answer, Prof: If ya wanna know who he's referring to and what evidence he has, the best place to look is his own books--better than asking me for a summary. Also, I have no personal investment in what anyone thinks of his material; I don't receive a commission for every book he sells or anything, or for pointing out he's done some pretty good research. Hell, I can even defend some of his strangest stuff, like the interdimensional reptilian notion, if I really want to, but it probably ain't the best use of my time. I think you'll find a few of his books available on the net in PDF for free if you check. If nothing else, it's entertaining reading--here's a guy he's been to over forty countries and gathered quite a bit of research material and witness testimony (so he's not merely expressing a personal opinion). No way I can possibly capture that here, it'd be a wasted effort. We could all talk info and evidence (as opposed to opinion) when there's more than just one of us who's read his books (8 or so) and is in a position to logically assess the evidence--and so far that leaves me here talking to myself!! LOL! :!: :mrgreen:
BDM
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20






Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Scepcop » 15 Sep 2010, 01:44

Grand Illusion,
I have a question.

In this clip from David Icke's "Freedom or Fascism", he talks about the holographic universe and how objects are solid in our head cause we perceive them to be.



But if that's so then how come I still run into walls with my eyes closed? I went to a house with a glass maze in an amusement park once, and kept bumping into the glass cause I didn't know it was there and my mind thought that it was open space.

So how can I bump into solid objects I don't see, if Icke's theory is correct that solidity is only in our mind?

Any explanation?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Scepcop » 15 Sep 2010, 01:54

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:I would like to see a show of hands of all the parents out there who would like for their children to have a teacher who may not be right about everything, but is right only about "SOME" things.
C'mon, hold 'em up high so we can count them!


Then no one would be a teacher in your world, cause no one is right about everything. You said so yourself.

True that, but at least teachers SHOULD be using textbooks and valid sources for the material they present and not just some goofy ideas that don't begin to have an ounce of credibility.


Why are establishment textbooks more credible than alternative research? On what logic do you say that? Cause establishment = truth? Why?

If you listen to what Icke says about mind control, then you will understand that the establishments that promote a fixed viewpoint do so to keep you locked in five sense body consciousness of the left brain, to block you off from infinite consciousness. The elites can't control the masses if they are whole brained and connected with higher awareness and perception.

That makes sense.

Why do you think the establishment are religious about defending certain fixed world views like Darwinian evolution and macro evolution, which cannot be proven and have too many missing links that don't exist? Why do they always shut out new data that don't fit into their fixed paradigms?

Because these established institutions are set up by the elites to keep us in the 5 sense body consciousness to keep us weak and subservient.

What is the value of school? 99 percent of what you learn is useless. What is the value of cramming a ton of useless info into children's heads, making them take exams for it, which they then forget afterward? What's the use of that? Did you ever think about that?

It's to make people left brained dominant so they will be weak and subservient and cut off from higher consciousness.

They NEED you to believe in Darwinism cause it teaches you that you are an animal, not a spiritual being. That way they can control you. Otherwise they can't.

It all makes sense when you connect the dots.

ProfWag, I get the feeling that you are just a programmed automaton or droid programmed to argue with us until you get the last word or change our minds. If you really wanted answers, you'd watch the films recommended and do your own research. The reason you ask us for the answers is so you can nitpick whatever we say until you get the last word.

The skeptobots are programmed to debate this way as disinfo droids. You are programmed to argue and spin here, not to seek real answers. If you wanted real answers, you would read books and watch all the great films I recommend. But you don't, cause that's not your objective. Your objective is not to learn new things, but to debate endlessly on forums so you get the last word. That's obvious.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Scepcop » 15 Sep 2010, 02:11

ProfWag wrote:Thank you for the link, but it didn't seem to help my curiosity.
Bringing this point back full circle, David Icke has claimed that world leaders are a bunch of paedophiles and Satanic worshipers. I would still like to know to whom he is referring and what evidence he has of this. If he has none, then he is voicing a personal opinion based on some kind of prejudice. And if he is doing that, then his comments hold zero credibility for me.


ProfWag,
First, truth is best learned layer by layer. The reptile thing is is like a 5th layer for example, and if you start with that, it sounds too bizarre and outlandish and makes no sense. But if you go through layers 1 through 4 first, then it becomes much more plausible. You gotta take baby steps.

First, you gotta understand why Darwinism macro evolution does not explain human origins at all. If you watch Lloyd Pye's lectures, you will understand why. Our DNA is clearly manipulated and spliced artificially, not naturally. Where did humans suddenly get so much intelligence over animals and the ability to think and ask questions? How did they lose all the hair and body mass of the primates and Neanderthals suddenly and naturally? Impossible. Even Carl Sagan was baffled by it. Have you seen his book "Dragons of Eden" where he is at a loss to explain the origin of human intelligence? Science has no explanation for such things. NONE.

When the establishment can't explain something, they ignore it, and ridicule you if you bring it up. Same with 9/11. Same with macro evolution.

So we are not indigenous to the natural animals on earth at all. Our body and skin are not adapted to living in the wild jungles at all. We could not have evolved here naturally. There's no way around it. It's inescapable.

Once you understand that, then you either gotta believe in God or aliens/other non-human entities that intervened. Each step becomes more plausible as you go along.

Icke does have many eyewitness accounts of the Illuminati's satantic rituals and pedofilipia. Go to YouTube and search for Arizona Wilder or Cathy O'Brien. Their testimonials are filmed and documented. It's anecdotal evidence yeah, but maybe it's true?

What if it is ProfWag? What would you do about it?

Icke does not believe in something for no reason. He always has some reasons, often good ones.

ProfWag, how many of Icke's films have you seen? If you watch a few, you will not think he is nuts anymore, but one of the most brilliant in the world, if you watch with an open mind that is.

Can you please watch the Oxford Union presentation first? It's only 2 hours and you will have a whole new level of admiration and respect for Icke if you see it. Here's the link again:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 106638208#

I have some of Icke's books in PDF. If you promise to read them, I can send them to you. Then you can look at some of the evidence in his huge 600 page books online. Will you promise to read them rather than constantly argue? If so, I will send them to you for free by giving you a download link.

If you don't take the time to look at the material I give you, then I'm not going to answer these questions anymore. You gotta show that you are serious.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby ProfWag » 15 Sep 2010, 02:58

Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Thank you for the link, but it didn't seem to help my curiosity.
Bringing this point back full circle, David Icke has claimed that world leaders are a bunch of paedophiles and Satanic worshipers. I would still like to know to whom he is referring and what evidence he has of this. If he has none, then he is voicing a personal opinion based on some kind of prejudice. And if he is doing that, then his comments hold zero credibility for me.


ProfWag,
First, truth is best learned layer by layer. The reptile thing is is like a 5th layer for example, and if you start with that, it sounds too bizarre and outlandish and makes no sense. But if you go through layers 1 through 4 first, then it becomes much more plausible. You gotta take baby steps.

First, you gotta understand why Darwinism macro evolution does not explain human origins at all. If you watch Lloyd Pye's lectures, you will understand why. Our DNA is clearly manipulated and spliced artificially, not naturally. Where did humans suddenly get so much intelligence over animals and the ability to think and ask questions? How did they lose all the hair and body mass of the primates and Neanderthals suddenly and naturally? Impossible. Even Carl Sagan was baffled by it. Have you seen his book "Dragons of Eden" where he is at a loss to explain the origin of human intelligence? Science has no explanation for such things. NONE.

When the establishment can't explain something, they ignore it, and ridicule you if you bring it up. Same with 9/11. Same with macro evolution.

So we are not indigenous to the natural animals on earth at all. Our body and skin are not adapted to living in the wild jungles at all. We could not have evolved here naturally. There's no way around it. It's inescapable.

Once you understand that, then you either gotta believe in God or aliens/other non-human entities that intervened. Each step becomes more plausible as you go along.

Icke does have many eyewitness accounts of the Illuminati's satantic rituals and pedofilipia. Go to YouTube and search for Arizona Wilder or Cathy O'Brien. Their testimonials are filmed and documented. It's anecdotal evidence yeah, but maybe it's true?

What if it is ProfWag? What would you do about it?

Icke does not believe in something for no reason. He always has some reasons, often good ones.

ProfWag, how many of Icke's films have you seen? If you watch a few, you will not think he is nuts anymore, but one of the most brilliant in the world, if you watch with an open mind that is.

Can you please watch the Oxford Union presentation first? It's only 2 hours and you will have a whole new level of admiration and respect for Icke if you see it. Here's the link again:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 106638208#

I have some of Icke's books in PDF. If you promise to read them, I can send them to you. Then you can look at some of the evidence in his huge 600 page books online. Will you promise to read them rather than constantly argue? If so, I will send them to you for free by giving you a download link.

If you don't take the time to look at the material I give you, then I'm not going to answer these questions anymore. You gotta show that you are serious.

I have been trying to ignore the lizard thing as many people believe things that may not be true, but my concern is that if he is going to call someone a peadophile and a Satanist, then I want to know who he is talking about and what his evidence is of this. If all he has is anectodal, then spreading rumors such as that is as wrong as wrong can be and means he is a terrible person and not one I would pick to be associated with. I can assure you that if he would say that to me, he would shortly thereafter be missing some front teeth.
As I said before, if you'll read Michael Shermer's "Why People Believe Weird Things," then I'll read whatever the hell you want me to.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 16 Sep 2010, 11:55

Scepcop wrote:Grand Illusion,
I have a question.

In this clip from David Icke's "Freedom or Fascism", he talks about the holographic universe and how objects are solid in our head cause we perceive them to be.



But if that's so then how come I still run into walls with my eyes closed? I went to a house with a glass maze in an amusement park once, and kept bumping into the glass cause I didn't know it was there and my mind thought that it was open space.

So how can I bump into solid objects I don't see, if Icke's theory is correct that solidity is only in our mind?

Any explanation?


It's a good question, VW. I think that basically he's got it more or less down pat... Our bodies are a conglomerate of frequencies "tuned" to a similar band that the frequencies of the physical world are tuned to. they're close enough in frequency that they can interact, and as the frequency moves towards either end of the band, things get less and less solid and more and more "ghostly" or intangible (we can't perceive radio waves or UV light for instance as the frequencies are too high for our eyes/brain to detect. So eyes closed or not, if we walk towards a wall, even if it's one that allows photons to pass through unhindered, and don't take evasion action before impact, it's gonna hurt heheh :)

Maybe this angle from Michio Kaku will help (I've quoted this in my book):

"...if you have a radio in your living room...and you have all frequencies in your living room; BBC, Radio Moscow, ABC, but your radio is tuned to one frequency – you’re decohered from all the other frequencies. You’re only coherent [wave phase and amplitude in alignment; either exactly or in whole number ratios] with one frequency. We now believe that the universe is vibrating and that there are vibrations of other universes right in this room. There are the universes of dinosaurs because the comet didn’t hit 65 million years ago; the wave function of aliens from outer space looking at the rubble of an earth that already was destroyed – all in your living room, except we have decohered from them. We’re no longer in tune with them, we don’t vibrate with them. Therefore our universe is tuned to one frequency - our universe. But it means that probably there are other parallel universes in your living room and believe it or not this is called modern physics...get used to it. This is the modern interpretation of the quantum theory, that many worlds represents reality."

Believe it or not, this is taken from a video clip juxtaposing Icke's perspective from years ago with what physicists have FINALLY realised! (He was right all along.) B)
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 16 Sep 2010, 12:18

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Thank you for the link, but it didn't seem to help my curiosity.
Bringing this point back full circle, David Icke has claimed that world leaders are a bunch of paedophiles and Satanic worshipers. I would still like to know to whom he is referring and what evidence he has of this. If he has none, then he is voicing a personal opinion based on some kind of prejudice. And if he is doing that, then his comments hold zero credibility for me.


ProfWag,
First, truth is best learned layer by layer. The reptile thing is is like a 5th layer for example, and if you start with that, it sounds too bizarre and outlandish and makes no sense. But if you go through layers 1 through 4 first, then it becomes much more plausible. You gotta take baby steps.

First, you gotta understand why Darwinism macro evolution does not explain human origins at all. If you watch Lloyd Pye's lectures, you will understand why. Our DNA is clearly manipulated and spliced artificially, not naturally. Where did humans suddenly get so much intelligence over animals and the ability to think and ask questions? How did they lose all the hair and body mass of the primates and Neanderthals suddenly and naturally? Impossible. Even Carl Sagan was baffled by it. Have you seen his book "Dragons of Eden" where he is at a loss to explain the origin of human intelligence? Science has no explanation for such things. NONE.

When the establishment can't explain something, they ignore it, and ridicule you if you bring it up. Same with 9/11. Same with macro evolution.

So we are not indigenous to the natural animals on earth at all. Our body and skin are not adapted to living in the wild jungles at all. We could not have evolved here naturally. There's no way around it. It's inescapable.

Once you understand that, then you either gotta believe in God or aliens/other non-human entities that intervened. Each step becomes more plausible as you go along.

Icke does have many eyewitness accounts of the Illuminati's satantic rituals and pedofilipia. Go to YouTube and search for Arizona Wilder or Cathy O'Brien. Their testimonials are filmed and documented. It's anecdotal evidence yeah, but maybe it's true?

What if it is ProfWag? What would you do about it?

Icke does not believe in something for no reason. He always has some reasons, often good ones.

ProfWag, how many of Icke's films have you seen? If you watch a few, you will not think he is nuts anymore, but one of the most brilliant in the world, if you watch with an open mind that is.

Can you please watch the Oxford Union presentation first? It's only 2 hours and you will have a whole new level of admiration and respect for Icke if you see it. Here's the link again:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 106638208#

I have some of Icke's books in PDF. If you promise to read them, I can send them to you. Then you can look at some of the evidence in his huge 600 page books online. Will you promise to read them rather than constantly argue? If so, I will send them to you for free by giving you a download link.

If you don't take the time to look at the material I give you, then I'm not going to answer these questions anymore. You gotta show that you are serious.

I have been trying to ignore the lizard thing as many people believe things that may not be true, but my concern is that if he is going to call someone a peadophile and a Satanist, then I want to know who he is talking about and what his evidence is of this. If all he has is anectodal, then spreading rumors such as that is as wrong as wrong can be and means he is a terrible person and not one I would pick to be associated with. I can assure you that if he would say that to me, he would shortly thereafter be missing some front teeth.
As I said before, if you'll read Michael Shermer's "Why People Believe Weird Things," then I'll read whatever the hell you want me to.


Profwag, honestly, and with all due respect, the fact that we are still talking about "IF he says this" and "IF he has this info" suggests to me that you don't REALLY want to get to the bottom of it, or you would have either downloaded a free PDF or bought a book so you can ascertain for yourself precisely what he IS saying(!) Instead of hypothesising about what MIGHT be the case IF all Icke has is anecdotal information, why don't you let the good Mr Wu send you a PDF? Personally, I don't think it'll take--I think it'll be too "out there" for you and you'll probably throw the baby out with the bathwater too. Icke's material really can't be dished out to ppl who have fairly set ideas about what is POSSIBLE in this reality, because so much of his material challenges peoples' perception of this world on so many levels. It's not JUST that we've gotta process the fact that the whole political system is a sham; it's not just having to deal with the fraud of the banking system, the law courts, education, etc, etc; but we also have to face the illusory nature of our beliefs about the very nature of reality itself--it's a rough ride for the "uninitiated". I'd suggest other material... Maybe Michael Talbot's Holographic Universe or Stan Grof or something by Dean Radin, Brian Weiss or Lynne McTaggart, just to expand your sense of the nature of reality (hey, even Robert Monroe could be a good option). After that, dealing with Icke will be easier... Just an idea. I'll also look at Shermer's article(?) at some point too, but honestly, I find most sceptical dissertations on the "psychology of woo-woo" to be pretty shallow. Let's hope I'm wrong! (Just quietly, I consider it "weird" that there's still ppl around who think clairvoyance, telepathy, presentiment, remote viewing, etc, haven't been categorically scientifically proven, but I've done a lot of research to get to that point. *grin)
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Arouet » 16 Sep 2010, 12:24

Physicists like Kaku and Hawking dumb down their stuff for the general public. They use analogies to try and give us a bit of a taste of what they deal with. But it is a mistake to take those analogies and apply them to other things. People like Icke and Deepak Chopra have tried to coopt physics terms for their (in Chopra's case) new agey type hypotheses and in Icke's case his - I don't even know what to call them - theories. There is almost no chance that they actually do understand it. To suggest that what Icke is saying and what Kaku is saying are the same thing is misguided.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 16 Sep 2010, 12:58

Arouet wrote:Physicists like Kaku and Hawking dumb down their stuff for the general public. They use analogies to try and give us a bit of a taste of what they deal with. But it is a mistake to take those analogies and apply them to other things. People like Icke and Deepak Chopra have tried to coopt physics terms for their (in Chopra's case) new agey type hypotheses and in Icke's case his - I don't even know what to call them - theories. There is almost no chance that they actually do understand it. To suggest that what Icke is saying and what Kaku is saying are the same thing is misguided.


We may have to agree to disagree on that, Arouet. Kaku isn't speaking strictly in metaphor or analogy, but explaining how physicists such as he himself "see reality" currently. All they've done is catch up to mystics and occultists... As Kaku says himself: "believe it or not this is called modern physics...get used to it. This is the modern interpretation of the quantum theory, that many worlds represents reality." If you watch the clip this is taken from, they're really saying the exact same thing. Sure, Kaku might have the force of scientific training and technical expertise on his side, but that should only go to reinforce what the likes of Icke and others are saying. What they (phyicists) deal with is numbers, formulae, equations and experimental results; they then extrapolate from their findings to create new conceptual worlds, they aren't dealing with parallel universes directly (unlike occultists and mystics), but is it not interesting that the modern physicist's conceptualisation is so utterly aligned with what the seers, mystics, etc, have been saying for so long based on direct experience? The conceptual constructs based on experimental findings CAN be understood by the layperson because it doesn't take a PhD to use your imagination, like Kaku has done, for instance...
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Arouet » 16 Sep 2010, 16:23

I'm suggesting that if the modern day physicist and the centuries old mystic got together to discuss this stuff, I suspect they'd find very quickly that they are not talking about the same thing. Or at least that the areas where there is similarity are small indeed.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 16 Sep 2010, 17:15

Arouet wrote:I'm suggesting that if the modern day physicist and the centuries old mystic got together to discuss this stuff, I suspect they'd find very quickly that they are not talking about the same thing. Or at least that the areas where there is similarity are small indeed.


Well that's fair enough as a suggestion, and 100+ yrs ago the vast majority of scientists--unaware of what mystics and occultists actually are and have been saying all along--would have agreed! But that is less and less the case these days. You might find the writings of Capra, Goswami, Talbot, Wolf and others to be interesting in that regard. LeShan (not a physicist) also did a study on parallels b/w mystics, clairvoyants and physicists in his book, The Medium the Mystic and the Physicist too, and found they have far more in common than most ppl realise (the list goes on btw). Not only are the areas of similarity not small, they are quite profound. More and more physicists are today saying some of the exact same things the mystics have been saying all along.

As Capra observed, “It is becoming ever more apparent that mysticism, or the perennial philosophy, as it is sometimes called, provides the most consistent philosophical background to the new scientific paradigm.”

There's not much more I can say than that without having to write for hundreds of pages to illustrate the point, so I recommend reading what physicists are saying about these things nowadays.
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby really? » 16 Sep 2010, 20:39

The_Grand_Illusion wrote:
Arouet wrote:I'm suggesting that if the modern day physicist and the centuries old mystic got together to discuss this stuff, I suspect they'd find very quickly that they are not talking about the same thing. Or at least that the areas where there is similarity are small indeed.


Well that's fair enough as a suggestion, and 100+ yrs ago the vast majority of scientists--unaware of what mystics and occultists actually are and have been saying all along--would have agreed! But that is less and less the case these days. You might find the writings of Capra, Goswami, Talbot, Wolf and others to be interesting in that regard. LeShan (not a physicist) also did a study on parallels b/w mystics, clairvoyants and physicists in his book, The Medium the Mystic and the Physicist too, and found they have far more in common than most ppl realise (the list goes on btw). Not only are the areas of similarity not small, they are quite profound. More and more physicists are today saying some of the exact same things the mystics have been saying all along.

As Capra observed, “It is becoming ever more apparent that mysticism, or the perennial philosophy, as it is sometimes called, provides the most consistent philosophical background to the new scientific paradigm.”

There's not much more I can say than that without having to write for hundreds of pages to illustrate the point, so I recommend reading what physicists are saying about these things nowadays.


That might be a problem of some physicists looking at physics with more philosophical perspective rather than just good ol' physics. Discover magazine feature an article titled "Who Wrote the Book of Physics" April issue 2010.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 16 Sep 2010, 22:35

really? wrote:
The_Grand_Illusion wrote:
Arouet wrote:I'm suggesting that if the modern day physicist and the centuries old mystic got together to discuss this stuff, I suspect they'd find very quickly that they are not talking about the same thing. Or at least that the areas where there is similarity are small indeed.


Well that's fair enough as a suggestion, and 100+ yrs ago the vast majority of scientists--unaware of what mystics and occultists actually are and have been saying all along--would have agreed! But that is less and less the case these days. You might find the writings of Capra, Goswami, Talbot, Wolf and others to be interesting in that regard. LeShan (not a physicist) also did a study on parallels b/w mystics, clairvoyants and physicists in his book, The Medium the Mystic and the Physicist too, and found they have far more in common than most ppl realise (the list goes on btw). Not only are the areas of similarity not small, they are quite profound. More and more physicists are today saying some of the exact same things the mystics have been saying all along.

As Capra observed, “It is becoming ever more apparent that mysticism, or the perennial philosophy, as it is sometimes called, provides the most consistent philosophical background to the new scientific paradigm.”

There's not much more I can say than that without having to write for hundreds of pages to illustrate the point, so I recommend reading what physicists are saying about these things nowadays.


That might be a problem of some physicists looking at physics with more philosophical perspective rather than just good ol' physics. Discover magazine feature an article titled "Who Wrote the Book of Physics" April issue 2010.


I don't consider it a problem at all. It's actually my whole point. Physics has led the physicist full circle back to mysticism and away from the dead end of reductionistic materialism. Who'da thunk it! ;)
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby Arouet » 17 Sep 2010, 00:47

The_Grand_Illusion wrote:I don't consider it a problem at all. It's actually my whole point. Physics has led the physicist full circle back to mysticism and away from the dead end of reductionistic materialism. Who'da thunk it! ;)


This is why I don't like philsophy. I mean, I find it interesting, and fun at times (when I can understand it!) but at the end of the day terms like reductivist materialism are quite loaded. Outside of a philosophy class no one really understands what it means vs. naturalist, etc. I prefer to try and focus on what we can actually figure out.

There are so many different types of mystics, new agers, etc. that to say physics is catching up with mysticism doesn't mean much. Popular physicists try to use language that is familiar in describing their hypotheses to the public: it is unsurprising that much of the language is taken from how we have described such things in the past. Such analogies are familiar and may help convery some idea of what they're talking about. Multiverse is an easier concept to understand. When they get to talking about quatum entanglement, retrocausality, etc. then we're in a whole difference ballgame. I've heard Chopra use some physics terms in completely inappropriate ways.

Now, I'm not a physicist either, but thorugh forums or listening to intereviews I've heard physicists explain this problem.

Now, as for the link to particular mystic tradtions: well, it is hardly surprising that some stories may match up better than others: there are lots of stories. But I would like to see an interview with a physicist and a new agist and see just how close or far apart the ideas are. I mean, you're not going to find any universal spirit or consciousness talking to Hawking! So some mystics contemplated a multiverse? So what, I've contemplated multiverses. In any event, multiverse is one possibility, there is no consensus as of yet that it exists.

Icke talks about everything we see really being a hologram. I'm not sure if he's using hologram as an analogy: certainly didn't seem so from his talk. Are there any physicist that would back him up? especially with how he claims these lizard folk walk around just outside of visible light, etc. etc.?
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Greetings all! My virgin post...

Postby The_Grand_Illusion » 18 Sep 2010, 11:26

This is why I don't like philsophy. I mean, I find it interesting, and fun at times (when I can understand it!) but at the end of the day terms like reductivist materialism are quite loaded. Outside of a philosophy class no one really understands what it means vs. naturalist, etc. I prefer to try and focus on what we can actually figure out.

There are so many different types of mystics, new agers, etc. that to say physics is catching up with mysticism doesn't mean much. Popular physicists try to use language that is familiar in describing their hypotheses to the public: it is unsurprising that much of the language is taken from how we have described such things in the past. Such analogies are familiar and may help convery some idea of what they're talking about. Multiverse is an easier concept to understand. When they get to talking about quatum entanglement, retrocausality, etc. then we're in a whole difference ballgame. I've heard Chopra use some physics terms in completely inappropriate ways.

Now, I'm not a physicist either, but thorugh forums or listening to intereviews I've heard physicists explain this problem.

Now, as for the link to particular mystic tradtions: well, it is hardly surprising that some stories may match up better than others: there are lots of stories. But I would like to see an interview with a physicist and a new agist and see just how close or far apart the ideas are. I mean, you're not going to find any universal spirit or consciousness talking to Hawking! So some mystics contemplated a multiverse? So what, I've contemplated multiverses. In any event, multiverse is one possibility, there is no consensus as of yet that it exists.

Icke talks about everything we see really being a hologram. I'm not sure if he's using hologram as an analogy: certainly didn't seem so from his talk. Are there any physicist that would back him up? especially with how he claims these lizard folk walk around just outside of visible light, etc. etc.?


Ok, there's a few misunderstandings above to clear up. Mystics don't "contemplate" other realities or transcendent states of consciouness, they *experience* them--big difference! YOU might, as a rationalist, contemplate/think about multiverses, but an mystic or occultist enters into them--totally different ballgame. As Kaku says, "many worlds represents reality", so on that front physics, in some quarters at least, is beginning to catch up. As I said previously, it's been made fairly clear that what a lot of physicists are saying is exactly what mystics, etc, have always said. So to say that physics is catching up to mysticism is only meaningless if you don't know what mysticism is--and most rationalists and scientists don't(!)

As for Hawking, one doesn't need to bring him into the discussion as he doesn't appear to deal with these concepts and perspectives, so for my lines of inquiry he's not relevant.

Icke and the hologram. The hologram seems to be the best analogy or metaphor we have for describing this "level" of reality and based on my research, Icke's usage of the term if pretty well justified--however he intends it. Icke's explanations of the nature of reality closely parallel Michael Talbot and to some extent Michio Kaku, as I've pointed out. Various scientists use the holographic description of reality, and they don't seem to intend it merely as a metaphor anymore (at least not all the time). Quantum biologists, for instance have used these terms in speaking of the human body as a conglomerate of interfering wave frequencies...

Entanglement or nonlocality are not difficult concepts to grasp. Take "telepathic" brainwave entrainment: it is scientifically proven to exist through many experiments. As physicist, Amit Goswami points out: the obvious explanation is nonlocal entanglement, a connection "outside" of our space-time. That might bend some minds, but it's fairly simple in principle.

Returing to the topic of Satanism and child abuse, some of you might find this little clip interesting. Skip to 5:15 and go to 15:30. Icke talks about why he says and does what he does (no reptilians mentioned).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_WTpE0tcQE

As for scientists talking about reptilians... well... I'm not away of any off the top of my head. *grin
But fear of ridicule (or other forms of deterrents) is a powerful motivating factor in academia. People generally know what they can get away with before it costs them their precious reputation...! But if even one form of life exists outside of our familiar band of light, then how many more might there be? And why not, for the sake of discussion, bipedal reptilian variations? Maybe check out Harry Oldfield's material...
Brendan D. Murphy is the author of the forthcoming book series on the nature of reality and consciousness, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science, Mysticism and the Occult. Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Grand-Illusion-TGI/151764238172173?ref=ts

It's all just a dream, and the dream is dreaming itself...
User avatar
The_Grand_Illusion
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 20:20

PreviousNext

Return to Introduce Yourself

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron