|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,252
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938193 - 10/05/13 10:14 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It's an interesting talent but it's no more a demonstration of chi than walking or singing. I think that's the gist of other comments. I wouldn't go so far as to contest the idea that it's 'not chi' as it clearly is, but the definition of chi and what it's capable of are two different things. I see no reason to contest your valid visual evidence... but what else can you prove it can do?
It's a difficult subject because it's generally associated with improvable claims, falsehoods and outright lies. I'm more than willing to put willful goose bumps on my list of possible phenomena, but it does nothing to improve my disposition towards more mystical interpretations of chi. But it's sneaky to establish a working definition of chi and then later suggest other things are possible because they are also chi. Bait and switch.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "Youβre not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." βAyishat Akanbi
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Rahz]
#18938201 - 10/05/13 10:16 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Its the only way chi can be demonstrated that I know of, otherwise I would be asking you to believe me. Here you have evidence that something really is going on, but you don't know what, all you get to see is the side-effects of the phenomena, you don't get to feel it.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938208 - 10/05/13 10:17 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The feeling is the actual phenomena, just as love is the phenomena and not the descriptions of it.
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938220 - 10/05/13 10:22 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yes but you could willfully trigger goosebumps, without chi... A shitty analogy would be like a gun... You pull the trigger, your intention is to fire the gun, but you don't will the powder to ignite. If everything is working correctly it will through a chain reaction.
Quote:
And really it doesn't matter what you call it or how you define it, because those are just thoughts of it, they are not what it is, because what it is is beyond thoughts, ie: feeling. (
Yeah yeah, spare me the lecture I have heard it all before. Explain what it is in the best way that it can possibly be done through our limited means of communication. What about question C?
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18938247 - 10/05/13 10:32 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Can you willfully trigger goose bumps without chi?
I think it is kind of hard to say that for certain if you can't see or measure chi in the first place.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Rahz]
#18938253 - 10/05/13 10:36 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rahz said: It's an interesting talent but it's no more a demonstration of chi than walking or singing. I think that's the gist of other comments. I wouldn't go so far as to contest the idea that it's 'not chi' as it clearly is, but the definition of chi and what it's capable of are two different things. I see no reason to contest your valid visual evidence... but what else can you prove it can do?
It's a difficult subject because it's generally associated with improvable claims, falsehoods and outright lies. I'm more than willing to put willful goose bumps on my list of possible phenomena, but it does nothing to improve my disposition towards more mystical interpretations of chi. But it's sneaky to establish a working definition of chi and then later suggest other things are possible because they are also chi. Bait and switch.
I agree, there are tons of hoaxsters.
Chi isn't mystical, it is just currently un measureable phenomena, like love.
Is love mystical?
You guys get too got up in the definitions, when really the only way to know of it's existence or not is to find out personally.
I can't prove to you chi exists, or it wouldn't be chi.
I can show you evidence of the passing of it, but that is about it, and it is the best you will ever get unless you experience it first hand.
I mean you guys kinda know me here, I'm pretty much just a regular, albeit outspoken, guy.
I'm in school for comp sci, it's not like I have something to gain by convincing you guys to believe me. Not like I'm trying to sucker you guys out of money, I gave and have always given information freely.
Do with it what you want.
Edited by teknix (10/05/13 10:44 PM)
|
Heffy
BrauMeister



Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 3,262
Loc: International Traveller
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938289 - 10/05/13 10:47 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Might chi be immeasurable because it has absolutely no influence on reality?
-------------------- I am the king of Rome, and above grammar! - Emperor Sigismund
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy]
#18938304 - 10/05/13 10:52 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Seems like it influenced my arms . . .
Seems like it influences my heart . . . 
Seems like it influences my meditation practices 
Seems like it influences my fire 
Seems like it influences my emotions 
You still don't address the real issues, but just pipe in with your opinion whenever you feel like it, I believe your still a couple pages back with a couple of questions I posited to you and you decided to dodge, how convenient.
You're not really debating or positing any arguments, your simply proselytizing your opinion. Not much different then a dogmatic Christian fundamentalist.
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938305 - 10/05/13 10:52 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Can you willfully trigger goose bumps without chi?
I bet that I could. In a number of ways.
Quote:
I can show you evidence of the passing of it, but that is about it, and it is the best you will ever get unless you experience it first hand.
I just think you are jumping the gun in assuming it is the passing of Chi that is making you get goosebumps. Nobody has any idea if this is evidence for chi or not.
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18938306 - 10/05/13 10:53 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Do it then, and post a video of it like it did, then maybe I will believe you.
(IE; no external sources) Turn them on and off, just as I did.
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18938312 - 10/05/13 10:53 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Ok, I'll try.
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18938327 - 10/05/13 10:57 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I just think you are jumping the gun in assuming it is the passing of Chi that is making you get goosebumps. Nobody has any idea if this is evidence for chi or not.
Well that's the thing, just like with supposed supernatural phenomena, once we know what it is it isn't supernatural, the same with chi. But chi has been chi for millennia.
|
Heffy
BrauMeister



Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 3,262
Loc: International Traveller
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy]
#18938353 - 10/05/13 11:07 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
once we know what it is it isn't supernatural, the same with chi. But chi has been chi for millennia.
So how do you know it's not nothing, and never was?
The way you are defining chi is absurd. You are attempting to prove it has substance, while simultaneously trying to hide it behind proven natural physical phenomenon.
Which is it?
-------------------- I am the king of Rome, and above grammar! - Emperor Sigismund
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy]
#18938361 - 10/05/13 11:09 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Nope.
Your still pages back before you get to ask me another question, this isn't an interrogation.
|
Heffy
BrauMeister



Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 3,262
Loc: International Traveller
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy]
#18938365 - 10/05/13 11:11 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- I am the king of Rome, and above grammar! - Emperor Sigismund
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy]
#18938368 - 10/05/13 11:12 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Heffy] 1
#18938378 - 10/05/13 11:15 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Might chi be immeasurable because it has absolutely no influence on reality?
--------------------
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18938382 - 10/05/13 11:16 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
So after a just a few attempt of trying to induce goosebumps, I have failed. However, I was able to induce chills. They start at the base of the neck and shimmer down through my arms. Like pieces of my skin are contracting in waves down my body. This was done through intentionally arranging stimuli. Namely certain videos. If I find a video that is intense enough to trigger goosebumps, then perhaps through mental imagery I can induce goosebumps with imagined stimuli. I really think it's possible. Have you ever heard of people having thoughts that gave them goosebumps or shivers?
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
If you succeeded you would have probably also felt ananda.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18938394 - 10/05/13 11:21 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cactilove said: So after a just a few attempt of trying to induce goosebumps, I have failed. However, I was able to induce chills. They start at the base of the neck and shimmer down through my arms. Like pieces of my skin are contracting in waves down my body. This was done through intentionally arranging stimuli. Namely certain videos. If I find a video that is intense enough to trigger goosebumps, then perhaps through mental imagery I can induce goosebumps with imagined stimuli. I really think it's possible. Have you ever heard of people having thoughts that gave them goosebumps or shivers?
Chills that are induced aren't chills. 
Now prove that you felt chills and that you made yourself feel chills.
|
|