Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Injection Grain Bag   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | Next >
Offlinewolf8312
Pennywise
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/12
Posts: 2,356
Last seen: 2 days, 19 hours
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy]
    #28609038 - 01/04/24 12:42 AM (24 days, 7 hours ago)

Quote:

Bardy said:
I don’t think denying entities are beings that exist in another dimension is comforting… like, comforting of what?

If they do exist in another dimension all we have to do is not smoke too much DMT and we’ll never have contact with them. Life goes on the same without people believing things like that (well maybe not exactly the same, but ever so slightly different lol).





Again if you haven't experienced high doses of oral/IV DMT that is something I can't really explain to you.

It isn't simply a bunch of hallucinations we are discussing (there would not be scientific studies/research on account of that) but this is the ground upon which many people are dismissing the experience as mere hallucination.

As I explained in one of my last posts full on hyperspace is very much a red pill wrenched-out-of-the-matrix type experience that would shatter the preconceptions and worldview of both an atheist or a religious conservative. I'm not resorting to hyperbolic metaphor when I say that! 

Whether objectively the experience is "real" or not, it is The Matrix level shit. In fact, the movie's depiction has nothing whatsoever on hyperspace! Neo was merely taken back to yet another reality inhabited with humans whereas the metaphysical reality apparently behind this one is inhabited by bio-mechanical behemoths with powers beyond human comprehension and that defy all linguistic description!

The point is, the more dogmatically a person believes himself to be in control and understand this world and his place within it, the bigger the shock and humbling will be upon encountering hyperspace.

I think it would leave many normal people (my mother for example) who rely and trust in normality distraught and in tears, and shaken for many years to come. I feel anxious just imagining some of my loved ones experiencing/realizing it for themselves!

The terror comes from being brutally ripped out from everything you formerly knew, or believed to be true, not because you are simply seeing entities!

Respectfully, by asking that question in the first place, I really don't think you seem to grasp the scale and magnitude of hyperspace or what we are talking about here.

It is a truly terrifying and life-changing realization, or awakening and there are no words in the English language I can possibly use to explain to you on an internet forum what exactly that realization is!

1.5/3 grams of rue. 10-15 grams of Mimosa. Go and tell them yourself they are not real! :grin:


--------------------
"I'm every nightmare you ever had. I am your worst dreams come true. I am everything you ever were afraid of."

Pennywise the dancing clown



Edited by wolf8312 (01/04/24 07:33 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: stareatclouds]
    #28609043 - 01/04/24 12:53 AM (24 days, 7 hours ago)

Wolf said he didn’t come back a theist. He said he came back believing anything is possible, which I think is wonderful.

Nobody in this thread said it isn’t possible for DMT to turn someone into a theist. If you interpreted it as such then I think you possibly misunderstood.

I did not say the entities aren’t real. They are real because people experience them. We’re discussing the nature of their reality. So it seems like you may have misunderstood what I wrote as well (in this thread; I don’t much care for what I thought ten years ago, or even yesterday).

I am an ever changing being, my beliefs and arguments are also changing as I am open to other peoples suggestions. And if I find their thoughts on a topic logical and persuasive then I often change my mind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: wolf8312]
    #28609045 - 01/04/24 01:06 AM (24 days, 7 hours ago)

I think you’ve misunderstood me Wolf.

I’m not claiming they’re not real. I’m trying to discuss the nature of their reality. As in, are they constructs of the mind, or do they exist somewhere else (space-wise/dimension-wise). My intuition tells me that it is more likely they are constructs of the mind.

I haven’t experienced full on hyperspace and I’m not denying how intense, real and all of the above that it feels to the person. I’ve had a handful of experiences on DMT where I’ve completely lost touch with reality and entered a kind of “DMT land” (maybe this is the point right before hyperspace, I don’t know) where my entire visual field was filled with patterns and objects which were hyper-realistic. I remember how that felt just as real, if not more so, than the “real” world.

What I think we might actually be disagreeing about here is more along the lines of how much our brains are capable of? I’m not sure.

I’m of the opinion that our brains are almost limitless in potential of constructing experiences.
And I think that, maybe, for one to think that these entities exist in some alternate dimension you need to hold the belief that our brains aren’t capable of constructing such an intense and indescribable experience?

Do you think that’s a reasonable assumption of where we disagree?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy]
    #28609053 - 01/04/24 01:45 AM (24 days, 6 hours ago)

And thanks for the aya recipe! I’ve got a heap of Rue at the moment and I’m keen to test the waters with it. Just need to order some bark.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinewolf8312
Pennywise
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/12
Posts: 2,356
Last seen: 2 days, 19 hours
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy]
    #28609083 - 01/04/24 03:32 AM (24 days, 5 hours ago)

Quote:

Bardy said:
I think you’ve misunderstood me Wolf.

I’m not claiming they’re not real. I’m trying to discuss the nature of their reality. As in, are they constructs of the mind, or do they exist somewhere else (space-wise/dimension-wise). My intuition tells me that it is more likely they are constructs of the mind.

I haven’t experienced full on hyperspace and I’m not denying how intense, real and all of the above that it feels to the person. I’ve had a handful of experiences on DMT where I’ve completely lost touch with reality and entered a kind of “DMT land” (maybe this is the point right before hyperspace, I don’t know) where my entire visual field was filled with patterns and objects which were hyper-realistic. I remember how that felt just as real, if not more so, than the “real” world.

What I think we might actually be disagreeing about here is more along the lines of how much our brains are capable of? I’m not sure.

I’m of the opinion that our brains are almost limitless in potential of constructing experiences.
And I think that, maybe, for one to think that these entities exist in some alternate dimension you need to hold the belief that our brains aren’t capable of constructing such an intense and indescribable experience?

Do you think that’s a reasonable assumption of where we disagree?




Yes pretty much.

For myself there are many different possibilities.

A few being:

Perhaps God (or something much bigger than ourselves) exists within us all. This is basically a cliche we all heard of before even touching DMT!
That perhaps the experience is both miraculous and merely a construct of our minds. Or to paraphrase Einstein: Everything is a miracle and nothing is, or maybe both! 

Another possibility is that these creatures are indeed separate from ourselves perhaps existing on a physical (doubtful IMO) or nonphysical plane (spirits, demons, behind the 'veil' etc.) somewhere and that DMT allows us to attune with and interact with these creatures. That this is the metaphysical fabric/brain of the universe.

Or perhaps DMT turns our brains up to to full power, yet everything we experience is just a figment of our imagination, delusion/hallucination.

The only reason I mention high and low Aya/Anahuasca is to make the point that not all the DMT entities are equal, and that there seems to be a hierarchy of smaller elemental's at the bottom and towering machines/bio-mechanical aliens, or perhaps even deities at the top!

Interestingly the experience/entities seem to become evermore inorganic and mechanical the deeper one goes (especially true of smoked DMT IME).

I can see why someone would take my standard dose of Anahuasca or a typical spice/flash experience (which is ferociously intense) and come back still pretty much with all of his prior beliefs and assumptions about the universe intact. With the former the entities and space they inhabit are too low level, and with the latter one blasts past it all too quickly to make proper contact.

The trouble is I just cannot explain it, or the impossibilities one will encounter/be shown with high dose oral DMT, other than to say try, and see for yourself.

That is not me intending to be snooty or dismissive.

I just think, without trying a high dose IV/Ana/Aya, it would almost be impossible to understand what I am failing so miserably here to convey.

But perhaps what Jules in pulp fiction said is on the right track:

Whether or not what we experienced was an 'According to Hoyle' miracle is irrelevant. What is relevant is that I felt the touch of God'


--------------------
"I'm every nightmare you ever had. I am your worst dreams come true. I am everything you ever were afraid of."

Pennywise the dancing clown



Edited by wolf8312 (01/04/24 03:45 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblestareatclouds
star eat clouds?
 Unread Journal User Gallery


Registered: 09/29/14
Posts: 9,886
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: wolf8312] * 1
    #28609095 - 01/04/24 04:31 AM (24 days, 4 hours ago)

Quote:

wolf8312 said:
The point is, the more dogmatically a person believes himself to be in control and understand this world and his place within it, the bigger the shock and humbling will be upon encountering hyperspace.

I think it would leave many normal people (my mother for example) who rely and trust in normality distraught and in tears, and shaken for many years to come. I feel anxious just imagining some of my loved ones experiencing/realizing it for themselves!

The terror comes from being brutally ripped out from everything you formerly knew, or believed to be true, not because you are simply seeing entities!




This is the crux of why I am so annoyed with their attitudes. They are positing matter-of-factly about certain things while not even at the correct starting point (and I don't mean correct as in the actual truth about any of this; none of us know). But he's talking about these entities simply existing in another dimension or not while completely oblivious to what these encounters often entail. Even THAT would be a huge ontological shock to many, simply knowing there's other intelligence out there (and seemingly lightyears beyond us in that department).

The bigger questions attached to many Hyperspace encounters are often more frightening, especially to those stuck in their current understanding of what is and isn't possible. It's akin to experiencing real magic and can be a lifechanging experience (both good or bad). How much control do you really have on this reality when something takes over and can manipulate it to any degree they want, including your physical body? It can be quite unnerving.

If you believed in something higher after this, how comforting is that belief if you have a terrifying DMT experience? If you're a devout atheist, fully knowing there's nothing after this, how simple is it coming back to life after being shown how wrong you are? Many people are actually MORE comforted believing we're just some fortunate bacteria who haven't been wiped out by The Great Filter yet. Coming back and realizing you could be the pet project of an advanced species in some simulation is understandably tough to some.

And regarding the, "all we have to do is not smoke too much DMT and we’ll never have contact with them" part: early on in this thread, before Bardy started trolling with laser posts, I mentioned experiencing the same entity from my trip afterwards, without taking DMT. Believing I had to do DMT to experience that again was indeed a comfort, but I was shown it isn't exactly true. But a strict materialist can reduce all of these experiences into whatever is most palatable for them, so who cares?


Quote:

Bardy said:
Wolf said he didn’t come back a theist. He said he came back believing anything is possible, which I think is wonderful.

Nobody in this thread said it isn’t possible for DMT to turn someone into a theist. If you interpreted it as such then I think you possibly misunderstood.




Uh, an atheist is someone who disbelieves in the existence of God or gods. I said DMT is known for turning atheists into believers. Nillion very clearly called it bullshit so I'm not sure why you're pretending nobody said as much?

Regardless, suddenly believing there absolutely could be a God/creator is what I am referring to, regardless of whether they become devout religious folk. Believing something is possible when you vehemently denied it - fully "knowing" different - prior is the newfound belief and ontological shock I was referencing.

I notice you ignored what I said regarding your "unscathed" comment and how wildly incorrect and irresponsible it is. Par for the course for you, though.


Quote:

Bardy said:
I haven’t experienced full on hyperspace and I’m not denying how intense, real and all of the above that it feels to the person. I’ve had a handful of experiences on DMT where I’ve completely lost touch with reality and entered a kind of “DMT land” (maybe this is the point right before hyperspace, I don’t know) where my entire visual field was filled with patterns and objects which were hyper-realistic. I remember how that felt just as real, if not more so, than the “real” world.




If you have no touch to reality, how can something be described as real? Anyway, I'm curious, what patterns and what objects? You had no idea what was going on or where you were?


Quote:

Bardy said:
I’m not claiming they’re not real. I’m trying to discuss the nature of their reality. As in, are they constructs of the mind, or do they exist somewhere else (space-wise/dimension-wise). My intuition tells me that it is more likely they are constructs of the mind.




Man, it's embarrassing watching you weasel out of your own stances.

Quote:

Why do you call hallucinations entities? It’s misleading. Just because it feels real doesn’t mean it is. Don’t mean to rain on your parade. The brain is an amazing thing and tricks you into some pretty fucked up shit when you feed it certain chemicals.




Quote:

I’ve never encountered entities on a trip, but I’ve heard a lot about them.
I’ve wondered if they might be a visual hallucination that manifests from our internal monologue, and because of the ego dissolution (or the concept of our self fading to nothing) we experience it as being a separate being, or beings.




Quote:

I agree, hallucination is a broad term. But again, it isn’t a bad term, it is useful for distinguishing what is real and what isn’t.




Okay, so you consider hallucinations real now? Damn near every time you've spoken about entities, you've reminded everyone what fools they are for not realizing they're just hallucinations. Pairing that with the standard, "not to sound like a dick, haha" or "not trying to rain on anyone's parade" doesn't make it any less annoying or condescending.

You've held the same dime-a-dozen reductionist viewpoint for 8 years, which is fine, but you present it as novel to those you bust it out on:

Quote:

These are very basic principals that too many people in this thread seem to be blissfully unaware of.




The most obviously explanation is literally what everybody thinks at the very first step, though. In fact, even when theorizing more "out there" explanations, I'd guess most still consider that first step as the frontrunner explanation, but know that something more is still possible -- this is why it's sad spending 8 years using it as some *mic drop* idea they hadn't otherwise considered.


Quote:

Bardy said:
I feel like there are two distinct types of “real” in my mind.

There’s the scientific type of real that can only be backed up by one or more observations from other people. Like if I see a tree in the distance and I ask you if what I’m seeing is actually a tree, then we ask a couple more people to make sure we’re not ascribing the word “tree” to a large animal standing still or something.

Then there’s the sense in which all of experience is real. Even if we disagree about something subjective. That subjective experience, although it differs between us, is still real for both of us.




Okay, so what you mean is there's an actual, objective real that is backed up by science and has multiple observations from others affirming it is how it is. And then there's this other, [sarcasm]equally valid[/sarcasm] "real" that you'll use when someone has an experience. You know, in a kind of "their truth" sort of way, i.e., "Yes, it felt real to you, but it wasn't ACTUALLY real."

This was a month ago, by the way, not 10 years. Funny how the the code is backed up by multiple observations from other people, including by 3 people in this thread, yet you continue to dismiss it childishly.


Quote:

Bardy said:
And I think that, maybe, for one to think that these entities exist in some alternate dimension you need to hold the belief that our brains aren’t capable of constructing such an intense and indescribable experience?

Do you think that’s a reasonable assumption of where we disagree?




wolf specifically said, "I tend to think if these entities are there then they are non-physical/metaphysical, and hence scientifically unverifiable." The only 2 posts of his in this thread that mention the word "dimension" are because he's quoting you. It's kind of like how I never once said anything about the laser and other dimensions, despite you accusing me of "literally believing the code exists in another dimension."

Obviously our brains are capable of "constructing" it in the sense of experiencing it. There's no doubt we possess the hardware to have the experience, but whether or not we're capable of constructing it ourselves isn't even relevant. My brain is capable of an internal monolog, but this doesn't prevent telepathy from being real. My brain is capable of imagining an apple, just as it is actually seeing one. There's a difference between a radio being capable of receiving messages and whether aliens are talking through it. Just because humans can broadcast radio signals doesn't mean aliens can't; believing in the possibility of something isn't a declaration that it's proven and happening.

I am curious why you even participate in these discussions when there's literally nothing that could sway you on this? You're commenting under the guise of being "an ever changing being", which is hilarious, yet it's clear that everything people experience will be handwaved by you as just a hallucination constructed by the mind. You employing your "sure, they're 'real' in the sense you experienced them" cover doesn't change this.


Quote:

What WILL help us understand why a particular person sees patterns and imagery is the scientific analysis of the brain while affected by these substances.




Do you understand that this isn't true? If some external entity from Venus is capable of beaming a specific images into my head, the same regions in my brain as when I imagine an apple will light up regardless. It does not prove that there was no outside help in seeing these images (just as nothing has conclusively proven there is). It proves we have the hardware necessary to experience that image.


Quote:

Bardy said:
if I find their thoughts on a topic logical and persuasive then I often change my mind.




Another hilarious quote given how poor your logic has been throughout the thread (as well as your integrity when presenting honest arguments).

Dr. Gallimore is one of the world's foremost experts on DMT and has been studying it exclusively for years and years at this point. He has Master's degrees in chemistry and pharmacology, a PhD in biochemistry from Cambridge, and has done post-doc work in computational neuroscience. He doesn't believe the neuroscience fully explains these encounters and uses more logic and insight than you do to dismiss them.

Despite this, you namedrop him to hurl more insults that yet again reframe my stance into something I've never shared and throw collateral damage to a very accomplished scientist:

Quote:

Andrew Gallimore seems to have created some type of DMT based religion. It’s all subjective by definition.

To believe this stuff you need to have had a drug experience in which you perceive things and then interpret them the same way as others that are part of the religion.

Anyone who has a different interpretation just hasn’t seen the light.




While I have never said anything close to that, it's more important to mention that Dr. Gallimore also hasn't. Again, you seem to have absolutely no problem completely inventing arguments for people or misrepresenting someone entirely to further yours. While it's not as damaging to me as I'm just a random forum poster who can defend himself, it's pretty scummy to completely misrepresent someone who makes his living studying and writing about these things. Dr. Gallimore is an incredibly learned scientist and I'm grateful someone with his knowledge has dedicated himself to psychedelia. You should be, too.

Not only is Dr. Gallimore agnostic* on the origin of the entities, only believing our neurochemistry hasn't yet explained them, but he also doesn't believe the laser code is proof of a simulation! He's actually hung out with Dan, fully believes him to be genuine, but doesn't agree that the code itself proves anything regarding reality being simulated. This is my actual stance, as well. In fact, Dan also doesn't believe this based solely on the laser code, either. The main thing being constructed solely by the mind are these arguments you consistently battle against that solely exist in yours.

You don't seem to know what the term "agnostic" means, by the way.

However, Dr. Gallimore does recognize the visual properties reported in the laser to be novel (which, again, is all I've said myself), suggesting it's possibly some unknown mapping to our brains through coherent light, IIRC. But you, Nillion, and the bum who unironically used tricky wording to misinterpret what ChatGPT meant about "prompt engineering" probably know better than him. After all, he's just an expert on everything involved whereas you're so logical you point out how hundreds of people visualizing the same code through a laser is exactly like you staring at your car while stoned! Brilliant!

From what I've read, he has never stated anything that could be misconstrued as religious or dogmatic. Anybody who actually reads what he's written would see the only definitive statements he makes are those backed with scientific evidence/proof. Anything far out there is never disguised as proven or backed by anything if it's not. I've never read him conclusively share anything like what you claim. Please point out any examples to the contrary.


Quote:

Bardy said:
What I think we might actually be disagreeing about here is more along the lines of how much our brains are capable of? I’m not sure.

I’m of the opinion that our brains are almost limitless in potential of constructing experiences.
And I think that, maybe, for one to think that these entities exist in some alternate dimension you need to hold the belief that our brains aren’t capable of constructing such an intense and indescribable experience?




To me, it sounds like you're late to the party on recognizing what most of us already have: if something is experienced with the exact same qualia as everyday base reality, it throws a monkey wrench into your understanding of what "real" actually means. For many people, it has made them question whether our base reality is as stable as presented. You know, because something is capable of changing it entirely, which is a weird mechanism for our brains to have. Your reality is malleable by something, clearly, so I don't find it as impossible as you that an intelligent something could or couldn't augment it, as well.

Regardless, your unshakeable understanding that the brain can simulate anything is the focal point. If you already believe this to be the case, I don't believe there is ANYTHING that would convince you otherwise. Thus, I find it perplexing why you spend so much time presenting yourself as all-ears to the contrary.

Previously you've said even if a "psychic" correctly told you there was a moldy sandwich on top of your fridge, "it would have to have been just a lucky guess, nothing more." So even if a completely paranormal, unexplainable experience happens, it HAS to be explained by something normal. You quite literally refuse to believe in an otherworldly explanation, even with evidence to the contrary.

Okay, so please tell me what logical and persuasive experience someone could have on psychedelics that would fully convince you their experience was something more, or at least novel to our understanding of the human brain. I would love to hear a genuine experience one could have that wouldn't result in you saying "you were tripping man, could've been anything." What exactly couldn't be constructed fully by their mind?

Because to me it just seems like what it is: someone who will always reduce every experience to the most reductionist explanation, regardless of what is presented. And you seem to go out of your way to insult anybody who doesn't share that particular viewpoint while telling them their thinking is wrong.

It would seem anyone who has a different interpretation than you just hasn’t seen the light.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: wolf8312]
    #28609097 - 01/04/24 04:36 AM (24 days, 4 hours ago)

Yeah, I think I understand what you mean. And I can roughly intuit how difficult it would be to explain based on my experiences with psychedelics, even though I haven’t been that deep.

I suppose your first statement depends on what you mean by God.
We are the creators of our experience of the universe, which is all we can know, and in each passing moment we are creating the universe again and again.

I love thinking about this stuff. The fact that before we were born there was no existence (obviously for our parents there was, but not for us), and our consciousness is just recreating the universe over and over in every moment, all of our feelings, thoughts, emotions, a limitless darkness when we close our eyes, a limitless universe when we open them and an environment filled with a constant symphony of noises.

And when we fall asleep and our senses are mostly shut off our brains recreate it all from scratch. People, places, environments, scenarios all popping into and out of existence the same way everything within our waking world is always popping into and out of existence.

So we are the creator. Each one of us, in that sense.

I wouldn’t call it a delusion or a figment of the imagination. The belief about the nature of the entity’s reality could be considered a delusion in my mind, depending on the belief and how strongly it is held, but not the raw experience itself.
The raw experience seems as though it is very real. It’s just how people interpret that experience that seems to be the basis of these theories.

I appreciate the polite discussion Wolf! I value your input here 😊 And hopefully I have the balls to dive deep enough into an aya trip if I get a chance in the near future. Those few strong experiences I had with smoked DMT made me a little cautious.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblestareatclouds
star eat clouds?
 Unread Journal User Gallery


Registered: 09/29/14
Posts: 9,886
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy]
    #28609133 - 01/04/24 05:53 AM (24 days, 2 hours ago)

Quote:

Bardy said:
And hopefully I have the balls to dive deep enough into an aya trip if I get a chance in the near future. Those few strong experiences I had with smoked DMT made me a little cautious.




Don't worry, dude. It's not real. No need to be afraid of something that exists solely in your head (unless it's that tumor you joked about me having). The brain is capable of some pretty crazy shit when you feed it certain chemicals. Are you afraid you might get unpleasantly shown just how little you know about reality or what?

In all seriousness, please do exercise caution and don't discount people's experiences. I fully acknowledge many folks have gone far plenty of times and still affirm it as nothing more than drug-induced hallucinations. But plenty don't and I am serious when I say there's quite a few, likely on both sides, who don't return.

It isn't always fun and you often have no idea that you did DMT. In fact, feeling like you've died is very common. It's easy to discount this all by packaging it in the ever-so-convenient "subconscious" being responsible, but another to experience it yourself. When you hop in the game, you may find that explanation from the sidelines even more difficult to rationalize depending on what you experience.

I genuinely hope you have nothing but pleasant experiences with all psychedelics, especially those involving DMT. Personally, I find it bad form to involve the ego when going against something known for destroying it (and again, not always in a pleasant way). No sense bringing balls into it when you're not tougher than psychedelics anyway.

I have plenty of balls, I think. Well, only 2 of them, but I don't consider myself a pussy. I've fought sanctioned, full-contact back in my younger days, have had guns pulled on me without flinching, and even ran into a burning building filled with children (left my phone in there after setting that orphanage on fire).

Beyond youthful intrigue, I've also never been a believer in the paranormal and have always considered myself a fairly logical, grounded person. By 16, I was a winning player at low-level $16 SNGs. I eventually played poker for a living as an adult until UIGEA. Poker involves using logic and reasoning at every step of your decision making; it's extremely unlikely to be a longterm winner without the ability to ignore your emotional response to things in favor of grounded reasoning. I can also show you posts I made as a teen where I correctly identified Bob Lazar as the fraud that he is. A believer in the illogical or fantastical without evidence isn't something I've ever been.

My brain diving deep into cards while neuroplasticity was at higher degree is something I'm grateful for. Despite your incorrect assessment, I consider tons of alternatives as a default before arriving at any conclusion I'm happy with. I play devil's advocate on plenty of ideas, both mine and others, to try and "break" them because I'm only interested in the truth.

Despite this, a "low dose" of DMT wrecked my shit and changed how I think about everthing (and I still do not believe they're externally real, either, just that it's possible). I had something turn my consciousness on and off, move my body around, and play with my limbs like a puppeteer. There were a bunch of other "displays" it performed with what I perceived as its intention of showing me how little control I truly had. At some point during this, while I guess I was fighting the experience, it turned off my ability to yell and made me submit mentally by declaring myself weaker than it was. If you've seen Kill Bill, it was like Pae Mei testing The Bride's skill. And by that, I mean finding out you have none while the more powerful sensei gleefully torments you to drive the point home.

Keep in mind, if you think all of this exists solely in your head, controlled by your very own brain, that means it has access to everything you do. Well, more than you do, actually, because you can't just will yourself into experiencing everything your brain is capable of, can you? Well, your brain has access to all of that because it IS that.

So not only does this include your memories, goals, likes/dislikes, fears and thoughts, but your brain also IS the mechanisms responsible for triggering emotions or feelings in your body. What part of our humanly experience isn't controlled/influenced by our brain? If it wants you to feel terrified, you're going to feel terrified. If it wants you to feel pain, you're going to feel pain. If my "subconscious" is actually malevolent and has FULL control over my EVERYTHING, buckle the fuck up, because that's about to get way more unnerving than what some external entity can do, IMO.

It may not be a great ride either way, but for me it's the difference between getting jumped by some random assholes and getting jumped by some assholes who knows I'm terrified of clowns. In the first scenario, I'm probably getting my ass beat. But in the second scenario, I'm probably getting my ass beat by you, Kiwi, and Nillion folks dressed Pennywise and Krusty or something. They also know where to move to dodge every punch I throw. And they're reminding me of that time I inhaled sambal at the Pho restaurant and coughed noodles halfway out of my mouth at the exact time 2 hot chicks were walking by my table. Who the fuck sanctioned this fight?

DMT also induces this weird state-dependent memory thing where you can't fully remember the experience until you do it again. So each time I've hit the pen lightly when alone, trying to slowly dip my toe back in, I've suddenly gotten the full memory of what was really happening throughout that experience. It was fucking terrifying, to the point I tossed my cartridge because I knew eventually I'd forget and hit it again. That was when I was trying the laser experiment again. I recorded it on video to maybe describe the characters. I also foolishly figured it'd make it less likely I get thrown on my back like before (or at least I'd have evidence of it happening). In the video, after I hit the pen, I say "That's right. That's right" and the hairs on my leg begin to stand.

And I know that even for how terrifying that experience was, I mostly just remember that I remember it being terrifying, i.e., that raw, real memory has again faded, so I'm reliant on my mental note of, "Dude, NEVER do DMT again. It is demonic." The few times I've remembered it full-on, like when I ate mushrooms last, I couldn't write anything better down to describe it than I have above. When it happens, I don't bother. It's just that "something really was totally in control of you" becomes more visceral in that moment, words doing it no justice, but it eventually fades until I forget again. And eventually, I know I'll feel enticed to do DMT, to the point I recently bought materials to extract my own this time.

Being honest, when I ate mush that last time and the full memory hit me, I tried throwing up the mushrooms in fear. I've tripped 100+ times, I'm sure, and would never dream of doing that. When I've hit the pen and remembered that experience, I'd get so freaked out, hoping I didn't do enough for "it" to takeover again like prior. One of the times it did take over my perception, transforming everything in my room within a split second, reminding me of what it had done prior. Perhaps it's my own brain telling me I don't need to do DMT right then. Perhaps it's an external entity saying the same thing. Perhaps it's one or the other and they're both just assholes. I don't know or care, tbh, because it's unfalsifiable at this point.

Anyway, I'm just saying it's not about balls. I personally don't believe it's fully about set and setting or intention, either. And I definitely don't believe the adage that "DMT doesn't show you what you want to see, it shows you what you need to see." DMT makes you a passenger on a train where the conductor may or may not have taken his anti-psychotics that day. It's a roll of the dice whether you're passing snow-capped mountains in the Amtrak dining car or on a runaway train performing the trolley problem -- and DMT can make you every passenger, the conductor, the train, and the people tied to the tracks simultaneously.

Just a longform post with my random thoughts, but the central theme is to be careful is all. I wish you happy times in this reality and that one. Cheers.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleNillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
    #28609155 - 01/04/24 06:35 AM (24 days, 2 hours ago)

Quote:

LogicaL Chaos said:
Quote:

wolf8312 said:
What do we even mean by Entities?




I describe them as "living" intelligent beings within the DMT "Multiverse" (aka Hyperspace) that have to ability to communicate with us or other entities.

And the question is are these entities just within our mind as partitions of ourselves, as blue_lux suggests, or are they separate, physical entities who live physically in another dimension/realm and we are interacting them within the DMT "Multiverse" aka Hyperspace or some kind of hybrid situation where our mind give these entities energy/consciousness to exist (my theory in the OP)?




I don't believe the two explanations are mutually exclusive.

It may well be that one entity could be a psychosomatic manifestation and another could be something like a demon. A percentage of users report malevolent or evil entities and in some studies it is about 1 out of 20 of those who report them.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleNillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: stareatclouds]
    #28609172 - 01/04/24 06:53 AM (24 days, 1 hour ago)

Quote:

stareatclouds said:
Uh, an atheist is someone who disbelieves in the existence of God or gods. I said DMT is known for turning atheists into believers. Nillion very clearly called it bullshit so I'm not sure why you're pretending nobody said as much?



I merely find the idea that someone can be an atheist, take DMT and then become religious to be disingenuous. People often interpret the experiences as spiritual in connotation or nature but the experience doesn't automatically imbue a person with a religious ontology, if anything a percentage of users of psychedelics who are atheists come aware from the experience as agnostics in the classic sense of believing that there is a higher power or a God, but that they don't know the specific details.

I would say that DMT and even the psychedelic experience in general often expands the mind, that it can open the mind of those who are closed to certain possibility and that we see this with regard to some people who are inclined to deny that God exists. They become more open minded to the possibility of the idea that sanctity or sacred things exist.

The idea that psychedelics tend to create theists of atheists though, I do believe that is imaginative at best.

It might amuse you to know that this is my position and I am a member of a religion that uses sacred fungi as a sacrament, essentially as a catalyst to promote divine inspiration and experiences. I am well aware that results vary though and that a sacred experience still does not a theist make.

And the reality is that nearly one third of DMT users report no entities, regardless of doses and those who do report entities describe incredibly distinct phenomena. They don't report meeting the same being that provides different people the same name for itself, for example. Likewise a significant population of the users of psychedelics do not have experiences they interpret as spiritual.

It also seems that new users are more likely to report specific things as profound that older users with more experience taking psychedelics are often less likely to see as profound. One of these is the sense of insight or truth that arises in relation to the experiences.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleBlue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής
I'm a teapot User Gallery

Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,146
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Freedom]
    #28609198 - 01/04/24 07:21 AM (24 days, 1 hour ago)

Eros


--------------------
I the music, not the bling
https://rictornorton.co.uk/eighteen/1730news.htm
𝔦𝔫 𝔫𝔬𝔪𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔟𝔬𝔫𝔦 𝔭𝔢𝔰𝔰𝔦𝔪𝔦 𝔪𝔞𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔲𝔪 𝔣𝔦𝔲𝔫𝔱
May I ask what your bud type is?
  LXIVAMOR 
Profundæ lātissimæque vēritātēs amandæ sunt, sīc ideo necesse est: rēs maxima amanda est; pōtus sit is bene scīmus cum nōs id adeō explet, cum altō hīc movet īmus: rēs maxima omnis amor.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleBlue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής
I'm a teapot User Gallery

Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,146
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy] * 1
    #28609202 - 01/04/24 07:23 AM (24 days, 1 hour ago)

U are all part of my shroomy family, and part of me. I love you all!

:inlove3:


--------------------
I the music, not the bling
https://rictornorton.co.uk/eighteen/1730news.htm
𝔦𝔫 𝔫𝔬𝔪𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔟𝔬𝔫𝔦 𝔭𝔢𝔰𝔰𝔦𝔪𝔦 𝔪𝔞𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔲𝔪 𝔣𝔦𝔲𝔫𝔱
May I ask what your bud type is?
  LXIVAMOR 
Profundæ lātissimæque vēritātēs amandæ sunt, sīc ideo necesse est: rēs maxima amanda est; pōtus sit is bene scīmus cum nōs id adeō explet, cum altō hīc movet īmus: rēs maxima omnis amor.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,849
Last seen: 8 hours, 15 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy]
    #28609255 - 01/04/24 08:23 AM (24 days, 13 minutes ago)

Quote:

Bardy said:
I don’t think denying entities are beings that exist in another dimension is comforting… like, comforting of what?

If they do exist in another dimension all we have to do is not smoke too much DMT and we’ll never have contact with them. Life goes on the same without people believing things like that (well maybe not exactly the same, but ever so slightly different lol).

Also, they’ve never hurt anybody. Even the bad ones let people return to reality unscathed 😁





You can easily see that belief has no foundation. Just ask why you believe something iteratively. Whatever answer you get about why you believe something, ask why you believe that. This can help you find your fundamental beleifs and how they are believed without any proof.

If you can even for a few minutes let go of the whole phenomena of belief, then you can see the fear that underlies it. Make friends with this fear and you don't have to be bound by the beliefs that were given to you.

Another way to see the absurdity of belief is to just look at the diversity of belief out there, and how almost everyone seems to think their beliefs are the true ones.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinetregar
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 1,049
Last seen: 1 hour, 59 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Freedom]
    #28609276 - 01/04/24 08:46 AM (23 days, 23 hours ago)

I've taken dmt all by itself and at least 150 times with amounts of THH (2nd highest alkaloid in caapi) from 70mg to 300mg, with trip reports below:

12 reasons THH rocks: https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/28423951

I would personally suggest to take DMT with THH as found in true Ayahausca, as DMT does not block serotonin on it's own but requires the SRI THH to achieve this, important teamwork, see chart below:



I way prefer the DMT always with THH, the entities you then meet are of the highest order, just as professor 8 describes. 

professor8 (found here from 11/1/2010 he writes like a poet w/special powers of imagination & expression):
Quote:

A while back I read a very good explanation of the different effects of Harmalas that has stuck with me. I believe it was 69ron that said: ‘Harmine is the Coffee of the harmalas & Harmaline is the Weed and when it comes to THH (tetrahydroharmine) you have The Light.'

While very similar in molecular structure, THH has a completely different personality to Harmine & Harmaline. Calling it The Light of the harmalas is very appropriate. IMHO, it is the Holy Grail of The Harmalas. I have found Harmine very, very helpful in Meditation & Yoga. It energises your Light Body and allows you to see your Chakras & Auric fields; very helpful in a biofeedback sorta way.

Personally, Harmaline is too heavy & stony for me but I do respect its power and personality, kinda like a big shaggy & lovable dog.

Tetrahydroharmine (THH) has the ability to raise your vibration in a most powerful, yet subtle way. It brings a crystalline prismy texture to spice and adds a super clear watery dimension to Aya, like looking down through 10meters of shimmering Caribbean Sea on clear blue day. It brings a dimension of pure light to the entheogenic experience and encourages entities & intelligences of only the Highest Order. If one is not accustomed to perceiving these experiences with a spiritual perspective most of the nuances & subtleties THH brings on are overlooked and remain unseen and one would better enjoy Harmaline as a house painter chooses a roller over a brush, its about preference & choice..




Without the THH (in the same family as ibogaine) I also experience no human teaching or insights, just as author quotes below:

Daniel Pinchbeck "Breaking Open the Head" (Daniel also states in his book, that Ayahuasca is his favorite entheogen):
Quote:

For many people, Ayahuasca-a slowed-down low-res interface of the DMT flash-seems to convey strong messages from the natural world, of nature as sentient energy and spirit matter, of the need to protect the planet we have been given.

Yage whispers that human beings are meant to be gardeners of this reality, journeyers, storytellers and singers, weavers of the sacred. DMT, on the other hand, conveys no overt human or humane message.



Graham Hancock, "Supernatural", pg 428:
Quote:

My experience with smoked DMT was qualitatively different from the realms and beings Ayahuasca introduced me to. For whereas the Ayahuasca worlds seemed rich, luxurious, and abundant in the transformations of organic and supernatural life, DMT brought me to a world--or to some aspect of a world--that appeared from the outset to be highly artificial, constructed, inorganic, and in essence technological.




Gayle Highpine (Ayahuasca researcher):
Quote:

In the western world, Ayahuasca acquired a new definition: It was now, by definition, the combination of Banisteriopsis caapi and a DMT-containing plant. Ayahuasca became, by definition “orally active DMT.” The first anthropologist to adopt the new definition seems to have been Luis Eduardo Luna in 1984. Luna spent time with Terence McKenna, absorbing his perspective, before beginning his fieldwork. Since then, anthropologists have increasingly adopted this definition and filtered their observations through it. The preeminence of the Ayahuasca vine in the indigenous Amazonian world became the elephant in the living room of Ayahuasca studies, with a tacit agreement to pretend it doesn’t exist.

The leaves were Ayahuasca’s “helpers,” I was told, and their purpose was to “brighten and clarify” the visions. The vine is like a cave, and the leaf is like a torch you use to see what is inside the cave. The vine is like a book, and the leaf is like the candle you use to read the book.

The vine is like a snowy television set, and the leaf helps to tune in the picture. There was a subtle attitude that the need for strong leaf was the sign of a beginner: An experienced ayahuasquero could see the visions even in low light.

Ayahuasca vine is not visionary in the same way as DMT. Visions from vine-only brewsare shadowy, monochromatic, like silhouettes, or curling smoke, or clouds moving across the night sky. It is because their visions are usually monochromatic that vines are classified by the color of vision they produce: white, black, blue, red (in my experience, dark maroon).

Snakes, the most common vision on Ayahuasca, are considered the manifest spirit of the vine. Vine visions can be hard to see; in fact, the “visions” may not be visual at all, but auditory or somatic or intuitive. But the vine carries the content of the message, the teaching, and the insight.

The leaf helps illuminate the content, but the teachings are credited to the vine. Vine visions are “frequently associated with writing, to a code that is present in visions…or in the ‘books’ where the spirits keep the secrets of the forest.” (Calavia Saez 2011:135).

The vine is The Teacher, The Healer, The Guide. The purpose of drinking Ayahuasca is to receive the message the vine imparts. This is why it is the vine, not the leaf, that is classified by the type of vision it gives. “For them the vine is, in truth, a living guide, a friend, a paternal authority” (Weiskopf 2005:104).

Listening to the Vine:
While I was living in the village, someone began the process of shamanic apprenticeship. There was a series of ceremonies with brews of special strength for that purpose; brews with enormous quantities of vine. About two to three pounds of fresh vine per person was used (about 25 to 35 times the amount needed for MAOI inhibition). Those were powerful experiences indeed.

Although the apprenticeship began with crushingly vine-heavy brews, the more the apprentice progressed, the weaker the brew he would need. He would learn to see the dimmest of visions. If he spent a full two years “fasting,” then eventually even smelling or tasting the brew, even touching an Ayahuasca plant, would be enough to visit her realms. On the other hand, he would learn to navigate the strongest of brews with clear focus, and be undistracted by any amount of DMT fireworks.



DMT + tiny amounts of 5-meo-dmt [perhaps similar theoretically to Amazonian snuffs which have a makeup of 7.4% bufotenin (potent 5-ht1a agonist), 0.04% 5-MeO-DMT (potent 5-ht1a agaonist) & 0.16% DMT (zero potency as 5-ht1a agonist)]:
Quote:

As an experiment (and in a foreign land) I smoked the last of the Bufo alvarius venom (the story of whose collection is described within the pages of Tryptamine Palace) with some ‘regular’ DMT (extracted from Jurema Preta.). In the vast majority of my early nigerine (DMT) experiences, I encountered visual fields of ‘dots’ that would come together to form images, much like the pointillism style of painting developed by Georges Seurat or the Australian Aboriginal song-line paintings.

** With the addition of the 5-MeO-DMT containing toad-venom to the DMT however, the visual characteristic was completely different and totally unique to my experiences so far. On this occasion there was a complete lack of ‘dots’ or ‘points’ of any kind, the fine lines of the constantly changing imagery were like those painted with a single-hair brush on Tibetan thangkas and due to the overwhelming artistry of what I was seeing, I could only think of the vaulted ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in comparison.

Sistene Chapel: This was without a doubt the most ‘visionary’ experience I have ever been fortunate enough to encounter and I lay there with my eyes shut watching the most fantastic parade of the Collective Unconsciousness imaginable, wishing that it would never end, and as I sit here now I can not even describe one tiny corner of it, since every image in the multitude of imagery was in such constant motion that they defied all but a glimpse. And then moments later, like a tent collapsing when its ropes are cut, the vision is gone. Leaving only a struggle of words to explain it, since nothing before or after has come close to this experiences visual majesty.

This experience leads to the interesting question of selectively combining DMT and 5-MeO-DMT for a more visionary and somewhat less overwhelmingly transcendental experience. (Or for the other way around). This combining of the two endogenous entheogens is being tested in changa blends (reportedly at a 90% DMT to 10% 5-MeO-DMT ratio), while many Pharmahuasca urban-shamans are also adding 5-MeO-DMT to their ayahuasca-analogues to transform and deepen that experience. It seems likely to me that the combining of DMT and 5-MeO-DMT in various ratios and manners will only become more popular as the exponentially increasing number of psychonauts search for new psychological terrain to explore.



more on this here: https://www.dmt-nexus.me/forum/default.aspx?g=posts&m=945210


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Freedom]
    #28609463 - 01/04/24 01:04 PM (23 days, 19 hours ago)

Quote:

Blue_Lux said:
U are all part of my shroomy family, and part of me. I love you all!

:inlove3:



:heart:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBardy
Male

Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 8 hours, 37 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Freedom]
    #28609737 - 01/04/24 05:40 PM (23 days, 14 hours ago)

Wise words Freedom.

I tried doing this today and I found myself always coming back to an answer of “I don’t know”. I didn’t find that to be fearful though.. I’m not scared to admit I don’t know anymore.

…Maybe sometimes I’m a bit scared to admit I don’t know, but then I remember how nice it feels to just accept that I don’t know. A feeling of mystery and wonder washes over me sometimes when I admit I don’t know something, not every time, depends what it is.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineIcon
Bloomer
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 2,866
Last seen: 6 hours, 53 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Bardy] * 1
    #28609934 - 01/04/24 08:58 PM (23 days, 11 hours ago)

"The point is, the more dogmatically a person believes himself to be in control and understand this world and his place within it, the bigger the shock and humbling will be upon encountering hyperspace." - wolf

"I merely find the idea that someone can be an atheist, take DMT and then become religious to be disingenuous. People often interpret the experiences as spiritual in connotation or nature but the experience doesn't automatically imbue a person with a religious ontology, if anything a percentage of users of psychedelics who are atheists come aware from the experience as agnostics in the classic sense of believing that there is a higher power or a God, but that they don't know the specific details." - nillion

These statements are related. It's natural for a control freak to be terrified by the DMT experience because they lose control. And if you're a little more cool with it, then you're humbled by the magnificence and attribute it to supernatural intelligence. Then it's natural to start to search for explanations and interpret the experiences in your own context. An intrigued user will then bias their trust in explanations from fellow psychedelic users and cult beliefs are formed.

When I got into DMT, I was atheist and it did make me agnostic. It was also 2011-2012, a lot of new-age spiritual theories were floating among the big mayan doomsday calendar one. And they were the ones most likely using DMT so there's that correlation. And McKenna attached his timewave zero theory to the mayan calendar, and he was the biggest advocate of DMT. Then nothing happened. A decade has passed. The exploration and fascination in spiritual worlds yielded nothing close to what was imagined or suggested. I still appreciate a good trip, but it's not my focus anymore. Those dozens of DMT trips gave me plenty to think about for a lifetime. I'll probably always be interested in the psyche, but I'm not as enchanted with the illusions as I used to be.

I only had two memorable religious experiences. One was as Christ and the other as Buddha. Primary and secondary messiahs. At the time I was basically the only one in town who had even heard of DMT, let alone extracted it and distributed it. Made me feel like a leader, a provider, a shaman. One day I gathered a few friends to hang out and try dmt together. We were vaping it out of a volcano, which collects the vapor in a bag. As the bag was filling, friend's mom came home so we all ran out of the house to hide in the back yard behind some bushes. So we were hitting it as we ran and while sitting in the grass. On that trip the association occurred to me, that these are like my disciples, solid friends following me on this journey of spiritual exploration. As we came down, we realized we were covered in countless mosquitos, hundreds or thousands of them. We noticed them when they calmly withdrew and swarmed away as we regained sobriety. Yet no one was bit. The whole second coming concept in christianity is a dangerous idea. I was actively trying to keep my ego in check back then or I could have really gotten carried away with that idea.

Another time I was on mescaline and vaped some DMT. I was sitting legs crossed in a single point hammock swing. It can distort your sense of position. At the peak, I hallucinated that I peeked my eyes open and saw shadows dancing on an illuminated lawn (I was indoors in a dimly lit room). My interpretation of this was that I was sitting cross-legged under a tree. It felt so vivid and real that I believed I had just briefly become lucid to my true existence, and that my entire life was a dream that I was having under this tree. The thought generated multiple emotions of shock that my existence could have been imagined so convincingly; delight in the humor of it being taken so seriously; and anxiety that I may not get to finish the dream if I were to interrupt it any further. I came down from that one thinking I might be Buddha.

But those were just two experiences out of probably over a hundred. Those two deities were just very familiar to me so I could relate to very cherry picked aspects of their stories. I have no knowledge about any other religions so my mind is incapable of interpreting the experiences in ways that I'm sure others could with different backgrounds. I highly doubt the indigenous tribes taking ayahuasca were imagining christ, vishnu or buddha 1,000 years before their stories were written, let alone the geographic separation. So I take my visuals and interpretations with a grain of salt.

That's why I lean toward the generated-from-within theory. I think there's a psychological explanation for a lot of the experiences. It still bothers me that we don't know how consciousness works, why we have it, why we're the only ones. It's so bizarre that it's probably natural that humanity has gone crazy trying to explain it. I think religious people are absolutely insane, yet I envy their confidence or faith I guess they'd call it. That ignorance is bliss / blind loyalty to an idea has its psychological advantages. Belief in entities goes hand in hand with belief in aliens, I think. Probably caused by the anxiety of being the only sentient beings. Maybe our awareness of being above everything in the food chain has us kind of searching for an equal and looking out for a superior. Most ancient cultures were polytheist, even with animal and plant deities.

I think it's a shame that some people have frightful experiences. I've only had a few and after analyzing them I'm pretty sure they were caused by my own anxiety. In my experience, there was a trick to getting past that. Yea, we don't know wtf is going on, we don't know who's in control or why things are the way they are, yet clearly it's bigger and more complex than we knew. For me, I had to accept that. I had to surrender to the fact that I don't know everything and dunno what's going on but that I genuinely want to be here for it, whatever it may be. Idk if that's what bravery is, but it has a strong effect - an effect like people describe when they're in terrifying circumstances and they start praying to god and put their life in his hands kind of effect. Fear, dread, worry disappear. I guess it is faith in a way, I have a lot of faith in DMT. It's still nerve-racking every time I do it, but the underlying relationship is promising.

I'll pick on stareatclouds only because I genuinely want everyone to be able to have that relationship with DMT. Saying you got big balls on the internet and the way you talk to people is not necessary if you were truly confident in yourself. Feeling possessed by an entity is not something I've every felt in my many experiences, but I never believed in entities or aliens anyway. I'm not a psychiatrist but I feel like there is a reason for your experience. As far as being logical and non-paranormal, then calling DMT demonic, I think it's just overconfidence in the face of the inexplicable. You were all-in on logical, so when you experienced something you couldn't rationalize, you busted. I'm okay with simply being surprised and accepting not knowing, but with your ego you apparently have to back track and logic why it's so illogical; deep down you've convinced yourself that there actually must be paranormal entities. To me DMT is basically a magic trick; but you're super smart, logical, and immune to trickery so you've manifested demons as an explanation to satisfy your ego. I think your arrogance has made you gullible to your subconscious insecurities.


Edited by Icon (01/04/24 09:58 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblestareatclouds
star eat clouds?
 Unread Journal User Gallery


Registered: 09/29/14
Posts: 9,886
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: Icon]
    #28609962 - 01/04/24 09:49 PM (23 days, 10 hours ago)

Haha yeah, I don't think deep enough about things. All of our interactions were me politely explaining why your theories on DMT don't really hold water due to the many experiences disproving them. You kept stating demonstrably false or unfalsifiable ideas as fact, which I poiinted out. And then you freaked out like a child, screaming, "I NEVER WANTED TO INTERACT WITH YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE!" Whatever you say, Mr. "You can't fire me, I quit!"

Quote:

None of these are my "beliefs" and I think my reply to you was pretty reasonable and rational. I did think about and consider your points. There's no requirement or guarantee I won't find them poorly thought out. No idea how you're registering my open discourse on the topic as needing my beliefs to go unchallenged, either. I wish you could return fire with something thought provoking, man. Do it!





Quote:

I never wanted to interact with you in the first place, I really don't care what you think; you responded to me because my ideas apparently contradict yours. I've lost track of what your beliefs even are because you apparently only care about getting attention from disagreeing and personally attacking others.





lol, I responded in-depth to everything you said. You got angry because I pointed out examples that contradicted your "ideas ." You literally have negative reviews due to how you're well-meaning, but really uneducated about DMT. You have another bad rating where you kept insisting some random guy was another person, despite him telling you otherwise :lol: using your ego to do your deep thinking again, eh? And several more due to how uninformed you are on topics you speak about. I have one non 5-star review ever and it's Bardy from this thread, although I'm sure you'll add another.

My point is, you are basing your opinion of me on a single thread where you were not very polite and pleasant yourself. Yet your ratings as a whole from multiple people rate you as the things you're accusing me of -- you guys project so much, man.

But you're quoting someone who just makes up his own truths like he's a scholar :lol: so I'm wasting more of my time. "I merely find the idea that someone can be an atheist, take DMT and then become religious to be disingenuous", yeah, this is called your opinion, and it's a bad one. The disingenuous part is you changing it from "atheists become believers" into "take DMT and become religious." But par for the course with that dude. Regardless of what you want to be true, it flies in the face of tons of personal anecdotes, including an actual study from John's Hopkins where 28% believed in a higher power after. But rudely dismissing something factual I presented as bullshit is fine, but me calling that behavior pathetic is soooo messed up! How dare I talk to rude people who argue in bad faith with anything but smiles.

I wish I had the intellect of the geniuses in this thread. Believing whatever suits my personal beliefs and ignoring all evidence to the contrary without a hint of understanding how silly that is. Maybe in the future I can convince myself I'm Jesus or something like truly egoless person.

The entire point of my post was that there's no such thing as balls for psychedelics. Perhaps you should think deeper about things. Despite what I think of Bardy, especially with him speaking authoritatively on something he has zero experience in, I'd never want to encourage someone to take a deep dive when I know they aren't all pleasant trips. Especially if low level ones had him feeling uneasy. And I included personal details of a terrifying trip because those are things I wish I'd known could happen prior.

Instead of acknowledging it as a good faith post to share useful information, you're in here telling me I deserved it, ridiculing me for it, while deluding yourself into thinking you're taking the high road. This is why I call you guys pathetic. Because your actions are genuinely pathetic to me. But we're all different and that's okay. I'll be comfortable with who I am, calling out what I believe are shitty, dishonest actions.

You can be comfortable with your deep thinking, like telling me I deserved a bad trip. *PSSSSSTT...* People you care about will have bad experiences, too, buddy. Perhaps keep the quiet part inside so you don't make people you like feel shame.


Quote:

I'll pick on stareatclouds only because I genuinely want everyone to be able to have that relationship with DMT. Saying you got big balls on the internet and the way you talk to people is not necessary if you were truly confident in yourself. Feeling possessed by an entity is not something I've every felt in my many experiences, but I never believed in entities or aliens anyway. I'm not a psychiatrist but I feel like there is a reason for your experience. As far as being logical and non-paranormal, then calling DMT demonic, I think it's just overconfidence in the face of the inexplicable. You were all-in on logical, so when you experienced something you couldn't rationalize, you busted. I'm okay with simply being surprised and accepting not knowing, but with your ego you apparently have to back track and logic why it's so illogical; deep down you've convinced yourself that there actually must be paranormal entities. To me DMT is basically a magic trick; but you're super smart, logical, and immune to trickery so you've manifested demons. I think your arrogance has made you gullible to your subconscious insecurities.




Maybe you should edit another time and clear this of all the strawman arguments? Again, you visualized yourself as Christ himself with disciples. And of course you were lucky enough to be so smart to not fall into that trap. :lol: Listen to yourself talk, man. Of course you find it normal to invent some wild backstory of horseshit to explain something as subjective as someone else's DMT experience that you don't know shit about. But just as I told you in our first interaction (before you started PMSing), people get all sorts of fucked up trips out of nowhere. Unfortunately, your remedial explanation as just another one of your egotistical thoughts that isn't validated by the vast anecdotal evidence about trips.

One of the women in the original Strassman study was raped by some alligator entity. It kind of sucks you weren't there to drone on about how she deserved it and probably gave into foolish thinking. "It's not like the time I realized I was Jesus or saw something move it's legs in the dark. You brought this on yourself!"

It's amusing watching folks bend themselves into pretzels to try and hurt my feelers, especially while considering it some righteous action. Not a hint of irony. lol for how I talk to people. Check the scoreboard, junior. As stated, I'm actually extremely polite and respectful, known for humility, although it sounds funny saying it myself. Please consider the possibility that while I may have said mean words and insulted people directly, I didn't flip a coin to do so. But we've done this long enough.

Even arguing with people, I don't think I'd make fun of someone for sharing such an experience. I called people stupid for idiotic arguments that I believe were in bad faith (like ignoring studies I posted validating what I said). You're puffing up your own ego while shitting on a tough experience I had, all in the name of pretending you're egoless. Fortunately, I am confident enough in myself to where I don't mind being vulnerable by sharing a bad trip as long as it might help another prepare for their experiences. Even someone I was arguing with prior. I hope all of your trips are rad and safe.

Later.


Edited by stareatclouds (01/04/24 10:16 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineIcon
Bloomer
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 2,866
Last seen: 6 hours, 53 minutes
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: stareatclouds] * 1
    #28609979 - 01/04/24 10:07 PM (23 days, 10 hours ago)

"And I included personal details of a terrifying trip because those are things I wish I'd known could happen prior."

I think that is key. You went into something without knowing much about it, then made your own personal interpretation. All experiences are valid. I'm not saying you deserve a bad trip, I don't think trips can be bad anyway; duality requires human interpretation. but I don't wish anyone to suffer from psychological distress.

Just seems like you missed the point with DMT if you only do it a couple times and are scared off with crazy fears of demon possession. But to each their own. I disagree with preaching abstinence though. Just because you had a scary trip doesn't mean you should be concerning anyone else with your trauma. Being scared is a right of passage in DMT. It's part of the ride. You just interpreted it in an unfortunate way.

I think it explains your attitude on the forums too. I really don't think you're bad, but you're taking my dialog as some kind of personal attack and think it's necessary to dish it back or something. You're the one romanticizing these interactions with exaggerated emotions.


Edited by Icon (01/04/24 10:29 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblestareatclouds
star eat clouds?
 Unread Journal User Gallery


Registered: 09/29/14
Posts: 9,886
Re: A New Theory for the DMT Entities? [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
    #28609989 - 01/04/24 10:22 PM (23 days, 10 hours ago)

You absolutely said I deserved it, but it's nice to know that my post calling you out resonated. Glad you can at least feel some type of shame, even if it's only wanting to avoid being recognized by others for your true behavior. Here are more of my true thoughts on ego/balls and another example of how I treat people with challenging trips differently than you. The only personal interpretation is you inventing things that I don't think. This is why I called all of you clowns, by the way. Insisting you know about something you don't and speaking like an authority on something like this. It's seriously an awful personality trait.

If it's so noticeable on you that multiple people rate you negatively for it on a message board, you might want to consider changing something. Just the idea of trying to tell someone they're doing DMT wrong and "missed the point" of it. There is no universal point, you bumbling fool. These are the comments where I just immediately realize I am talking to people with very little value to offer our conversation. "I know I'm not a psychiatrist, but..." are things I'd never say unironically. Actual psychiatrists know not to do that, dude. It's legitimately against their code of ethics. Go think deeper, young Padawan. You legit sound like a teenager on reddit who smokes dirt weed and raves about the trichomes or some shit.

Sorry, buddy. I've got to block you now. The whole "take liberties with a story, twist it, and argue something different" makes me insult y'all for how pathetic it is. And mods don't want to clean up this dump site so I'll abide by their rules.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | Next >

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Injection Grain Bag   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Salvia + DMT = ?? ninjapixie 4,303 18 03/15/05 11:22 PM
by ninjapixie
* Can you get brain damage from a DMT overdose?
( 1 2 3 all )
trypyamine 45,564 50 05/04/12 06:53 PM
by dmtisnot4me
* DMT noise
( 1 2 all )
thedudenj 7,959 34 02/01/07 08:27 PM
by Feanor
* Has anyone used their vaporbrothers here for salvia, dmt or something else? darkstar45 1,850 3 08/18/09 03:53 PM
by 5544
* Oral DMT (with Moclobemide) - first time - The Realm of Shamans
( 1 2 all )
bluedolphin 12,419 22 06/26/19 01:25 PM
by ohfunkya
* Have you ever encountered an entity?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 16 17 )
NorthernerM 4,891 321 01/04/24 07:58 PM
by tree frog
* DMT - Reason behind "Alien abduction" mikeyboy 5,751 18 01/13/08 09:12 PM
by handicappedrat
* Dmt experiences - Question
( 1 2 all )
Dickhead 6,586 23 04/06/05 10:58 AM
by Fizikz

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: psilocybinjunkie, Rose, mushboy, LogicaL Chaos, Northerner, bodhisatta
2,400 topic views. 8 members, 68 guests and 13 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 13 queries.