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: Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Miracle-blindness
    #531482 - 01/25/02 10:34 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

As I was making a post to another topic I desided to make this a separate thread. The goal is to describe miracles and observe how Swami agonises at trying to disregard them. I propose that only simple and obvious examples be presented, no aliens or end of the world, just the stuff from everyday life. I would be surprized if we here on a spirituality board were unable to punch this guy into pulp with evidence (or die of laughter trying).

I suggest several random things (without order or topic)

1. Miracle of life. Science has been so busy explaining evolution with pure play of chance, and it has shrowded in silence the simple fact that over all these countless years it hasn't produced a single living thing even as simple as a virus or bacteria.

2. Miracle of dreams. Who is the seer of dreams and where is he located?

3. Miracle of the speed of light. Why is the speed of light exactly 299 792 458 m/c but not 238 357 854?

4. Miracle of society (language, government, economy, add your own). Given the currently known basic physical laws it is so improbable that such higher-order things would arize, I mean it is so freegin damn absolutely improbable, that it is not even funny. Yet, they do. Why?

5. The miracle of the unknown. If the miracles 1 and 4 indeed come about to be, then what other things might be around? Aliens? To me, the idea of aliens is just a riduculous parody to what might really be out there... No?

Of course I could go on like this for hours. Anyone else care to join?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #531535 - 01/25/02 11:22 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

The goal is to describe miracles and observe how Swami agonises at trying to disregard them.
Wow. I am totally flattered. This is the first thread dedicated to me *blushes*. However, to date I have felt no agony in responding to the generally outlandish claims here.

just the stuff from everyday life.
Please read my response on the 2012 thread. Everyday stuff may indeed be mysterious, but falls short of the definition of miraculous.

I would be surprized if we here on a spirituality board were unable to punch this guy inot pulp...
That doesn't sound like a spiritual stance to me. Somehow I thought these boards were about topics, but when people can't refute a point, seems that many want  to turn it into a personal confrontation. Well bring out the big guns and give it your best shot :blush:

I am not sure what your point is with your examples. They are interesting and fun ideas to ponder and research. No one, least of all me, claims to have the answers. Remember though, the unknown is not necessarily miraculous.


     


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineskaMariaPastora
Utopiate
Registered: 03/14/01
Posts: 443
Loc: MA
Last seen: 20 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #531570 - 01/26/02 12:05 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

The fact that we are conscious. Science can't even begin to explain why we exist as conscious, self-contemplating entities.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemissulena
enthusiast
Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 251
Last seen: 22 years, 4 days
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: skaMariaPastora]
    #531600 - 01/26/02 12:46 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Do you think being conscious and understanding yourself helps your chance of survival in anyway no matter how slight or do you think you could do without it and have the same chance of surviving as someone who is conscious and aware?
Natural selection and passing on the genes is what its all about.

Edited by missulena (01/26/02 01:03 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibletak
geo's henchman
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 11/20/00
Posts: 3,776
Loc: nowhereland
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: missulena]
    #531610 - 01/26/02 01:01 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

what does the speed of light thing mean?
3. Miracle of the speed of light. Why is the speed of light exactly 299 792 458 m/c but not 238 357 854?

is the second a random number, or what cause i dont know anything about it.

I was thinking about blindness the other day and how people cannot see colors..weird. But then what about dreams, i dream in color. Oh well. Also. My friend is coming to visit me this spring break, she has never been WEST...she says she hates hte heat...shes never experiances heat without humidity...i kinda assiciated that with blindness


--------------------
The DJ's took pills to stay awake and play for seven days.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineArCh_TemPlaR
enthusiast
Registered: 07/15/01
Posts: 200
Last seen: 21 years, 10 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #531616 - 01/26/02 01:06 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Uhmm.. About Swami, he's amusing. :smile:

Miracles?  Well, it's late, my system is about to shut down, here's the shorite:

I use this high-grade quality ginseng.  I heard this product was used by a very young child (9 years old) who had a brain tumor.  The tumor has gone into remission, vamooshed.  One of these days, I'm going to see this child for myself.

Anyways, this ginseng I have takes 6 years of cultivation, and it's not cheap!


KtP
ArCh

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineskaMariaPastora
Utopiate
Registered: 03/14/01
Posts: 443
Loc: MA
Last seen: 20 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: missulena]
    #531617 - 01/26/02 01:07 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Why would understanding calculus or figuring out the process of nuclear fusion help our survival in the jungle? If consciousness could be explained physically then we should have at least some theories about it.

I don't really know what I'm arguing about I'm pretty stoned right now, but I think the point is that there are plenty of things that modern science can't explain so just because science can't explain something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. ... agreed?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: skaMariaPastora]
    #531658 - 01/26/02 02:11 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Nothing matters any more. I fell in love tonight and THAT is the ultimate miracle!


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemissulena
enthusiast
Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 251
Last seen: 22 years, 4 days
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: skaMariaPastora]
    #531660 - 01/26/02 02:18 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Who would you rather helping you if you were on a stranded island -Einstein(a hypothetical einstein who was raised in the jungle) or a native with average mental ability?

Science can explain right now most of the things discussed in this forum but current SCIENTISTS today cant explain some things in this universe but it will al l be very clear in the near future to those not caught up in myth and magical fantasies. I think most scientists wouldnt even take many of these thoughts seriously thats why some questions are left unanswered.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMy Third Eye
old hand

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 11/02/00
Posts: 641
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531712 - 01/26/02 05:36 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

why is it that when things are known or proven by science they are considered not miraculous?..life in itself is miraculous to me..


--------------------
suddenly a flaming stealth banana split the sky
like one would hope but never really expect
to see in a place like this.
Cutting right angle donuts on a dime
and stopping right at my Birkenstocks,
and me yelping...Holy fucking shit!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLOBO
Vagabond

Registered: 03/19/01
Posts: 655
Loc: NY
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531729 - 01/26/02 06:21 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)



So now I see...., you just need it some zig-zig !


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDivine_Madness
member

Registered: 12/11/01
Posts: 182
Loc: The Netherlands
Last seen: 19 years, 4 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #531770 - 01/26/02 07:47 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Well, what I find to be very miraculess is the amount of people believing the pole shift and 2012 predictions blindly. How people blindly believe what shroomism and others are telling. And how even I can fall for this stuff at times.


--------------------
its all placebo

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531784 - 01/26/02 08:27 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)


Nothing matters any more. I fell in love tonight and THAT is the ultimate miracle!


Indeed! Love is the greatest thing.
I'm happy for you

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineskaMariaPastora
Utopiate
Registered: 03/14/01
Posts: 443
Loc: MA
Last seen: 20 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: missulena]
    #531793 - 01/26/02 08:47 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

>Science can explain right now most of the things discussed in this forum but current SCIENTISTS
>today cant explain some things in this universe but it will al l be very clear in the near future to those
>not caught up in myth and magical fantasies.

Galileo once had a "magical fantasy" about a heliocentric solar system and he also was ridiculed for his beliefs. Why don't people learn that the boundaries of what is known are being constantly pushed forward? What is a myth today (the 4th dimension, etc) could be something that is well known and understood a few years down the road. If we believe in only what we know today then there will be no chance for any progress.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531831 - 01/26/02 09:24 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Oh, no! He must have met Shroomism!

So, now, let's see... The amount of adrenaline raises every time the object is in close proximity. This must be due to the sympathetic nervous function. The erection you experience is due to the increased blood pressure in the pelvic area. Dreaming of the object of your passion must be due to subconscious brain activity while the brain chemistry is replenishing itself. Really, I must conclude you are not in love at all, this is all just body chemistry and instinctual desire to procreate. If you try to claim that you are not attracted to any other person, then I will claim this is an illusion caused by social conditioning and pherromonal compatibility with this particular object.

This is called miracle elimination. It is the primary goal of modern science. Try arguing with that.

-- Grib

P.S. I am happy for you.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: skaMariaPastora]
    #531869 - 01/26/02 10:21 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Galileo once had a "magical fantasy" about a heliocentric solar system and he also was ridiculed for his beliefs. Why don't people learn that the boundaries of what is known are being constantly pushed forward?
There is a huge disparity between a theory and a fantasy. Galileo studied the cosmos for years and tried to puzzle out the discrepancies in others' theories regarding the movement of celestial bodies.

The 4th dimensional shift is based on nothing at all. There is not one single piece of external data on which to form a hypothesis.

I sincerely hope that you can grok the difference.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531873 - 01/26/02 10:23 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Nothing matters any more. I fell in love tonight and THAT is the ultimate miracle!
Yes, I discovered a new object called a "mirror".


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: missulena]
    #531878 - 01/26/02 10:31 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Who would you rather helping you if you were on a stranded island -Einstein(a hypothetical einstein who was raised in the jungle) or a native with average mental ability?
Here you describe a classic misconception. A scientist is not just one who devotes hie entire career to research and is recognized as such by society-at-large, but anyone who follows the scientific method. When you bake a cake or grow mushrooms, you are practicing science.

Said native is a scientist in his own right. He has used observation, trial & error and deduction. He will be able to tell you when the monsoon season is about to start, which plant leaves to rub on your skin to take away the sting of a poisonous insect, the habits of the prey that he hunts, how to weave a basket, etc.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531880 - 01/26/02 10:31 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

The 4th dimensional shift is based on nothing at all. There is not one single piece of external data on which to form a hypothesis.

Says who?
Are you familiar with sub-atomic particles and the rate at which they vibrate?
Did you know that rate is increasing?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRevelation

 User Gallery

Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 6,135
Loc: heart cave
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #531891 - 01/26/02 10:43 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

The miracle of music and our appreciation of it.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531915 - 01/26/02 11:08 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Almost stepped out of the role on that one, eh? :smile:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #531939 - 01/26/02 11:28 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

I am not sure what your point is with your examples.

Ok, I'll try to explain. Take the speed of light for example. Or any other _basic_ physical law, such as any Maxwell equation, E=MC(squared), F=GmM/r(squared), etc. Clearly, many things can be "explained" in terms of these laws, some of these laws can even be "explained" in terms of other ones, but there is a basic minimal set of laws which can not be "explained". What does your science choose to do with those? It chooses to be silent and considers it "unscientific" to ask "Why is the speed of light this and not that".

In general, take a directly observable phenomenon P. What happens to the phenomenon P in the "scientific" mind, like yours is that

a) P is either considered worthy of further exploration, or P is considered unworthy of further exploration. The former would be anything scientists study, the latter is things scientists don't study. To the latter category belong all things which are "already known" -- everyday events, questions not considered scientific (why the brick fell on me and not others), questions not thought to have a plausible answer (why is E=MC(Squared)) etc.

b). If P is considered worthy of further exploration (which is the minority of things, mind you) it will be scrutinized either by observation or by contemplation until another phenomenon Q is found that is said to explain P.

c). Q could again be of several sorts. Q could be either worthy of further study, in which case a phenomenon R will be uncovered that is said to "explain" Q (go to step b) or Q could be one of things already explained (in which case the exploration stops and P is said to have been "explained", but step b. still has been valid for Q at some point in the past) or Q could be considered unworthy of further exploration (for example that the speed of light is this and not that).

In the end of the set of phenomena explored (E) another set of phenomena is produced (B) that is said to explain the whole of (E). (B) is the basic minimal set of laws that explain all other things.

Do you get the idea? By "explanation" you shift focus from one phenomenon to another until you tire and want to go no further. The way science chooses when to stop is a matter of convenience. How one can be satisfied with this state of things and choose to follow "science" is beyond me, reallly.

-- Grib.

P.S. I will now make a point of reminding you of things you didn't answer. So you can no longer avoid things that are "inconvenient to answer". Please explain to me why in all these years science was unable to produce a living thing, and still have the audacity to claim that life was created "accidentally".

Edited by gribochek (01/26/02 11:37 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #532073 - 01/26/02 01:39 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Ok, I will be more explicit. Your examples have NOTHING in common with Crop Circles, for example, which can be tested for anomolies; nor most any of the fanciful stuff posted here. You have veered off into a whole new territory, which is fine. This is an area of almost pure conjecture - the why and how of existence.

Science works. That is undeniable. Do we now know more than ever before about our universe? Yes, but there is a point where science can say no more, that is undeniable. That may always be so, no matter how deep our understanding gets. Does that mean that it is an unworthy pursuit to try to unlock some of the secrets? Of course not.

I would love for all the science bashers to have all their toys taken away: the cars, television and stereo, the heat and light, the hot running water and sanitation, the cheap and abundant food that stocks your grocery shelves - then the real whining would begin and perhaps some modicum of appreciation for the efforts of our experimental forefathers would set in.

Beyond that, it seems like you are trying to force some answer out of me about the "isness" of things. At that point it is time to shrug one's shoulders and ingest 5 grams of fungus.




--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #532084 - 01/26/02 01:47 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

So, now, let's see... The amount of adrenaline raises every time the object is in close proximity. This must be due to the sympathetic nervous function. The erection you experience is due to the increased blood pressure in the pelvic area. Dreaming of the object of your passion must be due to subconscious brain activity while the brain chemistry is replenishing itself. Really, I must conclude you are not in love at all, this is all just body chemistry and instinctual desire to procreate. If you try to claim that you are not attracted to any other person, then I will claim this is an illusion caused by social conditioning and pherromonal compatibility with this particular object.

Very good analysis. I am so proud of you. You win a swami-junior gold star and are well on your way to becoming an arrogant know-it-all . :blush:

I told my new lady that my attraction was all just pheromonal compatibility and instinctual desire to procreate. She got pissed and left - oh well.
 


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAdamist
ℚṲℰϟ✞ЇѺℵ ℛ∃Åʟḯ†У
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/23/01
Posts: 10,211
Loc: Bloomington, IN
Last seen: 9 years, 1 day
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #532352 - 01/26/02 07:20 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Swami do you realize that some of your automatic debunking methods create an environment of fear on these boards? After posting my first few times and having my words picked apart and refuted, I was scared to post anything else along the "unexplainable by science" lines.
Don't get me wrong, I understand that we need a degree of skepticism to keep us grounded.... but when your arrogant about it, thats not helping anyone.


--------------------
:heartpump: { { { ṧ◎ηḯ¢ αʟ¢ℌ℮мƴ } } } :heartpump:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #532924 - 01/27/02 11:50 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Ok. So we agree on some points at least.

it seems like you are trying to force some answer out of me about the "isness" of things.

Yes, but not only. The arrogance of science does not come from the drive to explore further. The arrogance of science comes from the drive to explore less! When you say "I don't believe laws of nature suspend themselves to allow for a miracle" what you say effectively is "I don't believe the laws _we_know_ don't work in this particular case". You are not preoccupied with the laws of nature, because naturally if there are laws of nature, they must work always, that's their definition after all, but you are preoccupied with the current knowledge and how well it stands up to the test by new and strange phenomena. And this is where arrogance starts. By saying "there are no aliens" or "there is no God" but "there is chance" and "there is atmospheric phenomenon" you effectively say "the building of knowledge we have built is sacred" instead of saying "we know very little, let's find out more".

Clearly, presented with a community of fanatics like Shroomism, you find yourself in a very beneficial position, where this attitude seems just and moral. There is no denial of that. But the ways and reasons you use to refute their arguments are closed off and often quite dirty (like the dictionary thing you have invented).

Let's talk for a minute about the phenomenon of "closed-eye vision" I have mentioned.

When you say there is no such thing, do you mean to say that I am a liar and a sensationalist? I hope not, because it would be stupid, for personally I have nothing invested in other people believing me. Then you must be saying that I misperceive something? This may be true, but I think what you are saying that I "misexplain" the phenomenon. You act as if I have said something about natural laws suspending themselves to allow me to see with my eyes closed. Really, must you think I this stupid? No, what is really going on is that this example challanges the way you think about the world. It challanges the premice that vision happens through photons hitting my retina which clearly can't be the case with one's eyes closed, right? So you invent a formula that keeps the basic premise in place. But my point is not that natural laws suspend themselves, but rather that we don't know the natural laws and never will, mind you, for the nature of being defies description in formulas and scientific articles. And this is something where you get scared of letting go of the baggage you have in your head. You are afraid to think of yourself as stupid and not knowing, and this is called arrogance.

-- Grib.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #533595 - 01/28/02 12:57 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Ok. So we agree on some points at least.
Of course we do. There is no such thing as an anit-Gribochek, nor an anti-Swami. There is some intersection between any two minds.

The arrogance of science does not come from the drive to explore further. The arrogance of science comes from the drive to explore less!
I have frequently heard the question, "Why don't scientists look further into the UFO (or other) phenomena?" Scientists are people with limited time and resources. So which scientists "should" research your favorite pet theory? As a computer scientist "should" I investigate aerial phenomena? My point is: because someone chooses NOT to explore a certain area, because A: they do not find it interesting or B: they do not believe that said research will bear fruit - you therefore determine that that is arrogance?

By saying "there are no aliens" or "there is no God" but "there is chance" and "there is atmospheric phenomenon" you effectively say "the building of knowledge we have built is sacred" instead of saying "we know very little, let's find out more".
To research something, first one must start on solid ground. I have never said "There are no aliens." rather "The evidence for the existence of aliens on earth, is very weak." So to get to the heart of the matter, one MUST brush aside misperceptions and hoaxes to see what is left. The noise has to be removed to see if there is, in fact, a signal.

When you say there is no such thing, do you mean to say that I am a liar and a sensationalist? I hope not, because it would be stupid, for personally I have nothing invested in other people believing me. Then you must be saying that I misperceive something? This may be true, but I think what you are saying that I "misexplain" the phenomenon.
I offered a possible explanation for the phenomena and suggested a test. Seems many people misunderstand no matter how many times I say it. To reiterate: I would love to find just one thing considered to be paranormal or outside of the accepted scientific paradigm. However, I will not be easily fooled merely because I have a desire to believe - this is called discrimination. I need substance, not just stories.

You act as if I have said something about natural laws suspending themselves to allow me to see with my eyes closed. Really, must you think I this stupid?
I have made no judgement as to your intelligence, either publicly or privatley.

No, what is really going on is that this example challanges the way you think about the world
An invalid assumption.

.It challanges the premice that vision happens through photons hitting my retina...
This is not a premise, but a fact.

..which clearly can't be the case with one's eyes closed, right? So you invent a formula that keeps the basic premise in place.
I offer a possible explanation for your experience and invite you to show me that my explanation is incorrect.

But my point is not that natural laws suspend themselves, but rather that we don't know the natural laws and never will, mind you, for the nature of being defies description in formulas and scientific articles.
This is a sweeping statement that argues against itself by the very nature of the method that we are using to communicate. If there was not some modicum of understanding, then technology would not exist.

And this is something where you get scared of letting go of the baggage you have in your head. You are afraid to think of yourself as stupid and not knowing, and this is called arrogance.
This is an amazing and incorrect assumption that you make. I am one of the most avid explorers around. I read several books a week and have done serious research in many fields both scientific and esoteric. This is the attitude of a lifetime student trying to grok the world that he lives in, not one who has the answers. I have no fear that something that you may show me will turn my world upside down. On the contrary, I would be most ecstatic. This is why, when possible, that I offer some way to test someone's hypothesis, such as your closed-eye visuals.

In 25 years though, I all have ever got from ANYONE postulating some form of esoterica is talk.

Telekinesis - move something for me. Never happened.

Telepathy - read my mind. Never happened.

Breatharianism - let me live with you 24 hours per day for a week to monitor your food intake. Turned down.

UFOs - let me see just one.

Astrology - have tested that on several occasions. Failed every time.

Closed-eye vision - navigate unknown terrain for me while blindfolded. Very simple. Doesn't require any laboratory nor hyperbole, merely a simple demonstration. What is so confounded difficult about that? Respond with a dozen paragraphs about my world-view and mindset. Who cares? SHOW ME!

All of this stuff to me is no different than being a good consumer. New weight-loss product or cancer cure? Show me the double-blind university-tested clinical trials.

Validation is neither evil nor close-minded. It is a rational and intelligent stance.



--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #533776 - 01/28/02 09:05 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

I have frequently heard the question, "Why don't scientists look further into the UFO (or other) phenomena?"

You know, myself I don't care about aliens. Nor clarvoyance, nor telepathy, nor any other thing like this, because I know that these are but a few of the endless, truly endless set of possibilities. I will not be running around trying to prove to everyone aliens exist, because a). I don't know that and b). if they did this wouldn't be important to prove anyway.

I would love to find just one thing considered to be paranormal or outside of the accepted scientific paradigm.

Ok. Life on earth. Please tell me it has been scientifically explained, please! :smile:


I need substance, not just stories.

You are calling me a liar, indeed! Well, you see, here is my point. In your pursuit of "truth" you would only consider reproducible events. Here is the problem, not all phenomena is reproducible at will. As simple as that. The closed-eye vision thing happened to me twice out of 10 -- 15 trips I had. What matters for its occurrence I don't know. The most prominent occurrence happened on the island of Cyprus. Will I be willing to go out of my way to Cyprus to prove something to you? Yes, if you pay for it :wink: And even though my wife seems to be more apt at this particular thing the phenomenon still couldn't be reproduced easily and surely. Is this the grounds for not considering it?


No, what is really going on is that this example challanges the way you think about the world
An invalid assumption.

This is not an assumption. Just think what sort of impact on your world view a thing like this would have.

photons hitting my retina...
This is not a premise, but a fact.

Yes, but this is a narrow definition of vision (optic vision). Blind people have a limited vision using their white sticks to probe the terrain, this is not optic. And I never claimed that vision with eyes closed is optic, it feels totally different from optic, but it is sure as hell more vivid then with probing sticks.

If there was not some modicum of understanding, then technology would not exist.

Did you study history of technology? Electricity was discovered by accident then explained by science. Radio was discovered by accident and then explained by science. Transistors were discovered by accident then explained by science. Psychedelic mushrooms were discovered by accident then explained by science. I could go on. There are many more things discovered without understanding then those first predicted by science. Your argument about technology doesn't work.

New weight-loss product or cancer cure? Show me the double-blind university-tested clinical trials.

Go read some articles by Garry Null. You'll find out amazing things about university-tested clinical trials.

(out of time, will write more later).

-- Grib
 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #533878 - 01/28/02 11:04 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Ok. Life on earth. Please tell me it has been scientifically explained, please!
Unknown causation does not equal paranormal, it means insufficient data.

I need substance, not just stories.
You are calling me a liar, indeed!
I truely don't mean to be insulting, but if my statement is calling you a liar then you have either a severe reading comprehension problem or extreme paranoia. You are seeing something that I never wrote.

Well, you see, here is my point. In your pursuit of "truth" you would only consider reproducible events.
I have covered this in depth on many occasions, I don't know what you get out of me repeating it again. For any phenomena to be understood,studied or accepted, it must be repeatable, otherwise two things are possible:

A. The reporter of the event misperceived what actually happened. (You can argue on this one ad nauseum, but there have been hundreds of psychological tests done to show that human perception is frequently faulty, so this MUST be ruled out for a new truth to be accepted.)

B. The causation is unknown.

Since A: You have not navigated an unknown course blindfolded in front of impartial observers, there is a possiblity (a strong possibility IMHO), that you misperceived what happened to you. Intoxicated people misperceive things all too frequently. ("Hey, I only had a few drinks and am OK to drive." - right!)

And B: It doesn't happen everytime, you can't even state for certainty that it is a mushroom trance that gives you this siddha. It could have been a shellfish that you ate on Cypress.

Here is the problem, not all phenomena is reproducible at will. As simple as that. The closed-eye vision thing happened to me twice out of 10 -- 15 trips I had. What matters for its occurrence I don't know. Is this the grounds for not considering it?
Depends what you mean by "considering" it. I have considered it and believe it to be a by-product of mushroom intoxication in the same way that breathing walls are a by-product. Do the walls actually move ( in consensus reality)? No. For me to accept it as a real phenomena takes more than an anecdote.

Yes, but this is a narrow definition of vision (optic vision). Blind people have a limited vision using their white sticks to probe the terrain, this is not optic.
It is called touch, and while they may form a sketchy internal picture of the world, does not qualify as vision. I would whip out Webster here, but don't want to drive you into a frenzy.

If there was not some modicum of understanding, then technology would not exist.
Your argument about technology doesn't work.
I have to say that this is the most far-out statement that you have made to date.
As an electrical and software engineer, I strongly disagree with you there. Try building a circuit board without understanding the laws behind electron theory. Try to build a new car engine without understanding thermodynamics, metallurgy, etc.
This is why people go to college, to absorb as much of the current body of knowledge available and hopefully to add to it. Technology is undertsanding and application of natural laws.

Whether said laws were discovered by accident or on purpose is irrelevant to technology. You made me laugh about the accidental discovery of the transistor. It was discovered at the Bell Research lab, that is what happens in research labs - that is why they exist. (Once again the Swam shows incredible restraint in not whipping out the dictionary.)

New weight-loss product or cancer cure? Show me the double-blind university-tested clinical trials.
Go read some articles by Garry Null. You'll find out amazing things about university-tested clinical trials.
Independent tests may be flawed, so what? It is a starting point. Instead though, you would have me swallow whole any outrageous claim made by a manufacturer/advertiser with NOTHING to back it up?

(out of time, will write more later).
Gee, I thought time was but an illusion...


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #534544 - 01/28/02 11:43 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Unknown causation does not equal paranormal, it means insufficient data.
Ok, this brings us much closer to the root of our disagreement. Please define paranormal for me (and, please, be so kind, don't appeal to the dictionary, say what _you_ think).

You are calling me a liar, indeed!
I truely don't mean to be insulting, but if my statement is calling you a liar then you have either a severe reading comprehension problem or extreme paranoia. You are seeing something that I never wrote.

This was ment as a half joke. I don't get insulted by anything, don't worry. A reading comprehention problem you mention is called reading between the lines, thank you.

For any phenomena to be understood,studied or accepted, it must be repeatable,

Understood? May be, depending on what one meens by understanding. Studied? Ok, I agree, definitely. But accepted? This is the most outrageous thing I heard! Why would lack of reproducibility prevent acceptance? Do we accept that sharks eat people sometimes along the coast of Australia? Can we reproduce it? Do we accept a beautiful sunset which we are told about by a friend who witnessed it, or do we demand a video-tape? No, you couldn't have meant "accepted"....

Try building a circuit board without understanding the laws behind electron theory.

I must make two points here.

1. Not with circuit boards, but with chemistry, significant practical success has been made by experimenters who knew nothing about atoms, molecules and the periodic table.

2. Although it is true that the understanding you talk about has strong practical significance, you can not with any degree of confidence say that it is "true" in some kind of universal sense unrelated to practical implications. Many examples can be given. Take every single scientific theory that has been superceded by another one. It was believed to be true and had practical use, then it didn't hold up to some new phenomenon and new theory emerged. Do you have any illusion that the current body of scientific theory is some kind of a "final draft"? Additionally one must consider examples such as accupuncture. (I hope in view of overwhelming amount of scientific evidence supporting it you will not claim that it is some sort of a hoax) Accupuncture has no understanding in the paradigm of current medical theory. It does, however, have a theory behind it, it talks about Chi and channels and chacras and stuff. Very useful for practical purposes, yet, does Chi and channels exist?

It was discovered at the Bell Research lab

It is irrelevant where it was discovered. By "accidental" here I mean to say that the theoretical science that existed at the time of discovery was unable to predict or assist the discovery. Kind of like with the three sixes in a row, did you say in advance "I am inventing a device to control electrical current with weaker current"? If not, then this was an accident.

(Once again the Swam shows incredible restraint in not whipping out the dictionary.)
I bow in deep apreciation.

-- Grib.




Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineArCh_TemPlaR
enthusiast
Registered: 07/15/01
Posts: 200
Last seen: 21 years, 10 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #534628 - 01/29/02 02:08 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Swami:

I have frequently heard the question, "Why don't scientists look further into the UFO (or other) phenomena?" Scientists are people with limited time and resources. So which scientists "should" research your favorite pet theory? As a computer scientist "should" I investigate aerial phenomena? My point is: because someone chooses NOT to explore a certain area, because A: they do not find it interesting or B: they do not believe that said research will bear fruit - you therefore determine that that is arrogance?


I'll add C: Institutes responsibly for the majority of funding studies and researching are very conservative. Therefore, researchers who are honestly interested in such studies are out of luck.

I'lll add D: field careerists are not going to risk their necks or their credibility.


Maybe it's more as fear and conservatism, than it is egos?

I have covered this in depth on many occasions, I don't know what you get out of me repeating it again. For any phenomena to be understood,studied or accepted, it must be repeatable, otherwise two things are possible:

Yeah, I remember laughing at such an assumption you made to one of my posts [chants]. Not that I was laughing at you, just the flabbergasted reaction I got. The way you phrased it within the context of what I conveyed is that you were implying I couldn't be trusted to just observe the phenomenon. As you said you couldn't even trust yourself from your own "filters and bias", it seems you manifest this characteristic upon others?

Anyhow, I do understand your way of thinking, but it seems you take the fun out of it! Or maybe through your searching, you drive too hard that you miss the beauty of the experiences people share here. My experiences I posted before I can never truly depict or duplicate the nature as it happened in mere words. You had to be there to see the moment unfold. It is not a phenomenon that science can reproduce objectively. We cannot objectified a human being as a lab rat in search of unequivocal truth in the name of science. Anyone who drives to such epistemological extreme is suspect of deeper internal issues..


And just for clarity, that last bit is just something to reflect on, I do not mean I'm pointing the finger at you particularily..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: ArCh_TemPlaR]
    #534739 - 01/29/02 07:22 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Maybe it's more as fear and conservatism, than it is egos?
My basic point is that we are all (more or less) free to spend our time and energies how we want. If you want to research UFOs, well then, God bless you, but don't decry the fact that I or others don't do it for you.

The way you phrased it within the context of what I conveyed is that you were implying I couldn't be trusted to just observe the phenomenon. As you said you couldn't even trust yourself from your own "filters and bias", it seems you manifest this characteristic upon others?
Once again. this is NOT the swami's judgement, is observable fact. Misperception abounds everywhere. Two people witness a bank robbery. One sees a black Ford getaway car, the other sees a blue Chevy. Venus is the number 1 object misidentified as a UFO. Even UFOlogists will acknowledge this as fact.

So to look past this, perceptual error MUST BE ruled out first to eliminate the noise from the signal.

Anyhow, I do understand your way of thinking, but it seems you take the fun out of it!
It all depends whether one is seeking amusement or truth...

you drive too hard that you miss the beauty of the experiences people share here.
I don't see superstition as beauty; perhaps you do. Thousands believe in astrology when there is not one drop of truth. I think it erroneous to base a life decision on some fanatsy like that. People give their power away all too easily.

A better example that hits home to everyone here is the dreaded War on Drugs. If the prohibtionists really examined the facts instead of swallowing everything that they were spoon-fed, prohibition would be impossible. The clear light of reason would make it so. Wouldn't that be wonderful?

Or maybe through your searching, you drive too hard that you miss the beauty of the experiences people share here.
Perhaps I will get ambitious and post some of my nature photos or some of my music. Then you can tell me how much beauty I miss. My attitude hardly precludes the appreciation of nature. That is an amazingly (to me) illogical leap that you make there.

We cannot objectified a human being as a lab rat in search of unequivocal truth in the name of science.
Many of the magical claims made here should stand up to examination without dissolution, but seems they cannot.

Anyone who drives to such epistemological extreme is suspect of deeper internal issues..
Please don't play junior pyschologist with me. Without being arrogant, I can say that I am probably one of the more balanced psyches here. I have the strength and energy of a young man (took 1 st place last year at SDSU in racquetball against 20 year olds), can talk about most any subject as I am extremely well-read, have great relationships, live in a beautiful area, express myself well verbally, artisitically and socially (yes, sometimes I am harsh here, but am truely caring and different in person) and many other fields, etc. I exhibit little sign of pathology...


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (01/29/02 09:26 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleCosmicJokeM
happy mutant
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/05/00
Posts: 10,848
Loc: Portland, OR
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #534768 - 01/29/02 08:19 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

gribocheck: go check out Other Drugs: 'best MHRB prep' and look at the tango Swami and I got into but not one second ago before i coincidentally hopped to this thread, very interesting indeed.

It's one thing to get involved with the sangha/satsang and it's
another to alienate yourself. In our posts are we really doing anything but turning other people off and inflating our own egos?.... are any of us the board's "teacher"? - I say no, none of us are.

In relating with others.
If I could make a suggestion..... could we post in a way that
would "work with others?" I.e., rather than having answers for
people, wouldn't it help if our words became grist for the mill (were work on our own spiritual self?). Our mode of communcitating with people is
not relating to them (in most of our posts). We are alienating ourselves. Everyone (including myself) wants to use the board to keep a 'connection' and feel liked and respected. We want to express ourselves freely.
A good example is the responses that you see from gnrm23 - he is well educated, but he doesn't come across with long dissertations or get "heavy" in his language. He keeps it simple. Using him as an example, you can see that what he writes is from the heart, is direct, and has it's depth in just a few words.

Whether 'you' think it is right or dharmic to "answer" peoples questions in believing that it will "force them to deal with whatever," is not a way of helping people. We would be most successful in listening and empathizing and then reply in a kind way, and my "peace/cj" ain't gonna cut it if i've done otherwise, for example

Can't we speak to each other mostly with your heart and not our heads (i like understanding big, complicated systems, but shit - outright critisism doesn't help anyone and i imagine some people must be afraid of posting with fuckers like us.

By assuming these people are "not ready" in some sort of way due to being afraid of an answer is wayyyyyyy out of tune of what this satsang (all of us) is all about. i think with spirituality we keep it simple... and that doesn't mean as in "simpleton-minds" on the board, it means in the heart. where it goes from within there is our freedom.


--------------------
Everything is better than it was the last time.  I'm good.

If we could look into each others hearts, and understand the unique challenges each of us faces, I think we would treat each other much more gently, with more love, patience, tolerance, and care.

It takes a lot of courage to go out there and radiate your essence.

I know you scared, you should ask us if we scared too.  If you was there, and we just knew you cared too.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: CosmicJoke]
    #534821 - 01/29/02 09:38 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

gribocheck: go check out Other Drugs: 'best MHRB prep' and look at the tango Swami and I got into but not one second ago before i coincidentally hopped to this thread, very interesting indeed.
Yes, please do. CJ states flatly that my stance against the ayahuasca purge is responsible for the destruction of the rain forest. OK, whatever...

It's one thing to get involved with the sangha/satsang and it's another to alienate yourself.
Perhaps, like you, I should use the word "fuck" more often in my replies to display my emotional maturity...

In relating with others. If I could make a suggestion..... could we post in a way that would "work with others?"... Can't we speak to each other mostly with your heart ...
I suggest someone should try a hydrochloric extraction and you go off on some tangent while making it highly personal, then come here and say "Why can't we all just get along?" Try setting an example before getting on the pulpit.

Namaste.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: CosmicJoke]
    #534828 - 01/29/02 09:46 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

When one sees a ritual sword fight it is somewhat strange to then go up to the fighting parties and tell them to resolve their differences peacefully.

gnrm is a true guru-of-the-board, I can not even hope to be like him.

Thanks for the reality check, tho.

-- Grib


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #534836 - 01/29/02 09:55 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

I apologize for get sucked in *the swamiji hangs head in shame*.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #535285 - 01/29/02 08:08 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

Are you putting your sword down, Swamiji-san? And to think that now you, your children and your grandchildren alike must commit ritual suicide...

As for the rainforest, I think he is shooting too low. My personal favourite blame I would pin on you is 7 million children drugged by ritalin and prozac from age 4.

-- Grib.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #535516 - 01/30/02 12:59 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

I had a moment of weakness where I bowed to peer pressure to put relationships before truth and honor. I just can't do it!

*Picks up sword* Go ahead - blame away. I can take it; and certainly can dish it out.

*Raises head with Dignity* The Swam is back! One cannot deny their true nature. That is the lesson that I have learned today.

Thanks for that cold slap in the face, Grib,


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: gribochek]
    #535522 - 01/30/02 01:03 AM (22 years, 1 month ago)

...7 million children drugged by ritalin and prozac from age 4.
Ah, yes - the Partnership for a Drug-Free America... too much!


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegreenpin
wierdo
Registered: 11/22/01
Posts: 13
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 21 years, 20 days
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #536272 - 01/30/02 07:03 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

From reading all of this. I constantly wonder how people get the way they are. But really, what is the point of having a question like that?

Why would it even matter if you got an answer to a open ended question like that.


--------------------
-stoly

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinegribochek
enthusiast
Registered: 04/18/99
Posts: 286
Last seen: 19 years, 11 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #536351 - 01/30/02 08:48 PM (22 years, 1 month ago)

So then reply to my earlier post or stand deshonored and defeated, you arrogant materialist, you!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineArCh_TemPlaR
enthusiast
Registered: 07/15/01
Posts: 200
Last seen: 21 years, 10 months
Re: Miracle-blindness [Re: Swami]
    #542756 - 02/06/02 04:58 PM (22 years, 27 days ago)

My basic point is that we are all (more or less) free to spend our time and energies how we want. If you want to research UFOs, well then, God bless you, but don't decry the fact that I or others don't do it for you.

Yeah, if it was about UFOS, I could understand why its shied away from the scientific community.  Either way, conservatism exists.  I wasn't harping about it..

Once again. this is NOT the swami's judgement, is observable fact. Misperception abounds everywhere. Two people witness a bank robbery. One sees a black Ford getaway car, the other sees a blue Chevy. Venus is the number 1 object misidentified as a UFO. Even UFOlogists will acknowledge this as fact.

So to look past this, perceptual error MUST BE ruled out first to eliminate the noise from the signal.


If you looked back at the tone of how I presented my experiences, it was not about attempting to assert them as unequivocal facts!  I said it before already.  Perceptual correctness or not, I value my honesty and my ability to present my thoughts as honest as possible.. I do value precision but not absolutely and not for scientific perfection as a mindset.. 

It all depends whether one is seeking amusement or truth...

Our angle may be different? I rather learn then believe.. I rather watch than seek..

I don't see superstition as beauty; perhaps you do. Thousands believe in astrology when there is not one drop of truth. I think it erroneous to base a life decision on some fanatsy like that. People give their power away all too easily.

Let's narrow it down to "Miracles of Shrooms" thread as a reference point to my previous comments.  In  context of those experiences, they are singular, isolated phenomenons at that moment in time and no more.  The epistemological value is rather impermanent and is not the aggregate of total truth -- because, I agree, is quite extremely difficult to duplicate in controlled settings.  Why? It's unique, it's called latent talents surfacing.  Not everybody can do what I do. And I cannot do what everybody else could.

As far as Astrology, there are billions of rocks in the sea but only a few jems to find.  There are probably many crappy, specious astrologers and there are few genuine ones..

A better example that hits home to everyone here is the dreaded War on Drugs. If the prohibtionists really examined the facts instead of swallowing everything that they were spoon-fed, prohibition would be impossible. The clear light of reason would make it so. Wouldn't that be wonderful?

Yes, it sure would..  :smile:

Perhaps I will get ambitious and post some of my nature photos or some of my music. Then you can tell me how much beauty I miss. My attitude hardly precludes the appreciation of nature. That is an amazingly (to me) illogical leap that you make there.


Sure, I love to see the uh other side of Swami! :P  I only stated within the context of what you've written previously, following this thread about Miracles.  I dare not make any leaps..  IF I did I apologize..

Many of the magical claims made here should stand up to examination without dissolution, but seems they cannot.

Yep.. Our angle is different.  I do not mind if unscientifice anomalies cannot stand up to examination nor do I place personal emphasis on beliefs.  I realized I don't need the baggage of beliefs.  Though, I *can* be affected by it, temporaly. Sometimes, I had no choice to make quantum leaps when my life depended on it.

Please don't play junior pyschologist with me. Without being arrogant, I can say that I am probably one of the more balanced psyches here. I have the strength and energy of a young man (took 1 st place last year at SDSU in racquetball against 20 year olds), can talk about most any subject as I am extremely well-read, have great relationships, live in a beautiful area, express myself well verbally, artisitically and socially (yes, sometimes I am harsh here, but am truely caring and different in person) and many other fields, etc. I exhibit little sign of pathology...

I did say suspect, not unequivocally.  I'm basing on psychology of Freud and Jung.  Anyone claiming he/she understands themselves to the level of the subconscious would be quite a 'miracle'. :laugh:  Like I said, it was meant as a reflection for you -- within the context of your posturing in here and the forum, not to insinuate an attack.  I'd never dare to insult oh grand master Swami. :P

And just to assuage my ego (ahahah in good humor).. I probably understand better than most psych grads at my hometown..

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Do we place too much trust in scientists and doctors?
( 1 2 3 all )
SneezingPenis 4,450 49 07/28/06 12:54 PM
by tallgreen
* I want to debate a "creation scientist".
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )
Phluck 16,420 232 12/01/04 04:26 PM
by Diploid
* Why did "real" miracles only happen long ago?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Swami 7,067 77 08/30/04 08:54 AM
by silversoul7
* blind leaders of the blind soulmotion 831 13 02/08/05 10:00 PM
by Frog
* shroom induced miracles?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
YouInfoIt 6,038 81 01/24/02 09:53 PM
by Swami
* Saint's Dried Blood Liquefies in 'Miracle' Anonymous 682 1 09/20/02 09:37 PM
by Swami
* Miracle of Life mikebart101 1,732 17 01/26/07 09:57 PM
by fireworks_god
* Scientist's Research Debunked LunarEclipse 2,260 18 12/31/05 03:03 PM
by MushmanTheManic

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,677 topic views. 0 members, 7 guests and 2 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 0.039 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.