Sparks, DMT, Strassman, Strieber and Entities

[CapnG]

CapnG,
I'm perplexed at your comments, I've never said - or even implied - that "all artists are incapable of creative thought and it is only by the grace of their drug use that any work of note is produced".

How can you say that when earlier you said this:

Take drugs away out the equation, and much of the better music of the last 80 or so years vanishes into thin air.

What that directly implies is that you believe that WITHOUT the use of drugs, those musicians would have been incapable of producing that music. Your words, not mine.

I'm all for individual freedom, the ability to do whatever one wants to one's own body, without interference from government operatives who toast the day's pot busts with big glasses of wine and whisky. That's Hypocrisy with a capital H, and I'm not cool with it. I can make my own decisions about what's good or bad for me, no need for the God-fearing fundamentalists to tell me how to get into their talking-monkey God's graces.

You'll get no argument from me on this. Even if you don't buy the whole CIA-drug angle, I think 90% of drug busts have less to do with law enforcement and more to do with maintaining the elite's stash...

As far as reality tunnels, again, you're taking some extreme stance and trying to imply that I've stated that I support that position.

No, I said I had a problem with that line of thinking, not "Holy crap David, you're sooooooo wrong!"

The Preznit thinks that God is talking to him, and that Jesus the Magikal Jew will love him even if he starts a nuclear holocaust. Holy Bat Guano. It's back to POV - I'll take the insanity of Secular Humanism over this other crap any day of the week.

But he's a idiot. I mean really, boredline retarded. You can size me up for a straightjacket too but I think that, as a bear minimum requirement, the man with his finger on the button of the largest nuclear stockpile on earth should at least be able to pronounce NUCLEAR.

[/i]Most? I don't think so, perhaps some, maybe even many, but a majority of scientific discoveries are the product of the scientific method, which is anything but accidental or random.

Pennicillin. Radio. Electricity. Etc... I wasn't saying these things materialize out of thin air but the catalyst for their research is usually some random discovery or observation.

The human brain is something we understand precious little about, so don't get so high on the idea that our science is absolute. The amount of knowledge we have about our own brains is really minimal, much less an understanding of why we appear to not use the majority of said brain.

Myth. We have a damn good idea what the brain is all about. The notion that we only use 10% of our brains is an urban legend, that's like saying "we only use 10% of our lungs". Clearly, we use 100% of our brains. Do we know everything about the brain? No. Do we know more than we did 100 years ago? 50 years ago? Yesterday? Hell yeah.

I suspect that our evolution is pretty frikkin far from being over; based on the way people seem to treat each other and the state of the species in general, I'd say we're not even at the halfway point.

Just out of curiosity, what makes you so sure we're on a path to a more noble form? Perhaps our evolutionary path is taking us in a direction that makes us more savage, more brutal and even less empathetic. Top predators becoming more vicious over time by preying on ourselves... just a thought.

Who knows, perhaps the secrets of the Universe are there for all to see, in a fungus that grows on the smelly stuff that plops out of a cow's ass. I'd like to believe that THE CREATOR™ has an awesomely wicked sense of humor, and that would be proof positive.

If it were, I wouldn't be laughing. It would be on par with everything else on this planet though...

Here, have a nice cup of tea and think about it. I'll put on a sweet Duran Duran record, and we can talk about how the draconian drug laws of the eighties have been such a resounding success for the precious little children, the ones who will one day wax poetic about the wonders of real cheese food™, instead of that soy and lecithin-based mess they'll be stuffing into their pieholes in twenty years, when all the cows are dead.

Depends who for. No doubt for the PTBs they've been a resounding success; drug crime is up, freedom is down, the populace is fat, lazy, stupified, ignorant and scared.

I think I'll have coffee though. And get something to eat... cuz I'm hungry... like the wolf...

 

[RedClover]

Just to add a little bit to this thread, earlier CapnG had mentioned Dr. Persinger and his experiments. Well here is a nice little 3 page article from Discover Magazine that covers both Persinger and his God helmet as well as Dr. Strassman's DMT experiments. The article can be found at

The God Experiments | DiscoverMagazine.com

Cheers-

RedClover

 

[Mogwa]

This thread takes me back to those halcyon days in Bloomington where I'd observe debates between the juicers and stoners over which brand of neuron strangler was least damaging or most beneficial in relieving the sundry stresses of life. The stoners always won because nobody could understand a word they said, and the juicers usually puked and passed out before they could offer a full rebuttal.
I avoided the whole issue by swilling Pepsi by the case and filtering my entire consumption of oxygen through a smoldering Marlboro. Now I'm a wheezing diabetic, while those old comrades of a wilder bent, at least those who survived those strange days, are running corporations from the comfort of mink lined hot tubs. I suppose there's some kind of rough justice in my fate, but I'm damned if I know what it is.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: oy.

 

[mjw]

I don't believe psychedelic drugs are a "gateway" to a "higher conciousness".

CapnG,

What do you mean by "higher consciousness"? If you put those words in quotes because you heard them from someone that has used a psychedelic drug then really how do you even know what he is talking about if you haven't experienced it yourself? By no means am I encouraging you to try a psychedelic drug, (if you already view them negatively then you are pretty much guaranteed to have a very negative time while on them lol) I'm just wondering how you think you know so much about it when the experience is all internal and subjective. You say that you have watched people take psychedelics (which ones?) recreationally and that it was amusing to you but all you have of their experience is your external observation. Just curious.

We can hook Talks-with-Ghosts up to an MRI if you like and chart the utterly predictable responses to his brain chemistry.

lol

 

[CapnG]

CapnG,

What do you mean by "higher consciousness"? If you put those words in quotes because you heard them from someone that has used a psychedelic drug then really how do you even know what he is talking about if you haven't experienced it yourself?

A better question would be what do the people who make those claims mean by it and what criteria are they basing that on?

I'm just wondering how you think you know so much about it when the experience is all internal and subjective.

Please understand the core of my argument: I am not dismissing the experiences themselves nor am I claiming to understand them. I'm not even really attempting to depreciate them, if the person on the drugs has a positive experience well, good for them. What I am saying is that the notion that these are somehow "otherwordly" experiences is ludicrous, they're hallucinations. Vivid? Sure. Life altering? Perhaps. But hallucinations all the same. It's what the science is telling us and it's what basic, deductive reasoning tells us.

You say that you have watched people take psychedelics (which ones?) recreationally and that it was amusing to you but all you have of their experience is your external observation. Just curious.

Mushrooms of some sort and weed (if weed counts). Most of them tended to just sit there with a glazed look. I had one roomie for whom EVERYTHING we said became hysterical and we'd often have to leave the room for a while to prevent him from asphixiating because he'd be laughing so hard. Also another once spent a good ten minutes rubbing his hands against the wall because he was convinced it was rippling or bubbling or something. There's probably other stuff but that's what I remember most.

And all any of us have is observation. If it's good enough for science, it's good enough for me.

 

[interestedINitall]

Who is this "Talks-with-Ghosts" person (such an odd sobriquet piqued my curiosity)?

Thanks to the blessed features of this message board I'm unable to reading certain people's ravings and am only seeing them excerpted in other people's posts.

 

[CapnG]

Who is this "Talks-with-Ghosts" person (such an odd sobriquet piqued my curiosity)?

Nobody, he's my imaginary, generic, shaman archetype, slumped over on the floor of the sacred cave as he drools while "communing with the spirits". Heavy stuff, man, groovy.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Capn, you need a avatar. I have one of Yoda smoking a joint you should use. Not quite DMT, or LSD, but close enough I hope. I also have one of Yoda having sex with a sheep, but I use that at a dating site I am on. Er, or was... They deleted my profile because of it


I didn't know the ignore worked for forum posts. I hoped it did, but just figured it blocked PMs. I LOVE this feature. I have 3 people on it. Would be 5 or 6 but some left or already got banned.

 

[interestedINitall]

I didn't know the ignore worked for forum posts. I hoped it did, but just figured it blocked PMs. I LOVE this feature. I have 3 people on it. Would be 5 or 6 but some left or already got banned.

Doesn't it work like a dream?!

 

[Koji K.]

In the interests of clarity (since we are talking about a well-established branch of science here, ie, pharmacology), DMT is not technically a hallucinogen. It's a disassociative. Apples and oranges.

I think anyone who brushes entheogenic experiences under the carpet when it comes to ufology, and the 'abductee phenomenon' in particular, is being foolish, especially when it comes to DMT.

I've never tried DMT, I don't plan to. But I've done a lot of reading (no, not just the "Spirit Molecule" book, but it is good...) in the matter and the similarities between abductee reports and DMT experiences are absolutely astounding.

On a broader note, psychologists have used LSD, psylocibin, and other such entheogens for years in their researches, and they have produced much more concrete, and scientifically solid results, than hypnosis, in their respective and various goals. So why anyone would accept the latter but discount the former in exploring 'abductions' and similar experiences is being highly and inexplicably selective, to say the least.

This isn't about dropping out, tuning in, and turning on (or whatever the hell that phrase was.) It's about research and keeping an open mind. Discounting pharmacology in exploring the abductee phenemonon makes about as much sense as discounting astrophysics, astronomy, biology, or any of a thousand other very grounded fields of science (much more grounded than hypnosis, I dare add).

Budd Hopkins and John Mack might have something to say about all this, but McGruff the Crime Dog doesn't. (Zing! I slay me.)

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I dealt with a case in which the person reporting the abduction took shrooms regularly. Due to the possibility of having flash backs occur this weakened his case, not strengthened it in my view. Were the beings he encountered in some way real? Possibly. Unfortunately, since it is factually known that he took certain drugs, hallucinating is on the table taking up more space than real encounters, until something more substantiated gets brought forth.

 

[Koji K.]

I dealt with a case in which the person reporting the abduction took shrooms regularly. Due to the possibility of having flash backs occur this weakened his case, not strengthened it in my view. Were the beings he encountered in some way real? Possibly. Unfortunately, since it is factually known that he took certain drugs, hallucinating is on the table taking up more space than real encounters, until something more substantiated gets brought forth.

I think I see your point. Use of mind-altering substances is an extra variable that can cause unhelpful confusion, it's true. But I think this is all the more reason we need proper research in a *controlled* setting, especially as regards DMT. It's one thing to have someone who uses such drugs recreationally to come forth with an abduction story, but another to administer the drugs clinically to an otherwise "clean" individual and observe/record the results. (With their informed consent, needless to say.)

This isn't to promote the use of drugs, but rather to promote an avenue of research which could be very illuminating on the abduction/contact phenomenon.

I think also it should be reiterated that the DMT experience is completely unlike the hallucinogen experience (eg, shroooms, acid, mescaline, etc). Subjects of experiments with DMT report in statistically significant numbers contact with entities in situations very reminiscent of abductions or "contact scenarios," whereas users of hallucinogens tend to report a very different set of experiences, usually the more mundane (but still seemingly profound) visual and auditory hallucinations of patterns and colors.

 

[RedClover]

To Koji K.

You said that you have done a lot of reading in regards to DMT and entity contact. Could you name some of the reading material you might recommend?

 

[Koji K.]

To Koji K.

You said that you have done a lot of reading in regards to DMT and entity contact. Could you name some of the reading material you might recommend?

The bulk of the reading I did was about 6-7 years ago when I was studying psychology. I basically got bored in the psych library where I spent a lot of time and would look up entries in the various electronic journal databases we had. I know it sounds like a cop out, but I can't for the life of me remember what that databases were called or any specific journal titles. I think one may have been the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs. I don't have access to these resources anymore, but a large public library or academic science library, if you have access to either, should have people who can point you in the right direction.

I do remember aside from Strassman's book 'DMT: The Spirit Molecule' that Alexander Shulgin mentions DMT and entity contact in his book 'Tryptamines I Have Known and Loved' (aka 'TIHKAL'). Gracie and Zarkov wrote some material on DMT and entity contact (I believe they coined the 'machine elve' phrase, although not certain on that), as did Terrance McKenna, Timothy Leary, and Peter Meyer. Specific titles of these last three I don't remember so well. Aside from Shulgin and Strassman, none of these latter names are medically qualified in any "respectable" way, but there is some stuff in the "real" journals, I just can't remember the names.

Also, while not dealing specifically with DMT (to my knowledge), Stanislav Grof has dealt with 'entity contact' as a result of altered states of consciousness in a clinical setting.

You might be interested in checking out the always useful erowid.com's DMT section at Erowid DMT (Dimethyltryptamine) Vault - Lots of stuff there, including works by some of the above, and dealing with 'contact'.

Hope any of this helps!

 

[CapnG]

I think I see your point. Use of mind-altering substances is an extra variable that can cause unhelpful confusion, it's true.

Ya think? Doesn't the very fact we refer to these substances as "mind altering drugs" speak volumes about the potential for innacuracy and fabrication?

I think also it should be reiterated that the DMT experience is completely unlike the hallucinogen experience (eg, shroooms, acid, mescaline, etc). Subjects of experiments with DMT report in statistically significant numbers contact with entities in situations very reminiscent of abductions or "contact scenarios," whereas users of hallucinogens tend to report a very different set of experiences, usually the more mundane (but still seemingly profound) visual and auditory hallucinations of patterns and colors.

Proving what? That use of DMT promotes a specifc reaction? So? The results of morphine use are well known, yet no one questions why the patient suddenly feels no pain. It's not a "miracle", it's chemistry.

If DMT creates these incredibly vivid "encounters" then that tells us more about the nature of DMT than it does about the validity of these so-called "contacts". Since all we are is a couple pounds of grey goo in a skull-shaped box, all reality is based on input. A chemical potent enough to override that input totally would create illusiary circumstances that would by definition appear totally real, yet be completely false.

As an aside, I don't recall anyone around here touting hypnosis either (not in this thread anyway). Certainly it wouldn't be me. Hypnosis makes for light entertainment but a poor research tool.

 

[Koji K.]

Ya think? Doesn't the very fact we refer to these substances as "mind altering drugs" speak volumes about the potential for innacuracy and fabrication?

Sure. You're kind of commenting on a very small portion of my thought there, though. I never said if you're a UFO witness or contactee or whatever you should rush out and do drugs right after your UFO experience. I'm just talking about the need for more research into the effects of some drugs because it could shed light on the abductee phenomenon. For example, maybe learning what effects the drugs have on the brains of individuals who report abduction-like experiences on DMT could shed light on brain states implicated in "actual" abductions (for lack of a better word.)

It all boils down to how you want to approach the phenomenon for research, and this seems a very promising avenue, given the uncanny similarities in the experiences reported by DMT subjects and abuctees.

Proving what? That use of DMT promotes a specifc reaction? So? The results of morphine use are well known, yet no one questions why the patient suddenly feels no pain. It's not a "miracle", it's chemistry.

If DMT creates these incredibly vivid "encounters" then that tells us more about the nature of DMT than it does about the validity of these so-called "contacts". Since all we are is a couple pounds of grey goo in a skull-shaped box, all reality is based on input. A chemical potent enough to override that input totally would create illusiary circumstances that would by definition appear totally real, yet be completely false.

It tells you about the nature of DMT maybe more than other things, yes, but you dismiss these contacts as being somehow "invalid" when I think we don't even know how to call a contact "valid" or "invalid" (since we, or at least I, don't know at all what they are to begin with). Certainly drugs can create illusions of things that aren't real, but if you have an illusion of something that's very similar to some other experience that you can't define, maybe that thing that can't be defined is working on the same parts of the brain.

I don't know if that's true or not, I'm just saying maybe, hence the need for more research from all possible avenues.