This Forum is For Your Experiences

[Jenny Chan]

I don't buy the "copy" scenario, and I'll tell you why. There's an experience aspect in NDEs where a person is on the operating table - and "dies." This individual is in the room as spirit, usually hovering over the table, watching everything that goes on. When the body is resuscitated this "spirit" goes back into the body. Later, they have a discussion with the doctors regarding everything they "saw" - and it's all verified.

So ... what went "back into the body?" A "copy?"

Whatever this "spirit" is, it's part of the physical construct. It was there at the time of conception, in both sperm and egg, because these component parts were "built" by the mother and father's bodies, where this "spirit" aspect is just part of everything that goes on.

The bottom line for me is that every cell in our body has this "spirit" aspect as part of the overall picture, and just like the physical body functions as it does, and the brain functions as it does, this "spiritual" component is a cell by cell build of the original. This is why it functions as it does, and the "bad spirits" are just like they were in their physical life because it's them.

This wouldn't be a "copy" ... it would be a componant part continuation of the original build.

The "copy" theory reminds me of the science behind Star Trek transporting and ironically in the New Testament mentions the resurrected bodies in Heaven will be different than our original bodies. I feel both are much different than downloading your "engrams" into a digital file- that is a "soulless" copy. I think a human demonstrates that "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts".

And in real life, since we have old cells that are replaced by new cells, we technically don't have a fixed body anyway, yet we maintain a sense of continuity.

 

[Randall]

And in real life, since we have old cells that are replaced by new cells, we technically don't have a fixed body anyway, yet we maintain a sense of continuity.

I like the way you think ?‍?

 

[Onlychild]

What all this shows is - we simply have no defining information ... just ponderings and guesswork as usual. Even the biblical approach mentioned above was wrong, because the entire picture was made up. Since the main theme was debunked, nothing else can be trusted.

All we have as data is what we call the paranormal subject, and until the day comes where someone properly defines THAT mess ... we simply don't know. This creates a problem in other subjects as well, like the ET / abduction scenario for instance, where people believe this terrifying aspect of the subject is ET. Nope. It's paranormal, and deals with the exact same non-empathic aspect we see here on earth every day.

 

[marduk]

I don't buy the "copy" scenario, and I'll tell you why. There's an experience aspect in NDEs where a person is on the operating table - and "dies." This individual is in the room as spirit, usually hovering over the table, watching everything that goes on. When the body is resuscitated this "spirit" goes back into the body. Later, they have a discussion with the doctors regarding everything they "saw" - and it's all verified.

So ... what went "back into the body?" A "copy?"

Whatever this "spirit" is, it's part of the physical construct. It was there at the time of conception, in both sperm and egg, because these component parts were "built" by the mother and father's bodies, where this "spirit" aspect is just part of everything that goes on.

The bottom line for me is that every cell in our body has this "spirit" aspect as part of the overall picture, and just like the physical body functions as it does, and the brain functions as it does, this "spiritual" component is a cell by cell build of the original. This is why it functions as it does, and the "bad spirits" are just like they were in their physical life because it's them.

This wouldn't be a "copy" ... it would be a componant part continuation of the original build.

I think you're heading down a 'the universe is a hologram' path.

Some physicists believe we're living in a giant hologram — and it's not that far-fetched

The wild idea, explained in basic English.

www.vox.com

 

[Onlychild]

I think you're heading down a 'the universe is a hologram' path.

Some physicists believe we're living in a giant hologram — and it's not that far-fetched

The wild idea, explained in basic English.

www.vox.com

When the scientists make up their minds about that subject, we can talk about it.

Why Our Universe is Not a Hologram - Universe Today

 

[marduk]

When the scientists make up their minds about that subject, we can talk about it.

Why Our Universe is Not a Hologram - Universe Today

they won't, because it's akin to string theory. An interesting idea, that's fundamentally untestable, and therefore not science.

But it is interesting.

 

[Onlychild]

they won't, because it's akin to string theory. An interesting idea, that's fundamentally untestable, and therefore not science.

But it is interesting.

Yeah ... but is it real? Not my area.

 

[marduk]

Yeah ... but is it real? Not my area.

Above you claim abductions are paranormal, not ET.

I don’t claim to be an abductee but I stared one of those little bastards in the eye once. Never said a word to me.

But I’m fairly sure that if I punched it in the face, it would feel it. Not that it would let me.

That make it real? I dunno. Don’t know if it was an ET or something else. But I do think it was physically there.

 

[Onlychild]

Above you claim abductions are paranormal, not ET.

I don’t claim to be an abductee but I stared one of those little bastards in the eye once. Never said a word to me.

But I’m fairly sure that if I punched it in the face, it would feel it. Not that it would let me.

That make it real? I dunno. Don’t know if it was an ET or something else. But I do think it was physically there.

I would have to go by your story because I wasn't there. You evidently saw something ... I can't say what it was.

I've been involved is this subject for decades, and I've never been abducted once. I've had paranormal attempts to make me think I was headed in that direction ... but ... I'd just wake up in bed. People can interpret this any way they wish, but, they weren't there.

 

[Randall]

I don't buy the "copy" scenario, and I'll tell you why. There's an experience aspect in NDEs where a person is on the operating table - and "dies." This individual is in the room as spirit, usually hovering over the table, watching everything that goes on. When the body is resuscitated this "spirit" goes back into the body. Later, they have a discussion with the doctors regarding everything they "saw" - and it's all verified.

Not exactly. Do a search for the AWARE Study. When you really dig into it, there has been no "verification" by the experiments specifically done to scientifically gather substantial evidence. I'm referring to those experiments in which a target message was hidden up and out of sight of operating room patients, unless they could actually float-up out their body and see it. ZERO patients have correctly identified a target.

Then there's a professor in the UK who was part of a study group there ( the name escapes me now ), but I heard her describe during an interview how she proved to herself that her OOBEs cannot be counted on precisely because despite being completely photorealistic, she learned that her perceptions din't correspond with the actual state of affairs at the time.

Virtually ALL the best evidence points at a functioning brain as the cause of our perceptions.

So ... what went "back into the body?" A "copy?"

The assumption there is that there actually was something that went "back into the body". The more probable situation is that there was no "thing" that was "out there" in the first place. It is a vivid lifelike illusion with a few interesting anomalies that are explainable other ways.

Whatever this "spirit" is, it's part of the physical construct. It was there at the time of conception, in both sperm and egg, because these component parts were "built" by the mother and father's bodies, where this "spirit" aspect is just part of everything that goes on.

That all depends on what EXACTLY one means by the word "spirit". To me it's indistinguishable from "personality". You can say a person is a "kind spirit" or has a "kind personality". There's no difference, and there's zero evidence that there's some ethereal form that carries the personality with it away from the body when it kicks the bucket. Personality has been scientifically proven to be brain dependent.

The bottom line for me is that every cell in our body has this "spirit" aspect as part of the overall picture, and just like the physical body functions as it does, and the brain functions as it does, this "spiritual" component is a cell by cell build of the original. This is why it functions as it does, and the "bad spirits" are just like they were in their physical life because it's them.

That all sounds rather like Midi-chlorians or other fictional or mythical things.

Midi-chlorian/Legends

Midi-chlorians were intelligent microscopic life-forms that lived symbiotically inside the cells of all living things. When present in sufficient numbers, they could allow their host to detect the pervasive energy field known as the Force. Midi-chlorian counts were linked to potential in the...

starwars.fandom.com

This wouldn't be a "copy" ... it would be a component part continuation of the original build.

What wouldn't be a copy? The totally unproven and rather impossible "spirit molecules"? Sorry if I come across as dismissive, but all the best evidence points to "spirit" being the same as "personality" which is a product of brain function. Take away the brain, and you get zero personality. Change part of the brain and it changes personality, sometimes radically. There's no escaping this.

Therefore if this afterlife "spirit" has any personality, then it must be caused by something that has taken over the function of their now deceased brain, which once again results in a copy. The only true continuity of personhood is actual immortality where you literally never die, not some ethereal partially there remnant of ones former self that is more like a projection than a living being.

Again, sorry if this is disturbing. It can make some people upset to hear there's cannot be any postmortem la la land. It's not a matter of because we haven't died and gone there we can't say. We can logically deduce ahead of time that it's just not possible, and therefore the phenomena reported must be something other than what afterlife believers think it is.

 

[Onlychild]

Again, sorry if this is disturbing. It can make some people upset to hear there's cannot be any postmortem la la land.

It doesn't bother me ... I've had these discussions with people before. There is no explanational data for what we call the paranormal ... and my personal look-into this subject shows it is real. What it is, explanation-wise, IS a guess. My approach shows that psychologically and linguisticly (at least with English) they are identical to us.

 

[marduk]

I would have to go by your story because I wasn't there. You evidently saw something ... I can't say what it was.

I've been involved is this subject for decades, and I've never been abducted once. I've had paranormal attempts to make me think I was headed in that direction ... but ... I'd just wake up in bed. People can interpret this any way they wish, but, they weren't there.

I'm not claiming any of my experiences are evidence or proof of anything objectively. I wouldn't believe this stuff if it hadn't happened to me.

My point, for what it's worth, is that most of it seemed physical to me.

 

[Onlychild]

My point, for what it's worth, is that most of it seemed physical to me.

There have been people, like a woman who got on an elevator, there was a guy on it and they talked while she went to her floor, and when she was about ready to get off, she turned to say good bye to the man she was talking with - and - he was gone. It gets "physical" somehow, in some way, we just call manifestation. It would be the same tactics regarding people scared by "aliens." Why would an intelligent group that was trying to deal with a problem here - use fear in their methodology?

 

[marduk]

Why would an intelligent group that was trying to deal with a problem here - use fear in their methodology?

Because it works. Humanity isn't rational, it only pretends to be. We're not smart animals, we're animals that can be smart.

Trigger a human fear response, and the humanity goes away. We become frightened frozen animals, easily controlled. To back up what I'm saying, there has never been a landing on the white house lawn, nor has there ever been any direct contact with our political or military organizations (even though the mythology says otherwise). They approach individuals, not social structures. They don't appear to care how we're organized. Nor do they seem to care to interact with us on a rational level.

They do appear to want to bypass all that, for reasons that are their own.

 

[Randall]

It doesn't bother me ... I've had these discussions with people before. There is no explanational data for what we call the paranormal ... and my personal look-into this subject shows it is real. What it is, explanation-wise, IS a guess. My approach shows that psychologically and linguisticly (at least with English) they are identical to us.

That's all fair enough. Whatever the case may be, there is definitely something out of the ordinary going on. It's also interesting that you not that "they" ( whatever they are ) appear to be identical to us. Our recent guest Michael Masters has also noted this, and believes the similarity isn't simply coincidental.

 

[Onlychild]

Because it works. Humanity isn't rational, it only pretends to be. We're not smart animals, we're animals that can be smart.

Trigger a human fear response, and the humanity goes away. We become frightened frozen animals, easily controlled.

Yeah but that isn't "ET" ... that's sadistic paranormal. Better defined as ex-humans in the non-empathic / antisocial category. There are two books you should look at that pretty much sum up everything: 1) is Nick Redfern's Final Events, which gets into the "govt" exploration of this topic of "the end times," and Landi Mellas and the late David Caywood's original book The Other Sky.

In The Other Sky, Landi's very first experience ('51 - a few years before mine in '54 or '55) is the sum and substance of what we are supposed to know, and, everything else is a paranormal attempt to confuse her (and - it succeeded).

To back up what I'm saying, there has never been a landing on the white house lawn, nor has there ever been any direct contact with our political or military organizations (even though the mythology says otherwise). They approach individuals, not social structures. They don't appear to care how we're organized. Nor do they seem to care to interact with us on a rational level.

They do appear to want to bypass all that, for reasons that are their own.

"Allegedly" ... there was contact early on with the "Govt." Did it really happen? Frankly, I don't really buy it ... the end results should have been much different.

As far as "individuals" go ... I haven't seen one yet, except for Landi's first experience. The only difference between her experience and mine was that her experience was given in a classical teaching methodology, and mine was constructivist. In other words, she was handed the answers and I had to figure everything out myself. And I'll tell you now, this subject is a complete and total disaster. I don't EVER see this mess as being straightened out ... if what I have is right, the event is going to hit - and - humanity is going down the drain. Period.

 

[Onlychild]

That's all fair enough. Whatever the case may be, there is definitely something out of the ordinary going on. It's also interesting that you not that "they" ( whatever they are ) appear to be identical to us. Our recent guest Michael Masters has also noted this, and believes the similarity isn't simply coincidental.

If the personalities are looked at from a psychological point of view ... they are identical. Even linguistically (English) everyday language pops up like ... in one event, the statement was made, and the "reply" was: "If you believe that sh!t."
I mean ... just how "everyday" is THAT?
Even in the paranormal study I did, what went on after "I opened the door" so to speak, was all typical ball-busting stuff that was supposed to "scare me" - unfortunately, Homie don't play that and I'd just sit there and shake my head and say "Seriously guys?" I once stood there after some simple event happened and said - "If you can do this ... why can't you materialize and we can sit down and talk?" Of course - nothing ever happened, but ... I tried LOL.

As far as I'm concerned - "they" ARE us. And if the idea of "we are supposed to go somewhere" is right - simply put, they've been "locked out" and stuck here because of their attitudes.

 

[Randall]

If the personalities are looked at from a psychological point of view ... they are identical. Even linguistically (English) everyday language pops up like ... in one event, the statement was made, and the "reply" was: "If you believe that sh!t."
I mean ... just how "everyday" is THAT?
Even in the paranormal study I did, what went on after "I opened the door" so to speak, was all typical ball-busting stuff that was supposed to "scare me" - unfortunately, Homie don't play that and I'd just sit there and shake my head and say "Seriously guys?" I once stood there after some simple event happened and said - "If you can do this ... why can't you materialize and we can sit down and talk?" Of course - nothing ever happened, but ... I tried LOL.

As far as I'm concerned - "they" ARE us. And if the idea of "we are supposed to go somewhere" is right - simply put, they've been "locked out" and stuck here because of their attitudes.

What are we talking about there aliens or ghosts ( discarnate personalities of the deceased )? Sorry, I lost track someplace. I'm no longer certain.

 

[marduk]

Yeah but that isn't "ET" ... that's sadistic paranormal. Better defined as ex-humans in the non-empathic / antisocial category. There are two books you should look at that pretty much sum up everything: 1) is Nick Redfern's Final Events, which gets into the "govt" exploration of this topic of "the end times," and Landi Mellas and the late David Caywood's original book The Other Sky.

1) Redfern has totally lost the thread on this as far as I'm concerned, and just published entertainment. His last few books put forward are contradictory to say the least. To put it frankly, I've put everything Redfern has ever published into file 11. And everything similar. QAnon has taught me how far conspiracies can go from entertainment to people's foolish reality. So, nope as far as I'm concerned on that.
2) 'Sadistic' also does not cover it. It just doesn't. Been terrified for sure, but it does not at all seem that terror itself is the goal, more simply a tool. It's more akin to total apathy. They literally don't seem to care, and just have a job to do. No idea what that job is. They've never said anything to me.

In The Other Sky, Landi's very first experience ('51 - a few years before mine in '54 or '55) is the sum and substance of what we are supposed to know, and, everything else is a paranormal attempt to confuse her (and - it succeeded).

Not sure what you mean 'the sum and substance of what we are supposed to know' means?

"Allegedly" ... there was contact early on with the "Govt." Did it really happen? Frankly, I don't really buy it ... the end results should have been much different.

100% don't believe it. At all. I do believe that the military/industrial complex has tried to give the illusion it has happened - for many reasons. I totally don't think it's ever happened.

And I don't think it ever will.

As far as "individuals" go ... I haven't seen one yet, except for Landi's first experience. The only difference between her experience and mine was that her experience was given in a classical teaching methodology, and mine was constructivist. In other words, she was handed the answers and I had to figure everything out myself.

I'm not at all sure what that means. Can you go into it more?

And I'll tell you now, this subject is a complete and total disaster. I don't EVER see this mess as being straightened out ... if what I have is right, the event is going to hit - and - humanity is going down the drain. Period.

Right. I'm with you there.

 

[marduk]

If the personalities are looked at from a psychological point of view ... they are identical. Even linguistically (English) everyday language pops up like ... in one event, the statement was made, and the "reply" was: "If you believe that sh!t."

Not in my experience. At all.

I mean ... just how "everyday" is THAT?
Even in the paranormal study I did, what went on after "I opened the door" so to speak, was all typical ball-busting stuff that was supposed to "scare me" - unfortunately, Homie don't play that and I'd just sit there and shake my head and say "Seriously guys?" I once stood there after some simple event happened and said - "If you can do this ... why can't you materialize and we can sit down and talk?" Of course - nothing ever happened, but ... I tried LOL.

My sense is that it's more akin to an ant demanding that the local human appear to explain why the anthill was just kicked. Even if the human could understand the ant, it probably wouldn't bother to explain itself. And if it did, the answer wouldn't make any sense to the ant.

As far as I'm concerned - "they" ARE us. And if the idea of "we are supposed to go somewhere" is right - simply put, they've been "locked out" and stuck here because of their attitudes.

That's a pretty giant leap.