Aliens, yay or nay?

[Anti]

Well, then there's the flipside of this, which is people labeling anyone who believes anything that science can't quantify or replicate as a complete idiot. There's been a ton of that in this thread, actually.

Must've been on one of the pages I didn't read. No wait! I read and/or participated in nearly every page and I don't remembre a whole lot of labeling of anyone who believes in the unquantifiable as an idiot.

I have personally argued with many ASSERTIONS that people have made about it, however.

If it's unquantifiable and not replicable... how can you claim to know anything about it?

(please, please, PLEASE answer that question!)

Both science and religion (or philosophy, or deeply personal experience, whatever you'd like to call it) have their place. Trying to use one to solve the other's problem is a fool's errand.

I disagree when it comes to science. Trying to use religion to solve *ANYTHING* other than temporary solace is a fool's errand. If people are praying and their prayers are being answered... that means that who/whatever is answering those prayers is ACTING WITHIN REALITY and this action can be documented and tested. So any claims that God or aliens-who-interact-with-humans, or bigfoot are real ought to have evidence to justify them.

 

[DreamsofTesla]

Must've been on one of the pages I didn't read. No wait! I read and/or participated in nearly every page and I don't remembre a whole lot of labeling of anyone who believes in the unquantifiable as an idiot.

Well, actually there have been a lot of ad hominem attacks, by multiple posters, and they've been pointed out repeatedly, by multiple posters. ::shrug::

If it's unquantifiable and not replicable... how can you claim to know anything about it?

(please, please, PLEASE answer that question!)

It's really simple. I think, therefore I am. I have experiences. Many of them are unquantifiable and not replicable. Yet I retain memories, physical sensations, emotions, even ideas. Much of that is neither quantifiable nor replicable. Yet here inside the little subjective bubble I delusionally call "me," those experiences all seem real, and I spend time mulling them over.

For example, "I" have had a "near death experience." I have fragmented recollections of it. I have almost no factual knowledge or understanding of it beyond what I've pieced together through physical healing and years of pondering it. But I do know some things about it. Not many. Most of them are very difficult to articulate. Almost none of that can be quantified and hopefully won't be replicated.

I disagree when it comes to science. Trying to use religion to solve *ANYTHING* other than temporary solace is a fool's errand. If people are praying and their prayers are being answered... that means that who/whatever is answering those prayers is ACTING WITHIN REALITY and this action can be documented and tested. So any claims that God or aliens-who-interact-with-humans, or bigfoot are real ought to have evidence to justify them.

Well, we're rocketing back toward the land of the tedious. In brief, your definition of religion and its use is a straw man. It's an extremely limited and myopic position, that "religion" can only be used for "temporary solace."

People (and all sentient beings) have all kinds of experiences that can neither be quantified nor replicated, yet they are subjectively true. People find their own ways of processing that information. IMO, that is as it should be. Everyone sorts their own life out on their own terms and at their own pace.

If you want to assert that science must be utilized at all times by all people, well gee, I dislike having my cognitive liberties curtailed by the people who prohibit marijuana, mushrooms, and DMT. Not really interested in having anyone drop their limitations on what I can do with my consciousness.

 

[Suspect]

Found something, UNREADABLE HA!
Anyways here's some "official" documentation.

http://vault.fbi.gov/UFO/UFO%20Part%201%20of%2016/view

Edit. This is from the site that lead me to the vault.

1. Part of the disks carry crews, others are under remote control
2. Their mission is peaceful. The visitors contemplate settling on this plane
3. These visitors are human-like but much larger in size
4. They are not excarnate Earth people, but come from their own world
5. They do NOT come from a planet as we use the word, but from an etheric planet which interpenetrates with our own and is not perceptible to us
6. The bodies of the visitors, and the craft, automatically materialize on entering the vibratory rate of our dense matter

 

[Greenstar420]

Aliens, yay or nay?

I'm just waiting for the real alien genetics.....

 

[HempKat]

you need to learn how to write your ideas in a clearer way so as to not send a message you don't want to.

Aparently so do you then because I said, it's not confined to just Academia or Pop Culture, in response to this:

Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive, thus, how can there be any such debate of one against the other?

there's no such debate in the Academia, meaning, no one respectable in a university at any level will teach or even discuss such nonsense.

you only see such debate in pop-culture books like the ones of Dawkins, or the opposite, books by some Creationist.

again, such pop-culture books are not in any serious curriculum of any higher learning institution. nor is the fictional debate within such books' pages discussed either in any serious manner, except maybe to illustrate common misconceptions.

Which is why it was quoted in the post where I said it's not confined to just Academia or Pop Culture. I made a reference to the topic changing in this thread. You started talking about how science vs religion isn't being discussed in Academia just pop culture and that pop culture books aren't used as part of the curriculum of any higher learning institute. The overall tone you set in saying that in response to my comment comes across like since Academia dismisses it as nonsense the debate does not exist. Hence my making the point that Academia and Pop culture aren't the only fronts this debate takes place in.

 

[Anti]

Well, actually there have been a lot of ad hominem attacks, by multiple posters, and they've been pointed out repeatedly, by multiple posters. ::shrug::

Yes. If by multiple posters lobbing ad hominems you include yourself, then yes. There have been a few.

What does that have to do with your assertion that those who believe in aliens are being called idiots?

If what you mean is that having your opinion dissected by a stranger on an internet forum makes you FEEL LIKE an idiot, I recommend that you stop discussing such opinions with strangers on the internet. You might need thicker skin.

It's really simple. I think, therefore I am. I have experiences. Many of them are unquantifiable and not replicable. Yet I retain memories, physical sensations, emotions, even ideas. Much of that is neither quantifiable nor replicable. Yet here inside the little subjective bubble I delusionally call "me," those experiences all seem real, and I spend time mulling them over.

Yet as you are very fond of pointing out, you have no proof that the information being transmitted to your senses is accurate. You are experiencing yourself, therefore you are justified in believing (provisionally) in yourself. I have not argued with your belief in yourself. It was YOU who attacked objective reality. I did lightly investigate your "bashar" claims because you posted it in the thread and I've been trying to give people the courtesy of looking at the evidence they present.

If I found the evidence questionable, I said so. No need for you to get hurt feelings over that. I'm not criticizing your belief. I'm criticizing the evidence. You are free to argue in its favor. You are free to ignore me. No one is forcing anything on you.

For example, "I" have had a "near death experience." I have fragmented recollections of it. I have almost no factual knowledge or understanding of it beyond what I've pieced together through physical healing and years of pondering it. But I do know some things about it. Not many. Most of them are very difficult to articulate. Almost none of that can be quantified and hopefully won't be replicated.

And none of them are evidence of anything other than a traumatic experience. Know what people see when they wake up from a coma? A bright light at the end of a tunnel. It seems to be (notice how I qualify my statements?) just what happens when a brain is "rebooting" after being switched off.

As I said way before you ever joined this thread, if you sit and ask for signs and then you look for them everyday... you're going to find them! This doesn't mean the signs are real. They are a function of your humanity. We evolved to pick out patterns against a seemingly random background. The most successful of our ancestors were those who could "see the future" the best. This manifested in non-magical ways like learning which kind of tracks a deer makes, and which kind a rabbit makes and so on. If I follow this track... (the pattern left by the animal's foot) I will eventually find a rabbit.

Or.. if I plant these seeds behind my hut, next fall I will have enough food to make it through the winter.

Those humans who had such pattern recognition skills prospered.

But there are side effects. Things like OCD. People like patterns so much that they often start to see patterns where none exist.

Well, we're rocketing back toward the land of the tedious. In brief, your definition of religion and its use is a straw man. It's an extremely limited and myopic position, that "religion" can only be used for "temporary solace."

Instead of critiquing my opinions (as you seem to do) perhaps you could instead use reason and evidence to show WHY you think my position is limited and myopic? It'd be soooooo much more constructive.

People (and all sentient beings) have all kinds of experiences that can neither be quantified nor replicated, yet they are subjectively true.

Subjective truth is often a lie.

The world I live in is subjectively flat.

But I "know" that I live on an oblong spheroid.

Because there is evidence to confirm this knowledge.

People find their own ways of processing that information. IMO, that is as it should be. Everyone sorts their own life out on their own terms and at their own pace.

True dat.

But in a DISCUSSION you either discuss or GTFO. You only own the words you contribute until you press the "post" widget.

Once you post it, it belongs to the discussion and none of us own it. It has a life of its own.

If you want to assert that science must be utilized at all times by all people, well gee, I dislike having my cognitive liberties curtailed by the people who prohibit marijuana, mushrooms, and DMT.

No one has ever suggested you should. No one here is curtailing your cognitive liberties.

Are you sure it's *ME* that has the persecution complex?

I injest cannabis, mushrooms and other substances and I enjoy the insights into my own personality and my simulacrum of the world that they provide me. But I would not assert that the DMT fairy is objectively "real" if I did not have some way to test this. And I would still have to suspect it was a product of my own mind if I could not get others to replicate the test.

I talked to GOD on LSD once... and yet here I am, an atheist. Because subjective experiences that cannot be independently confirmed or repeated might be hallucination! I have no evidence that the familiar voice in my head was anything other than myself and I *WAS* on an entheogen/hallucinogen at the time. Hmm. Maybe this data isn't as trustworthy as my lifelong experience of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west? I better look for more evidence.

But that's just how MY mind works. You are free to think and feel and do as you please and it kinda bugs me that I have to say so.

You are free to be as gullible as you choose. You are free to accept any and everything you wish. And you don't even need my permission!

Not really interested in having anyone drop their limitations on what I can do with my consciousness.

No one has attempted to do so. Stop being a drama queen.

 

[Anti]

When a dog follows a scent to find his prey.. he is following something in the PRESENT. Those scents are physical.

When a human follows the trail of his prey.. he is READING THE PAST to PREDICT THE FUTURE.

We are the only animals that we know of that have this way of seeing the world.

That's why we gravitate to "strong" leaders with a VISION FOR THE FUTURE.

 

[Suspect]

I injest cannabis, mushrooms and other substances and I enjoy the insights into my own personality and my simulacrum of the world that they provide me. But I would not assert that the DMT fairy is objectively "real" if I did not have some way to test this. And I would still have to suspect it was a product of my own mind if I could not get others to replicate the test.

I talked to GOD on LSD once... and yet here I am, an atheist. Because subjective experiences that cannot be independently confirmed or repeated might be hallucination! I have no evidence that the familiar voice in my head was anything other than myself and I *WAS* on an entheogen/hallucinogen at the time. Hmm. Maybe this data isn't as trustworthy as my lifelong experience of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west? I better look for more evidence.

Hey I remember a story that some Eskimos were given DMT and they shared the same entity on their trips, it was a tiger of somekind with a costume, none of them could ever have seen that in real life. Makes me wonder if the story is true or an urban legend, and what has Mckenna's view been on the entities, I think he says it is a consistent thing, you meet them everytime.

 

[DreamsofTesla]

There's really no chance of me reading all that, sorry.

When you say I made an ad hominem, I guess you mean the "monkey mind" statement that you decided to personalize apparently very deeply.

You mentioned wanting to find some information and getting distracted with a ton of snarky shit, then asked me to do the research for you. I'm not interested in that.

Monkey mind, #1 affliction of humans on earth, including myself. If you somehow feel you should be above and beyond it, and being reminded that you aren't is so hurtful, well then I'm sorry I hurt your feelings.

 

[DreamsofTesla]

Hey I remember a story that some Eskimos were given DMT and they shared the same entity on their trips, it was a tiger of somekind with a costume, none of them could ever have seen that in real life. Makes me wonder if the story is true or an urban legend, and what has Mckenna's view been on the entities, I think he says it is a consistent thing, you meet them everytime.

I would really like to try DMT at some point. It's been way too long since I've had mushrooms.

 

[unthing]

me too. i just need to get the set and setting right, preferably quiet countryside cabin and some friends.

 

[Suspect]

"..Given all of this, in a nutshell, the case for autonomous disincarnate DMT entities is closed. All that is needed to produce them is our own over-excited visual system and imagination, and thus Occam's razor wipes them right off the table and into the fairy-dust bin. "

Another viewpoint on DMT elves and whatnot.

http://www.tripzine.com/listing.php?id=dmt_pickover

 

[Suspect]

I'm happy to have my freezer-box full of self picked P. Semilanceata

Edit. Freezer-box

 

[bombadil.360]

Aparently so do you then because I said, it's not confined to just Academia or Pop Culture, in response to this:

Which is why it was quoted in the post where I said it's not confined to just Academia or Pop Culture. I made a reference to the topic changing in this thread. You started talking about how science vs religion isn't being discussed in Academia just pop culture and that pop culture books aren't used as part of the curriculum of any higher learning institute. The overall tone you set in saying that in response to my comment comes across like since Academia dismisses it as nonsense the debate does not exist. Hence my making the point that Academia and Pop culture aren't the only fronts this debate takes place in.

my friend hempkat,

one thing is to dismiss a debate as irrelevant, an another thing is to actively participate within the subject of said debate.

but we can agree to disagree, and let the alien debate breathe.

much peace to you and yours!

 

[bombadil.360]

I talked to GOD on LSD once... and yet here I am, an atheist. Because subjective experiences that cannot be independently confirmed or repeated might be hallucination! I have no evidence that the familiar voice in my head was anything other than myself and I *WAS* on an entheogen/hallucinogen at the time. Hmm. Maybe this data isn't as trustworthy as my lifelong experience of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west? I better look for more evidence.

Hello Anti,

considering what you have written above, I have to ask you a question:

lets say you are somewhere, it does not matter, it could be a city, town, the woods, the beach or a desert.

and suddenly, you encounter an intelligent being that is unknown to our current catalog of life found on earth. Not only that, but you two end up having a conversation.

after it is over, you go home, and you may or may not ponder on what was discussed, it doesn't matter to the purposes of the question I'm asking.

after some time has passed from said experience, you decide you want to talk to this being once again for X or Y reason; but it doesn't matter how much you try to make contact with this mysterious being, you are always unsuccessful. you always go to this same exact place at the same time, same day of the week, etc... you even try all kinds of variations, you even visit when the moon is at the exact same stage that it was when the first meeting occurred.

how would you classify the initial experience of having talked to said being and the subsequent failure to talk to the being again?

did it happen? or was it just a fantasy since you were not able to replicate the experience?

be good.

peace!

 

[Him]

“Each galaxy consists of a hundred billion stars. Do the math. A hundred billion times a hundred billion is 10 sextillion. That’s one with 22 zeros after it. There definitely are aliens in outer space — they’re out there!” - Michio Kaku

 

[HempKat]

my friend hempkat,

one thing is to dismiss a debate as irrelevant, an another thing is to actively participate within the subject of said debate.

but we can agree to disagree, and let the alien debate breathe.

much peace to you and yours!

It's not a question of agreeing to disagree or not since I've not once dismissed or disagreed with your claim that the science vs religion debate does not exist in Academia. My point was, is and will continue to be that whether the debate exists in Academia or not has absolutely nothing to do with the post you quoted when you started down the road of making that claim.

 

[Anti]

There's really no chance of me reading all that, sorry.

When you say I made an ad hominem, I guess you mean the "monkey mind" statement that you decided to personalize apparently very deeply.

You mentioned wanting to find some information and getting distracted with a ton of snarky shit, then asked me to do the research for you. I'm not interested in that.

Monkey mind, #1 affliction of humans on earth, including myself. If you somehow feel you should be above and beyond it, and being reminded that you aren't is so hurtful, well then I'm sorry I hurt your feelings.

There's really no chance of me reading all that, sorry.

 

[Anti]

Hello Anti,

considering what you have written above, I have to ask you a question:

did it happen? or was it just a fantasy since you were not able to replicate the experience?

I don't know. If I went back over and over to attempt to reestablish contact we can assume that I must believe it was real. This is based on the story you established. Under other circumstances I might come to a different conclusion.

 

[BushyOldGrower]

I read it. Anti makes some points but just stop being bitchy and let's decide what to do bout those dang aliens?